Question. How good is OLED in bright sunlight, even now with the modern AMOLED screens? I just heard in some recent podcasts people still lamenting the visibility of AMOLED screens in sunlight, even in the flagship Samsung phones (Galaxy SIII).
I'm outside a lot... Personally, I'd never trade visibility in that situation for slightly more color saturation or deeper blacks.
If I'm honest I'd trade new touchscreen tech, a bigger screen, better camera, faster processor, better graphics, lighter form factor and other functions for Apple to just make a phone with battery that lasts a reasonable amount of time (5 days perhaps between charges). I recall most of my old Nokia mobile phones only needing to be charged once a fortnight. I know screens suck battery life, as do 3G/Wi-fi/music/videos etc. but why shouldn't we expect a little more battery life for when we're not near a plug socket. Why don't Apple spend some of their billions of cash sloshing about in their accounts on developing battery tech. It's urgently needed, and could be incredibly lucrative to Apple.
If BLACKBERRY (RIM) had actually been thinking and not playing (f^{*ing) around with the playbook, torch, storm and extented the battery life of the blackberry to a week, perhaps RIM would be swimming, and not gasping, coughing on the the dock from almost drowning....
If BLACKBERRY (RIM) had actually been thinking and not playing (f^{*ing) around with the playbook, torch, storm and extented the battery life of the blackberry to a week, perhaps RIM would be swimming, and not gasping, coughing on the the dock from almost drowning....
They've not completely given up. They did announce they'll be licensing their OS.
Uhhh, Didn't Samsung start doing this with their AMOLED screens FOR YEARS NOW
Then again, since this is an LCD patent, it is diff, since LCD needs backlight and AMOLED does not. Seeing LCD inherently needs more layers than AMOLED, I'm not sure why Apple is still betting on LCD tech.
Also, this was done in 2007. I don't even think OLED screens were possible in 2007.
Not sure why Apple is sticking with LCD though.
OLED has better contrast ratios (no backlight so black is BLACK), can show brighter colors (although manufacturers like this feature a bit TOO much and over calibrate), uses less power, and since it requires no backlight they are thinner AND can be made flexible.
LCD has about 10 years left in it. OLED prices will come down and drive it out of the market. Sure, an OLED TV may be a bazillion dollars now, but i remember wback when an LCD monitor was a bazillion dollars compared to a CRT, and look how that turned out.
I go camping at least twice a year where i'm away from plug sockets for a good 5 days where it'd be very useful. In addition, I go on cycle tours for weekends, and fear my battery running out.
Also, I rather like the idea of being able to use my phone all day and not have to worry about plugging it in every night otherwise I'll be without my phone the next day.
And finally, in my iPhone (less than 12 months old) the battery has deteriorated such that I have to charge it daily (with normal use - i.e. just text messages, bit of music and web surfing). I'd call that fairly unacceptable when all the other elements of the phone have come on in leaps and bounds.
What harm is there in insisting battery technology is developed, I don't see it being a waste of time/money?
With all due respect, that's a fringe case (5 days with no power) and in Apple's view (and my view) it's not worth tripling the size/weight/thickness of the battery/phone in order to make it last several days. The demand for such a thing isnt there from most people, if size/weight is to be heavily sacrificed, because the vast majority of people with iPhones are able to plug it in every night, 99% of the time. I'd suggesting buying some kind of juice pack (like mophie) there's a ton of case options that include a built in battery which doubles/triples the battery life. Would be the perfect solution for you, as you're not gonna get a smartphone with 5 days of battery anytime this decade. I'll help you out: http://www.mophie.com/iPhone-4-s/47.htm
Also, the assumption that Apple isn't investing R&D in battery advancement is insane. Their products have some of the best battery life in the industry relative to their size (ie. Macbook Air/Pro) and this is clearly an area where they're continually moving forward.
I don't know but it is hard to believe Apple are not researching or at least assisting in researching new forms of battery technology. Anyone here know anything along those lines?
Sorry, but did you just post an article about an AMOLED screen from TWO generations ago when it was barely even in its infancy? When even a PENTILE display couldn't get over 200 ppi barely, and Samsung didn't even figure out its FMM technology yet (and subsequently have LG spies e-mail all the details back to base, lol)?
The advances made since then have been incredible. Trust me, in ten years OLED TV will be the new standard for high end sets. Its over 20 grand for one now, but that will only last for so long.
Its by no coincidence that TV manufacturers are jumping on the OLED bandwagon. They know its the next big thing in display tech.
If I'm honest I'd trade new touchscreen tech, a bigger screen, better camera, faster processor, better graphics, lighter form factor and other functions for Apple to just make a phone with battery that lasts a reasonable amount of time (5 days perhaps between charges). I recall most of my old Nokia mobile phones only needing to be charged once a fortnight. I know screens suck battery life, as do 3G/Wi-fi/music/videos etc. but why shouldn't we expect a little more battery life for when we're not near a plug socket. Why don't Apple spend some of their billions of cash sloshing about in their accounts on developing battery tech. It's urgently needed, and could be incredibly lucrative to Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I don't know but it is hard to believe Apple are not researching or at least assisting in researching new forms of battery technology. Anyone here know anything along those lines?
