Japan Display reports $294M net loss, hopes Apple will switch iPhone to OLED soon

Posted:
in iPhone edited May 2016
Amid slowing sales from a stalling smartphone market, Apple supplier Japan Display is apparently hopeful that future iPhone models could use OLED display technology, helping to once again reignite sales growth.




Japan Display announced on Tuesday that it expects to report a net loss of $293.5 million U.S., or 31.8 billion yen, for the fiscal year ending March 31.

Looking to the future, Japan Display is hopeful that Apple's "expected introduction" of OLED in its hottest selling devices could spur growth, according to The Wall Street Journal. The report cited analysts who believe Apple could adopt OLED in devices like the iPhone within "the next few years."

While Japan Display is investing in OLED technology, it does not yet have a factory that can mass-produce the low-power displays. Meanwhile, competitors -- and Apple suppliers --?Samsung and LG have already been talking about ramping up production of OLED panels in time for an OLED-equipped iPhone.

Rumors have suggested that Apple could be planning to incorporate OLED display technology in its iPhone lineup as soon as 2017. Apple already uses OLED for its wearable Apple Watch, making it the first product from the company to do so.


The Apple Watch is currently Apple's only AMOLED display device.


Reports have suggested that Apple has already tapped Samsung to supply 5.5-inch OLED panels for a "Plus" model of the 2017 iPhone. It was said last month that Samsung won a three-year contract to supply 100 million panels, in a deal worth $2.59 billion U.S.

Apple has long been rumored to move its flagship smartphone product away from LCD displays, but OLED suppliers lack the production capacity required to keep pace with brisk iPhone sales. Parts makers are taking notice, however, as LG last year announced plans to build out an advanced OLED plant, and in January was said to be ramping up curved panel production for 2017.

In addition to being more affordable, LCD also offers supply flexibility, longer product life, and superior visibility in sunlight. OLED panels, meanwhile, are known for bright colors and power consumption savings, which are key reasons Apple chose OLED for the wearable Apple Watch.

However, that advantage does not exist when using LCD, which requires a backlight to illuminate all pixels regardless of color. Without a dark UI, an iPhone with OLED wouldn't be able to realize the same level of power savings.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    slprescottslprescott Posts: 743member
    "Without a dark UI, an iPhone with OLED wouldn't be able to realize the same level of power savings."

    So will iPhone 7s / iOS 11 (2017) adopt a dark theme?
  • Reply 2 of 29
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    But I thoughts only Apple was doomed?
    this article doesn't make sense!!1
    cornchip
  • Reply 3 of 29
    Cobra101Cobra101 Posts: 22member
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
  • Reply 4 of 29
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    Cobra101 said:
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
    I wouldn't call adding an OLED display innovation.

    This is like the Sammy nerds calling big screens innovation.
  • Reply 5 of 29
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,732member




    Anybody else wish we could do this on an iPhone 6/6s?

    pscooter63baconstangwonkothesanejony0diplicationcrossladcornchip
  • Reply 6 of 29
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,584member
    mike1 said:




    Anybody else wish we could do this on an iPhone 6/6s?


    Honestly, I don't really see a use for that. 9/9/10 I use my phone in portrait mode anyways unless I'm watching TV or Twitch. I just fail to see how that mode is useful. 
    calicornchip
  • Reply 7 of 29
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,466member
    Cobra101 said:
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
    Did you miss the part where it says that neither LG or Samsung have the capacity yet to supply Apple? Or maybe you think OLEDs grow on trees.
    baconstangcornchip
  • Reply 8 of 29
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,756member
    OLED is a gimmick.  It is not a low-power display.  It consumes more power displaying white.  The LCD uses more power not because it is backlighted.  It is because iOS displays more white color than OLED displays.  Further, the OLED display looks more colorful simply because it does not display white colors as much as the iOS.  Take a look of Anroid phones.  You will see they don't display white colors.  And they keep the light intensity down constantly.  Microsoft Windows OS has played this trick too.  
  • Reply 9 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    Cobra101 said:
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
    Right... So, 5 years ago when OLED screen were POS tech, putting them into phones was  "innovation".
    Or maybe just fucking laughing at your clients... You choose.

