iPhone X support document discusses Super Retina OLED screen off-angle viewing, image pers...
A new support document discussing the Super Retina OLED display in the iPhone X addresses user viewing angles, as well as the possibility of image persistence when a display shows a faint remnant of an image that hadn't moved in a long period of time.
"If you look at an OLED display off-angle, you might notice slight shifts in color and hue," Apple declares in the support page. "This is a characteristic of OLED and is normal behavior."
This manifestation should only occur when a device is being used by two people simultaneously. The "shifts in color and hue" are very slight at narrow angles, and worsen slightly the farther away from a straight-on viewing angle the user gets.
"With extended long-term use, OLED displays can also show slight visual changes," writes Apple. "This is also expected behavior and can include 'image persistence' or 'burn-in,' where the display shows a faint remnant of an image even after a new image appears on the screen."
Apple advises users to avoid continuously displaying the same high-contrast image for prolonged periods of time. The company also notes that it has engineered the display to reduce the effects of OLED "burn-in."
The OLED burn-in "issue" isn't new, and isn't permanent with well-engineered panels. Evidence collected over the last few years demonstrates that retained images are wiped over a brief period of normal time of normal use displaying non-static elements, with the user periodically turning off the device when not in use.
The Google Pixel 2 XL is taking some flak about image retention on its OLED screen. However, the screen is based on LG's pOLED technology, and the smaller Pixel 2 that is not having any problems is based on Samsung's AMOLED process. The iPhone X uses Samsung-sourced screens.
"If you look at an OLED display off-angle, you might notice slight shifts in color and hue," Apple declares in the support page. "This is a characteristic of OLED and is normal behavior."
This manifestation should only occur when a device is being used by two people simultaneously. The "shifts in color and hue" are very slight at narrow angles, and worsen slightly the farther away from a straight-on viewing angle the user gets.
"With extended long-term use, OLED displays can also show slight visual changes," writes Apple. "This is also expected behavior and can include 'image persistence' or 'burn-in,' where the display shows a faint remnant of an image even after a new image appears on the screen."
Apple advises users to avoid continuously displaying the same high-contrast image for prolonged periods of time. The company also notes that it has engineered the display to reduce the effects of OLED "burn-in."
The OLED burn-in "issue" isn't new, and isn't permanent with well-engineered panels. Evidence collected over the last few years demonstrates that retained images are wiped over a brief period of normal time of normal use displaying non-static elements, with the user periodically turning off the device when not in use.
The Google Pixel 2 XL is taking some flak about image retention on its OLED screen. However, the screen is based on LG's pOLED technology, and the smaller Pixel 2 that is not having any problems is based on Samsung's AMOLED process. The iPhone X uses Samsung-sourced screens.
Comments
”With an LG OLED TV, any risk of burn-in or image retention have been addressed through the use of technology that not only helps protect against damage to the screen, but features self-healing properties so that any short-term image retention that may occur is quickly rectified”.
I wonder why this doesn’t apply to their phone displays? Lower cost compromises?
Ignoring any lighting, eInk is actually less power-efficient when it's changing the pixels than an LCD is. The improved efficiency is mostly limited to slow update rates because the screen holds an image with zero power applied. Backlighting a transmissive display is typically much more efficient than frontlighting a reflective display. With backlighting, you can have a sort of backstop to reflect light which would go into the phone back out instead. With frontlighting, you can't do that, so some light ends up going out towards the user rather than towards the display. Of course, you don't need frontlighting when there is sufficient ambient light.
The real improvement is in emissive displays (read: micro LED technologies, including OLED). Since each subpixel emits its own light, they only consume enough power for the level you're driving them. If the pixel is black, the subpixels can be entirely off. The display controllers currently draw more power than LCD controllers, and that is likely to be the case for a long time. Still, it's an improvement in a lot of situations.
I can't get the $1000 out of my pocket fast enough.
They'll have everything ready to go for when the real 'burn-in' reports start surfacing.
I would not put it past some of the more shady firms to get their own families involved and deliberately misuse the device in order to get the burn-in to happen sooner rather than later.
Apple is regarded as a soft target by many in the seedier side of the legal profession.
This document more or less admits that there is a problem waiting to happen.
It takes time. They already are testing them. I am definitely excited about microLED as it is super energy efficient and much way brighter than LCD or OLED. It's actually mind boggling how tiny they can get and yet manage to emit much more light. Imagine that each microLED bulb is only 1% of the entire pixel on your present iPhone display. Because it takes so little space, most of the pixel will be just deep black and once lit, will fill up the black pixel. You won't be able to perceive sub pixels.
I'm not saying this will happen and I don't think that it's even remotely feasible within the next few years, but I do believe that it helps lead the way toward that being a reality. Also, my mention of the notch isn't about the notch being problematic, but what I perceive Apple may want to do down the road. Imagine having a larger display, like even an 80" 8K TV (I'm thinking far ahead here) that is microLED with the camera embedded at the center of the display so that you can video chat with someone where your eyes are meeting, instead of the current system where the eyes always have a gaze below the camera because they're looking at the screen.
PS: Have you noticed that in TV shows and movies they go out of their way to make people in video chats turn their heads so from the audience's perspective the person at the other end of the feed is looking at a person off to the side even though the technology doesn't work that way?