Apple has a high investment in battery tech. This one reason why Apple batteries can be made to fit the space available and not rely on off-the-shelf batteries. YouTube has a great video on Apple battery tech.
In addition, Apple employs software and hardware optimization to use less power to do more with limited power.
How often a phone needs to be charged is also a factor of what you use it for. Your old Nokia likely did little more then any other dumb phone of its day. Comparing that charge life to a smart phone is not a fair comparison.
For my money, the ultimate display will be one that combines the best elements of the backlit Retina display with the best properties of e-ink (readability in direct sunlight). If any company can crack this and make it work, I think perhaps it will be Apple.
Call me when they decide to make an OLED screen in Super Hi-Vision.
Call me when there's ANY Super Hi-Vision screen available. That being said, I don't see how an OLED screen with such resolution wouldn't be possible. I'd be surprised if it wouldn't happen in the next 10 years.
Call me when there's ANY Super Hi-Vision screen available. That being said, I don't see how an OLED screen with such resolution wouldn't be possible. I'd be surprised if it wouldn't happen in the next 10 years.
You can't be serious! I sit here honestly believing that the next iPhone will have much better battery lifetimes, but I'm not so crazy as to think that 5 days is possible with near term technology. You need to realize that iPhone is a computer and much like a laptop doesn't last that long (battery lifetimes) if used extensively. It is the nature of the beast and will likely remain an issue for users for sometime.
By the way expecting more is all right as it drives industry forward, I just don't see the technology to deliver what you want in the next couple of years. At least not in a manageable pocketable cell phone. Today you can slap a battery pack onto an iPhone to extend the range but few do because it bulks up the device to much.
If I'm honest I'd trade new touchscreen tech, a bigger screen, better camera, faster processor, better graphics, lighter form factor and other functions for Apple to just make a phone with battery that lasts a reasonable amount of time (5 days perhaps between charges). I recall most of my old Nokia mobile phones only needing to be charged once a fortnight. I know screens suck battery life, as do 3G/Wi-fi/music/videos etc. but why shouldn't we expect a little more battery life for when we're not near a plug socket. Why don't Apple spend some of their billions of cash sloshing about in their accounts on developing battery tech. It's urgently needed, and could be incredibly lucrative to Apple.
Last I knew Apple owned a company that in fact has developed much of the battery tech used in its machines. That is why they can build laptops that can run for 3 or 4 years without significant loss in battery capacity. A rational comparison of Apples battery technology indicates that they are very much technology leaders now. That isn't to say we don't need something better but improvements don't happen overnight. Further batteries are real safety issues and as such require extensive validation and safety research to make sure a design is valid for public consumption.
I go camping at least twice a year where i'm away from plug sockets for a good 5 days where it'd be very useful. In addition, I go on cycle tours for weekends, and fear my battery running out.
What good is a cell phone if you are camping? Most places I go to to experience the great out doors have no signal. More interesting is this, how many other devices do you carry that are likely to last on one set of atteries for such a trip. I mean really I carry extra batteries for my LED flashlights.
Also, I rather like the idea of being able to use my phone all day and not have to worry about plugging it in every night otherwise I'll be without my phone the next day.
Honestly that is assinine! Is it really that difficult to slip the phone into a charger when hitting the sack?
And finally, in my iPhone (less than 12 months old) the battery has deteriorated such that I have to charge it daily (with normal use - i.e. just text messages, bit of music and web surfing). I'd call that fairly unacceptable when all the other elements of the phone have come on in leaps and bounds.
if the battery has actually failed or regressed why not take the unit back to Apple for a replacement?
It is more likely though that you are simply using the hardware more than in the past.
What harm is there in insisting battery technology is developed, I don't see it being a waste of time/money?
It isn't a waste of money however your implication that research isn't being done is down right misinformed. Battery technology is one of the hottest spots in R&D as everybody has the same issue. That is they need higher capacity and safer batteries.
I dont care about the lawsuit possibilities of this. What I do want to know is, if this is used on the new iPhone will it cause a screen replacement to be $300 like the Galaxy S3. Cause when my wife drops her new iphone and cracks the screen I want to know it will cost a lot less. That is a huge disadvantage of the s3. The glass is fused to the screen and it is a very expensive replacement.
I dont care about the lawsuit possibilities of this. What I do want to know is, if this is used on the new iPhone will it cause a screen replacement to be $300 like the Galaxy S3. Cause when my wife drops her new iphone and cracks the screen I want to know it will cost a lot less. That is a huge disadvantage of the s3. The glass is fused to the screen and it is a very expensive replacement.
