Samsung's OLED iPhone display supply dominance challenged

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 30
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member


    Soli said:
    foggyhill said:
    Soli said:
    foggyhill said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
     My concern involves the fact that so far, LG’s displays are really subpar. From what we’ve seen with Google’s phone which uses them, and LG’s own phones that use them, these are truly terrible displays.

    i would rather Samsung continue overcharging Apple for OLEDs that use Apple’s technology, as the current display is, than Apple having more controversy as to which phone you get, because of the display used. This wouldn’t be the first time that Apple used more than one display vendor where one display was better than the other. Apple really doesn’t need that nonsense right now.
    1) Samsung smartphone OLEDs are also subpar compared to the Samsung-made OLED display on the iPhone X so I wonder if this is more about effort and costs over expertise. If there's a technical consideration I'd think it's more likely geared toward total capacity over total quality.

    2) Saying that Samsung is overcharging is like when people come here saying that Apple is overcharging for their iPhone and then using some superficial specs to make the claim. At least with the iPhone the demand is outstripping their ability to produce for many months after a launch so it's arguable that Apple is not only NOT overcharging, but is undercharging as it's below the equilibrium price for several months.
    Samsung may be overcharging in view that pissing off Apple is not good for future business.

    When someone is forced to buy your product (not other options) , yeah you can charge much higher but there is a big risk that eventually this will provide an opportunity for a concurrent or another tech you don't control, to become more interesting.

    Apple may even invest heavily in those alternate techs creating or boosting a direct competitor to your own products (like they're doing with OLED and possibly with Micro-LED).

    That's why you can't really charge sky is the limit on OLED panels, especially because then you'd have to justify why you'd be charging Apple so much higher than others that same year with similar panels.

    Pissing off joe blow is one thing, but pissing off Apple is not something you should do.
    Apple is no more forced into buying components from Samsung as trolls come here saying they're forced to buy Apple products.
    Man, it's a false equivalence AND YOU KNOW IT.

    How the frack is that similar, justify your logic cause I'm tired of people using logical fallacies to make a point.

    They're selling top end phones at top end prices with a design that relies on OLED  (folded screen to the edge), a design decided years in advance and Samsung is the only one supplying this kind of volume in OLED.

    Once they have committed, options are ZERO for the Iphone X, the only "option" is not releasing that phone and that's not happening, there is no other way.
    Yields were bad and price increased? There was no option but forging ahead and trying to make things work. Gladly it did.
    The false equivalency are your claims of coercion. Every single part of Apple's products involve tradeoffs on some level. There are better components out there that Apple can't use or won't use because of size, yields, cost, etc. That's the nature of the nature of manufacturing. You weigh the pros and cons and make choices based on those factors.

    Cook has shown himself to be excellent in this position and for you to discount Cook and Apple with these 
    hyperbolical claims is an insult to everything they've accomplished. I figure you think you're supporting Apple with this implication that Sammy is bending Apple over and fucking them in the ass, but you're not. Whether you like it or not Samsung is Apple's business partner. Apple isn't a victim so enough with the finger-pointing and scapegoating. 
    Read about logical fallacies or STFU, you're gojng on ignore now. Bye.
    edited June 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 30
    I see this ala Apple's strategy with Qualcomm/Intel chip swap out... I think even if the quality levels are slightly different, you won't notice it unless some technical guy actually did some side-to-side comparison. With that said, I can see LG slowly phasing in and Samsung slowly phasing out, just like Qualcomm/Intel deal.
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 30
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,365member
    melgross said:
     My concern involves the fact that so far, LG’s displays are really subpar. From what we’ve seen with Google’s phone which uses them, and LG’s own phones that use them, these are truly terrible displays.

