Report: Apple ordering 65 million iPad screens for 2011

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 53
    markbmarkb Posts: 153member
    Quote:

    OK get Retina or AMOLED screens out of your heads now else you are gonna get disappointed!



    Agreed.



    What you should be hoping is a front facing camera, more ram, maaaybe better speakers, and a tiny bit more battery life. iPads are already pushing the limits in display technology, and Retina displays at 9.7" size are going to cost a fortune for the next 5 years.
  • Reply 22 of 53
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    I did the same calculation when I read this, and came up with about the same numbers.



    AAPL will hit $500 before the Jan 2012 earnings call if this report is accurate (and if Apple actually sells as many as they think they will).



    I might be able to retire before I die!



    Just hope the 16x gets a little better myself, but don't want to be too greedy! Some reasonably priced, effective forms apps for business and the analysts will start to catch on... Right now, at a minimum of $300/person/year, it is much cheaper to build your own if you have more than a few users.
  • Reply 23 of 53
    That is probably just the screen. As we know plenty of stuffs got sandwiched between the backplate and touch layer.
  • Reply 24 of 53
    The truth of the matter is probably far from this rumor and the posted comments. I highly doubt they've ordered 65M screens. A realistic prediction would be about half that number.



    The screens will not be AMOLED. That technology is actually (at this time) inferior, and yields are way, way too low. It's unfortunate, but I also doubt that the screen resolution will be any better than the current model. Here's why:



    Price for one. The iPhone's "Retina display" is 960x640 (614k) pixels while the iPad is 1024x768 (786k) pixels, but the iPhone screen is almost 3 times smaller. Smaller area, higher yields, lower cost.



    Two - if the iPad screen were to become a "Retina display" it would have to reach a resolution of 2560x1920 (4.9M) pixels. That's a 6-fold increase. The current GPU in the A4 chip has a hard enough time driving 800 thousand pixels, let alone trying to drive 5 million. This would require a significant redesign of the A4 chip, and Apple has a history of reusing technology long after it's most efficient useful life span.



    Don't expect a new display or a new CPU/GPU in the the iPad2. If we're lucky, we'll see a 1280x960 resolution along with a Cortex A9 based CPU in iPad3 in 2012. Maybe in ~4 years we'll see a "Retina display" and a souped-up Cortex A9 (A10?) chip with the yet-to-be-announced Series6 PowerVR graphics in iPad5... but not this round.
  • Reply 25 of 53
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by markb View Post


    Agreed.



    What you should be hoping is a front facing camera, more ram, maaaybe better speakers, and a tiny bit more battery life. iPads are already pushing the limits in display technology, and Retina displays at 9.7" size are going to cost a fortune for the next 5 years.



    Finally, someone with a clue.



    There is no way the supply chain can offer 65 million 9.7" Retina displays at an affordable price right now. Heck, I don't think they could manufacture that quantity at any price right now.
  • Reply 26 of 53
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post


    Because, according to the article, they have already ordered the screens. And if the screens had been an upgraded screen, the article would have mentioned it.



    Like they would know?



    The same rumors were appearing before the introduction of the iPhone 4. Nobody seemed to know anything about the Retina Display until Steve introduced it on stage.
  • Reply 27 of 53
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by success View Post


    There's no way Apple would let a second-gen get by without Retina. I think you'll see both a camera and new display at the minimum. Especially since there are other players in the game.



    i would LOVE to see a retina display on the iPad, but it will not happen - that would push the resolution to 2530x1897 pixels.



    for comparison, their THOUSAND DOLLAR, 27" monitor has a resolution of 2560x1440. it's just a monitor - no storage, no a4 processor, no 3g...



    [edit: ok the ONLY way the iPad will get a retina display is if apple redefines what a "retina display" is, WAY down from 326ppi to around 150ppi. it's that's the case, you're not getting a better display, you're getting "better" marketing]
  • Reply 28 of 53
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Oh... a "rumor" you say... from DigiTimes, you say............ >belch<...



    LOL It’ll be 100M in a couple week.s



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    i would LOVE to see a retina display on the iPad, but it will not happen - that would push the resolution to 2530x1897 pixels.



    That’s if you define it as 326ppi, which Apple does not. Jobs stated, if I recall correctly, that with perfect vision — referring to 20/20 vision — from 10-12” away could not discern separate pixels. This was discovered to be true with 12” allowing for 18/20 vision and a minimum 286 ppi.



    But what if the average distance for a tablet is 18” then Apple could use something around 250 ppi and still ‘honestly’ market it as a Retina Display.



    I’ve asked the question “How do you define Retina Display?” numerous times to people wanting a Retina Display and I’ve never received an answer.



    That said, any increase in the display quality is welcome, but I imagine the resolution will likely stay the same for another year.



    edit: Ah. I see you added more to your post.
  • Reply 29 of 53
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    If true, iPad alone: 65*600*0.2*[say, 16x]/900 = $135 - $140.



    Wow. (Subject to a number of assumptions, and assuming my arithmetic is correct).