    This years is the first time they're arguably better, though pentile screen in requiring bigger GPU and high rez screens have their own drawbacks.
    You do know Apple needs 200M+ OLED screens, that no one produces even half that now?
    Seriously, get a clue.
    wonkothesanecornchip
  • Reply 10 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    OLED tech's benefice in a phone (not in a TV...) is oversold, a LCD screen like the 9.7 inch Ipad Pro would be highly competitive with it (and possible) for September.
  • Reply 11 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    Find it funny that a company's survival depends on Apple's whim. Hope for them Apple doesn't decide something else hmmm.
    cali
  • Reply 12 of 29
    Cobra101Cobra101 Posts: 22member
    cali said:
    Cobra101 said:
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
    I wouldn't call adding an OLED display innovation.

    This is like the Sammy nerds calling big screens innovation.
    Apple makes a big deal of it now.
  • Reply 13 of 29
    redstaterredstater Posts: 49member
    cali said:
    Cobra101 said:
    Apple taking forever to move to OLED.

    Thats what innovation is all about!
    I wouldn't call adding an OLED display innovation.

    This is like the Sammy nerds calling big screens innovation.
    Innovation? No. But a good idea that everyone laughed at and mocked at the time only for it to become a runaway success that played a huge part in the decline of another device - tablets - and eventually creating a new category - phablets - that became the de facto standard for the industry so much that even the industry creator and leader wound up adopting it? Yes. Definitely yes. The larger screen thing was the single main reason why Samsung caught on. Which, of course, makes it the single main reason why Android caught on and ultimately survived while all the other competitors to iOS - including those from larger companies that had been in the mobile business much longer such as HP's WebOS, Nokia's Symbian and of course several mobile operating systems from Microsoft, once the biggest and most powerful company in the world and to this day still far more profitable than Google - didn't. And they didn't just do the bigger screens. Just as important was the split screen multitasking with stylus support, which separated Samsung from all the other Android competitors who also went with larger devices, especially HTC, which - along with Motorola - was the leading Android OEM (though back when Android device sales numbers were MUCH MUCH lower) and increasing the CPU cores and RAM to handle it. Which was also much-maligned by the other platforms, manufacturers and their fans ... until it was also adopted by them. And curved screens, which they ported from their HDTVs to mobile (as they did for their OLED screens also)? Everyone hated and laughed at it in 2013 and 2014 ... but now most OEMs have their own, and Apple may soon join them: http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/03/26/new-iphone-model-with-curved-glass-case-58-amoled-display-due-in-2017-insider-says And let us not forget about 3G service for smart watches. They added it back in 2014 when most people thought that smartwatch thing was going to fail entirely. Now several other manufacturers have 3G watches, and the Apple Watch 2 will have it also. And Google developed Chromecast and later Android TV largely in response to Samsung developing their own solutions for pushing media from their phones and tablets to their connected media players and smart TVs ... attempting to create an ecosystem within an ecosystem. So while Samsung isn't capable of true innovation, they are definitely able to iterate, as well as take features and components from one product line and use them to enhance another. So while innovation is a great thing, it isn't the only thing. Not by a long shot. So long as they aren't committing IP infringement like they did by making the original Galaxy into an iPhone lookalike (more or less) to each his own, as their own approach - even if it results in a bunch of failures like the S Beam, the Galaxy Round and Galaxy Camera - has proven successful enough for them in their own right. And they should stick to it, because their attempt to carbon copy the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus last year with the Galaxy S6 plus their flailing attempt at a fingerprint scanner with the Galaxy S5 were massive failures. Only by getting back to what they do best - steady iteration of their own product - with the S7 this year that their sales figures and profits rebounded.
  • Reply 14 of 29
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,756member
    redstater said:
    cali said:
    I wouldn't call adding an OLED display innovation.