    i would rather Samsung continue overcharging Apple for OLEDs that use Apple’s technology, as the current display is, than Apple having more controversy as to which phone you get, because of the display used. This wouldn’t be the first time that Apple used more than one display vendor where one display was better than the other. Apple really doesn’t need that nonsense right now.
    If and when LG produces OLED displays for Apple, it will produce using technology/specifications determined/developed by Apple.  Apple wouldn't have it any other way.  Ergo, when LG supplies Apple with OLED displays they will be every bit as good as Samsung displays.
    That’s the idea. What I’m saying is that those who are claiming that LG’s only problem is ramping up, are wrong, and that they also need to strongly improve their manufacturing expertise. I would hope that Apple would be able to maintain the standards they desire. But, Apple has used two screen suppliers before, and there were noticeable quality differences in the screens, with people going back to try to get the phone with the other manufacturer’s screen, sometimes successfully, and sometimes not.

    theres nothing 100% about any of this. And it’s why, despite rumors, LG may not be able to provide screens this year.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 24 of 30
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,365member
    I see this ala Apple's strategy with Qualcomm/Intel chip swap out... I think even if the quality levels are slightly different, you won't notice it unless some technical guy actually did some side-to-side comparison. With that said, I can see LG slowly phasing in and Samsung slowly phasing out, just like Qualcomm/Intel deal.
    Ah, but there’s a major difference between a modem and a screen. When real speeds don’t come close to the theoretical speeds the manufacturers of the modems claim their product can achieve, you won’t notice a real difference.

    but it’s very different with screens. The very week the Pixel 3 XL came out, there were reports of severe screen burn-in. In addition, blotchy screens, vertical and horizontal lines, as well as light from the edges. Also less than idea touch sensitivity. The same problems occurred when LG released their top model using those screens.
    these are things you notice right away. Most of it isn’t the technology the screens are using, but poor quality control and loose specifications. Some companies consistently turn out a good product, and others, not so much.

    the hope is that LG knows what the problems are in their manufacturing process, and can fix them, while at the same time produce screens using some different technology which is Apple’s, and not theirs. Last year, Samsung had problems cutting the notch, and I’m assuming Samsung did that. But the problem was overcome. Will LG also have those problems, or does Apple understand enough to lead them through it. We really don’t know, and making assumptions always leads to problems.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 25 of 30
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,644member
    melgross said:
    I see this ala Apple's strategy with Qualcomm/Intel chip swap out... I think even if the quality levels are slightly different, you won't notice it unless some technical guy actually did some side-to-side comparison. With that said, I can see LG slowly phasing in and Samsung slowly phasing out, just like Qualcomm/Intel deal.
    Ah, but there’s a major difference between a modem and a screen. When real speeds don’t come close to the theoretical speeds the manufacturers of the modems claim their product can achieve, you won’t notice a real difference.

    but it’s very different with screens. The very week the Pixel 3 XL came out, there were reports of severe screen burn-in. In addition, blotchy screens, vertical and horizontal lines, as well as light from the edges. Also less than idea touch sensitivity. The same problems occurred when LG released their top model using those screens.
    these are things you notice right away. Most of it isn’t the technology the screens are using, but poor quality control and loose specifications. Some companies consistently turn out a good product, and others, not so much.

    the hope is that LG knows what the problems are in their manufacturing process, and can fix them, while at the same time produce screens using some different technology which is Apple’s, and not theirs. Last year, Samsung had problems cutting the notch, and I’m assuming Samsung did that. But the problem was overcome. Will LG also have those problems, or does Apple understand enough to lead them through it. We really don’t know, and making assumptions always leads to problems.
    A minor correction: Last year the Pixel 2 and Pixel 2XL were released.  BGR is saying LG will get the order for the iPhone XI Plus screens.  Maybe Samsung wants to keep their largest screens for themselves.