    Not sure. If you leave out the multiple and go straight to earnings, your calculation comes to about $8.66 per share. Current EPS is $15.15, so what you are really suggesting is EPS growth of over half from the iPad alone.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    I might be able to retire before I die!



    The more desirable order.
  • Reply 30 of 53
    nhtnht Posts: 4,496member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I?ve asked the question ?How do you define Retina Display?? numerous times to people wanting a Retina Display and I?ve never received an answer.



    Easy...60 pixels per degree at the normal viewing distance. A HDTV has this characteristic at the desired 30 degree horizontal field of view (aka horizontal viewing angle).



    As you point out, the issue in defining what is a retina display with the iPhone and iPad is that there isn't as easy a definition of normal viewing distance. You don't want to use the HDTV definition unless you want to hold the device really really close to get 30 degree HVA.



    The alternative is to use an arbitrary spec like 300 ppi minimum.
  • Reply 31 of 53
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    ...Nobody seemed to know anything about the Retina Display until Steve introduced it on stage.



    I would NOT argue with anyone claiming that analysts are a lot of hot air, but the LCD of iPhone 4 was looked at under the microscope and the resolution was known well in advance of the official announcement. It was all over the tech blogs.
  • Reply 32 of 53
    nhtnht Posts: 4,496member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mytdave View Post


    Don't expect a new display or a new CPU/GPU in the the iPad2. If we're lucky, we'll see a 1280x960 resolution along with a Cortex A9 based CPU in iPad3 in 2012. Maybe in ~4 years we'll see a "Retina display" and a souped-up Cortex A9 (A10?) chip with the yet-to-be-announced Series6 PowerVR graphics in iPad5... but not this round.



    In 4 years the quad core Cortex A15s will be yesterdays' news.



    It strikes me as unlikely that the only thing the iPad 2 will add is a camera and more RAM.



    iPhone -> iPhone 3G = 3G chip + GPS

    iPhone 3G -> iPhone 3GS = Cortex A8 + PowerVR GPU

    iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4 = Cortex A8 Hummingbird + Retina display.



    At which point did Apple not add something significant to the next generation iOS product? You could argue that the iPhone and iPhone 3G kept the same processor but my recollection was that the next gen processor (A8) wasn't shipping in qty until 2009.



    The LG Optimus Dual Core A9 phone officially launched on the 16th and it's a lot faster than the iPhone 4. There's no way in hell Apple is going to allow competitors an A9 advantage for all of 2011.



    My bet is a 32nm Cortex A9 based A5 for 2011. That gives them a process node advantage over the Android competitors (read as more battery life).
  • Reply 33 of 53
    Wouldn't it be nice if some of those 65 mil screens would be matte.
  • Reply 34 of 53
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    My bet is a 32nm Cortex A9 based A5 for 2011. That gives them a process node advantage over the Android competitors (read as more battery life).



    I think that is most likely. The only caveat to me, is if Apple?s tweaking of the Cortex-A8 could yield a significant power management advantage over having time with the Cortex-A9 that they?d continue with a the Cortex-A8, but I think that is highly unlikely when I look at what the A9 has to offer and the amount of time Apple has had with the design.
  • Reply 35 of 53
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    My bet is a 32nm Cortex A9 based A5 for 2011. That gives them a process node advantage over the Android competitors (read as more battery life).



    I won't bet against that.



    It's about the time we should be seeing something from Apple's acquisition of P.A. Semi in April 2008. I wonder if the next-gen iDevice SoC will be it. It'll be interesting to see how Apple includes Intrinsity technology as well in upcoming processor designs.
  • Reply 36 of 53
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    I would NOT argue with anyone claiming that analysts are a lot of hot air, but the LCD of iPhone 4 was looked at under the microscope and the resolution was known well in advance of the official announcement. It was all over the tech blogs.



    Coud you supply some references.



    Our logs showed a semiun-confirmed hint of the higher resolution coming hit our tech guys about two months before Jobs announced it.
  • Reply 37 of 53
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    Two points.



    1) Apple have not finished with iDevices. We are not anticipating any, but they have more to come. Jobs said as much. ( Expect a games machine).

    2) They have a lock on this 9.7 inch market. They are buying all these screens to control access from the competition.
  • Reply 38 of 53
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    My bet is a 32nm Cortex A9 based A5 for 2011. That gives them a process node advantage over the Android competitors (read as more battery life).



    Can they get the yield high enough for the 32nm process for the millions of ipads and iphones? AMD has major problems with 32nm yield right now. We are talking about close to 100 million ipad/iphones next year.
  • Reply 39 of 53
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Can they get the yield high enough for the 32nm process for the millions of ipads and iphones? AMD has major problems with 32nm yield right now. We are talking about close to 100 million ipad/iphones next year.



    That?s the damn good question.
  • Reply 40 of 53
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    By becoming one of, if not *the* largest consumer of pad computing screens, Apple will get the best per-unit prices. This will help them drive down their component costs and help them keep their margins up.



    Apple is already the world's largest consumer of flash memory, and they therefore control the market. They enjoy the best per-unit pricing in the industry as a result of their huge orders, and force competitors to pay higher per-unit prices for the remaining supply of flash memory.
Sign In or Register to comment.