    This is like the Sammy nerds calling big screens innovation.
    Innovation? No. But a good idea that everyone laughed at and mocked at the time only for it to become a runaway success that played a huge part in the decline of another device - tablets - and eventually creating a new category - phablets - that became the de facto standard for the industry so much that even the industry creator and leader wound up adopting it? Yes. Definitely yes. The larger screen thing was the single main reason why Samsung caught on. Which, of course, makes it the single main reason why Android caught on and ultimately survived while all the other competitors to iOS - including those from larger companies that had been in the mobile business much longer such as HP's WebOS, Nokia's Symbian and of course several mobile operating systems from Microsoft, once the biggest and most powerful company in the world and to this day still far more profitable than Google - didn't. And they didn't just do the bigger screens. Just as important was the split screen multitasking with stylus support, which separated Samsung from all the other Android competitors who also went with larger devices, especially HTC, which - along with Motorola - was the leading Android OEM (though back when Android device sales numbers were MUCH MUCH lower) and increasing the CPU cores and RAM to handle it. Which was also much-maligned by the other platforms, manufacturers and their fans ... until it was also adopted by them. And curved screens, which they ported from their HDTVs to mobile (as they did for their OLED screens also)? Everyone hated and laughed at it in 2013 and 2014 ... but now most OEMs have their own, and Apple may soon join them: http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/03/26/new-iphone-model-with-curved-glass-case-58-amoled-display-due-in-2017-insider-says And let us not forget about 3G service for smart watches. They added it back in 2014 when most people thought that smartwatch thing was going to fail entirely. Now several other manufacturers have 3G watches, and the Apple Watch 2 will have it also. And Google developed Chromecast and later Android TV largely in response to Samsung developing their own solutions for pushing media from their phones and tablets to their connected media players and smart TVs ... attempting to create an ecosystem within an ecosystem. So while Samsung isn't capable of true innovation, they are definitely able to iterate, as well as take features and components from one product line and use them to enhance another. So while innovation is a great thing, it isn't the only thing. Not by a long shot. So long as they aren't committing IP infringement like they did by making the original Galaxy into an iPhone lookalike (more or less) to each his own, as their own approach - even if it results in a bunch of failures like the S Beam, the Galaxy Round and Galaxy Camera - has proven successful enough for them in their own right. And they should stick to it, because their attempt to carbon copy the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus last year with the Galaxy S6 plus their flailing attempt at a fingerprint scanner with the Galaxy S5 were massive failures. Only by getting back to what they do best - steady iteration of their own product - with the S7 this year that their sales figures and profits rebounded.
    Big screens idea is not new.  Long time ago I have wished Apple could make a phone in the Macs.  Why Apple did not do it?  It turns out there is a company in Texas which claimed to have a patent on putting a phone in the computer.  This company actually sued Apple's iPad.  Do you remember?  It lost.  Because the iPad is not a phone.  On the other hand, Samsung brought out the Note which is almost a computer with a phone.  This stupid greedy Texas company should have sued Samsung instead.  So after a few years Apple brought the iPhone 6 Plus which becomes hugely successful because it is almost a phone on a computer.  And this stupid greed company can not sue Apple any more because Samsung and others has been making this for several years.  
  • Reply 15 of 29
    512ke512ke Posts: 771member
    OLED, great. Curved screens, great. No bezel screens, great. The more Apple can do to differentiate future phones from the current ones, the better.
  • Reply 16 of 29
    jr7921jr7921 Posts: 9member
    foggyhill said:
    Find it funny that a company's survival depends on Apple's whim. Hope for them Apple doesn't decide something else hmmm.
    Wasn't there a sapphire crystal company in Arizona that did that?
  • Reply 17 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    DarthJar said:
    foggyhill said:
    Find it funny that a company's survival depends on Apple's whim. Hope for them Apple doesn't decide something else hmmm.
    Wasn't there a sapphire crystal company in Arizona that did that?
    That company's CEO  was a BS that sold Apple that they could actually do something they could not; that guy should be criminally prosecuted (because he got his money from the stock...). Apple lost 500M in that little "adventure".