    I thought the problem with the intel phones was dropped calls when at a distance from a cell tower.
    edited June 2018 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 26 of 30
    If GTAT is the big dud investment we all remember Apple making, well at least they didn't incur the multiple billions of dollars buying Motorola and Nokia -- with nothing to show for it -- a couple of other companies spent.
  • Reply 27 of 30
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,365member
    k2kw said:
    melgross said:
    I see this ala Apple's strategy with Qualcomm/Intel chip swap out... I think even if the quality levels are slightly different, you won't notice it unless some technical guy actually did some side-to-side comparison. With that said, I can see LG slowly phasing in and Samsung slowly phasing out, just like Qualcomm/Intel deal.
    Ah, but there’s a major difference between a modem and a screen. When real speeds don’t come close to the theoretical speeds the manufacturers of the modems claim their product can achieve, you won’t notice a real difference.

    but it’s very different with screens. The very week the Pixel 3 XL came out, there were reports of severe screen burn-in. In addition, blotchy screens, vertical and horizontal lines, as well as light from the edges. Also less than idea touch sensitivity. The same problems occurred when LG released their top model using those screens.
    these are things you notice right away. Most of it isn’t the technology the screens are using, but poor quality control and loose specifications. Some companies consistently turn out a good product, and others, not so much.

    the hope is that LG knows what the problems are in their manufacturing process, and can fix them, while at the same time produce screens using some different technology which is Apple’s, and not theirs. Last year, Samsung had problems cutting the notch, and I’m assuming Samsung did that. But the problem was overcome. Will LG also have those problems, or does Apple understand enough to lead them through it. We really don’t know, and making assumptions always leads to problems.
    A minor correction: Last year the Pixel 2 and Pixel 2XL were released.  BGR is saying LG will get the order for the iPhone XI Plus screens.  Maybe Samsung wants to keep their largest screens for themselves.

    I thought the problem with the intel phones was dropped calls when at a distance from a cell tower.
    Yeah, sorry. The number 2. I dont know why I was thinking 3. Some supposed pictures of that yet unreleased model just came out.

    i really don’t like to care about what these rumors say. Mostly they’re wrong. I doubt Samsung would withhold size screens from Apple. After all they cut them from large sheets, so there’s no real screen size before the orders roll in. Apple will likely sell around 150 million of the three new models. So possibly 100 million of the OLED models. Again, let’s say that sales are split about 50/50, then that’s 50 million large screens. Samsung could get about $100 for each of those screens (some numbers were $135 per iPhone X screen). 100 times 50 million is a whopping $5 billion. Even if that were off by $25 per screen, it would still be $3,750 million. They wouldn’t pass that up. We’re seeing (rumored) numbers of 2-4 million screens of unspecified size being produced by LG for Apple this year, assuming they can do it. That’s a tiny number.

    i so t know how true the Intel problem is. I read that under situations of extremely small signal, the Intel will drop the call, but the Qualcomm, while keeping it live, will garble it. So half of one, half of the other. If it were a real problem, you can be sure it would be plastered all over the place.
    edited June 2018 Alex1N
  • Reply 28 of 30
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,710member
    nunzy said:
    Apple does not like to give money to Samsung because Samsung copies everything that Apple ever does. Instead, it prefers to give money to LG because LG is not a real competitor to Apple. Smart!
    Foxconn isn't a competitor to Apple, yet back in 2015 they entered the so-called smartphone market in India. How long does anyone think it might take for Foxconn to get the idea of entering the Android phone market as a brand in the US?

    https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/mobiles-tablets/foxconnbacked-infocus-to-enter-indian-smartphone-market/article6933651.ece#!
    Alex1N
  • Reply 29 of 30
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,365member
    nunzy said:
    Apple does not like to give money to Samsung because Samsung copies everything that Apple ever does. Instead, it prefers to give money to LG because LG is not a real competitor to Apple. Smart!
    Foxconn isn't a competitor to Apple, yet back in 2015 they entered the so-called smartphone market in India. How long does anyone think it might take for Foxconn to get the idea of entering the Android phone market as a brand in the US?

    https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/mobiles-tablets/foxconnbacked-infocus-to-enter-indian-smartphone-market/article6933651.ece#!
    It sure is possible. Foxconn is struggling to limit Apple’s business as a percentage of their sales. Not that they want to do less business with Apple, but with the companies they’ve been buying, we can see that they want to become a brand themselves. I don’t blame them, as their first responsibility is to themselves.
Sign In or Register to comment.