    BTW, That's not a display manufacturer; so it's not the same thing.
  • Reply 18 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    512ke said:
    OLED, great. Curved screens, great. No bezel screens, great. The more Apple can do to differentiate future phones from the current ones, the better.
    How the frack is a no bezel screen great, there a reason the bezel exists and its not just esthetics.
    Curved screen is POS gimmick.
    diplication
  • Reply 19 of 29
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,329member
    tzeshan said:
     This stupid greedy Texas company should have sued Samsung instead.  So after a few years Apple brought the iPhone 6 Plus which becomes hugely successful because it is almost a phone on a computer.  And this stupid greed company can not sue Apple any more because Samsung and others has been making this for several years.  
    yes they can, if they believe they have enough evidence to convince a jury the patent they have is infringed.
  • Reply 20 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,758member
    redstater said:
    cali said:
    I wouldn't call adding an OLED display innovation.

    This is like the Sammy nerds calling big screens innovation.
    Innovation? No. But a good idea that everyone laughed at and mocked at the time only for it to become a runaway success that played a huge part in the decline of another device - tablets - and eventually creating a new category - phablets - that became the de facto standard for the industry so much that even the industry creator and leader wound up adopting it? Yes. Definitely yes. The larger screen thing was the single main reason why Samsung caught on. Which, of course, makes it the single main reason why Android caught on and ultimately survived while all the other competitors to iOS - including those from larger companies that had been in the mobile business much longer such as HP's WebOS, Nokia's Symbian and of course several mobile operating systems from Microsoft, once the biggest and most powerful company in the world and to this day still far more profitable than Google - didn't. And they didn't just do the bigger screens. Just as important was the split screen multitasking with stylus support, which separated Samsung from all the other Android competitors who also went with larger devices, especially HTC, which - along with Motorola - was the leading Android OEM (though back when Android device sales numbers were MUCH MUCH lower) and increasing the CPU cores and RAM to handle it. Which was also much-maligned by the other platforms, manufacturers and their fans ... until it was also adopted by them. And curved screens, which they ported from their HDTVs to mobile (as they did for their OLED screens also)? Everyone hated and laughed at it in 2013 and 2014 ... but now most OEMs have their own, and Apple may soon join them: http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/03/26/new-iphone-model-with-curved-glass-case-58-amoled-display-due-in-2017-insider-says And let us not forget about 3G service for smart watches. They added it back in 2014 when most people thought that smartwatch thing was going to fail entirely. Now several other manufacturers have 3G watches, and the Apple Watch 2 will have it also. And Google developed Chromecast and later Android TV largely in response to Samsung developing their own solutions for pushing media from their phones and tablets to their connected media players and smart TVs ... attempting to create an ecosystem within an ecosystem. So while Samsung isn't capable of true innovation, they are definitely able to iterate, as well as take features and components from one product line and use them to enhance another. So while innovation is a great thing, it isn't the only thing. Not by a long shot. So long as they aren't committing IP infringement like they did by making the original Galaxy into an iPhone lookalike (more or less) to each his own, as their own approach - even if it results in a bunch of failures like the S Beam, the Galaxy Round and Galaxy Camera - has proven successful enough for them in their own right. And they should stick to it, because their attempt to carbon copy the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus last year with the Galaxy S6 plus their flailing attempt at a fingerprint scanner with the Galaxy S5 were massive failures. Only by getting back to what they do best - steady iteration of their own product - with the S7 this year that their sales figures and profits rebounded.
    Profits have not really rebounded, they're still really blah.

    As for OLED, if something costs 6 times something else (OLED TVs), it better be better.
    The problem is that a top end Plasma from 3 years ago is barely beat by a OLED from 2016.
    For anything with movement, Plasma is still better than OLED.

    BTW,
    You know who the frack created the god damn bigger screen in 2007, well it's Apple.
    Going a bit bigger still because you run a POS inefficient OS that needs a big battery just to compete is why we got phablet. So No candy bud. This is not innovation.

    diplication
Sign In or Register to comment.