When you purchase an iPhone it is a good idea to also buy Apple Care for it. As I recall the last iPhone I purchased AC+ was $99 for 2 years but they also said if the screen needs to be replaced it is only $50.
Ok so anyway, now we've got the touch layer integrated, that makes room for...
More layers?
1) Transparent Photovoltaic layer? Would be a good work around for battery life issues.
2) Light sensing pixels? Like cones in the eye. A Real Retina Display. The possibilities:
i) Built-in fingerprint recognition
ii) Facial recognition
iii) Hover effects on finger proximity
iv) Greater multitouch input - shape of object, object tracking
v) Due to sensor effective size, huge aperture, 3D vision possible
vi) True face-to-face FaceTime, eye contact, a window, the goal for video conferencing
vii) Apps. There will be uses we can only dream of. Like a mirror.
3) Not really a "layer" but glasses-free 3D. Let Nintendo work out the kinks first.
If you listen to Samscum Apple doesnt invent anything and if by chance Apple does and it becomes popular then it becomes the defacto standard and everyone including samsuck can copy it just because it is popular. What a dishonest company.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Not sure why Apple is sticking with LCD though.
Question. How good is OLED in bright sunlight, even now with the modern AMOLED screens? I just heard in some recent podcasts people still lamenting the visibility of AMOLED screens in sunlight, even in the flagship Samsung phones (Galaxy SIII).
I'm outside a lot... Personally, I'd never trade visibility in that situation for slightly more color saturation or deeper blacks.
If BLACKBERRY (RIM) had actually been thinking and not playing (f^{*ing) around with the playbook, torch, storm and extented the battery life of the blackberry to a week, perhaps RIM would be swimming, and not gasping, coughing on the the dock from almost drowning....
Quote:
Originally Posted by haar
If BLACKBERRY (RIM) had actually been thinking and not playing (f^{*ing) around with the playbook, torch, storm and extented the battery life of the blackberry to a week, perhaps RIM would be swimming, and not gasping, coughing on the the dock from almost drowning....
They've not completely given up. They did announce they'll be licensing their OS.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-13/rim-says-blackberry-10-will-soon-be-ready-for-licensing
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Uhhh, Didn't Samsung start doing this with their AMOLED screens FOR YEARS NOW
Then again, since this is an LCD patent, it is diff, since LCD needs backlight and AMOLED does not. Seeing LCD inherently needs more layers than AMOLED, I'm not sure why Apple is still betting on LCD tech.
Also, this was done in 2007. I don't even think OLED screens were possible in 2007.
Not sure why Apple is sticking with LCD though.
OLED has better contrast ratios (no backlight so black is BLACK), can show brighter colors (although manufacturers like this feature a bit TOO much and over calibrate), uses less power, and since it requires no backlight they are thinner AND can be made flexible.
LCD has about 10 years left in it. OLED prices will come down and drive it out of the market. Sure, an OLED TV may be a bazillion dollars now, but i remember wback when an LCD monitor was a bazillion dollars compared to a CRT, and look how that turned out.
Because you are wrong.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/iphone-4-retina-display-vs-galaxy-s-super-amoled-fight/
Quote:
Originally Posted by CustardCar
I go camping at least twice a year where i'm away from plug sockets for a good 5 days where it'd be very useful. In addition, I go on cycle tours for weekends, and fear my battery running out.
Also, I rather like the idea of being able to use my phone all day and not have to worry about plugging it in every night otherwise I'll be without my phone the next day.
And finally, in my iPhone (less than 12 months old) the battery has deteriorated such that I have to charge it daily (with normal use - i.e. just text messages, bit of music and web surfing). I'd call that fairly unacceptable when all the other elements of the phone have come on in leaps and bounds.
What harm is there in insisting battery technology is developed, I don't see it being a waste of time/money?
With all due respect, that's a fringe case (5 days with no power) and in Apple's view (and my view) it's not worth tripling the size/weight/thickness of the battery/phone in order to make it last several days. The demand for such a thing isnt there from most people, if size/weight is to be heavily sacrificed, because the vast majority of people with iPhones are able to plug it in every night, 99% of the time. I'd suggesting buying some kind of juice pack (like mophie) there's a ton of case options that include a built in battery which doubles/triples the battery life. Would be the perfect solution for you, as you're not gonna get a smartphone with 5 days of battery anytime this decade. I'll help you out: http://www.mophie.com/iPhone-4-s/47.htm
Also, the assumption that Apple isn't investing R&D in battery advancement is insane. Their products have some of the best battery life in the industry relative to their size (ie. Macbook Air/Pro) and this is clearly an area where they're continually moving forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I don't know but it is hard to believe Apple are not researching or at least assisting in researching new forms of battery technology. Anyone here know anything along those lines?
You don't know if they are or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU
You don't know if they are or not.
Correct. I think that's exactly what he said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus
Because you are wrong.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/iphone-4-retina-display-vs-galaxy-s-super-amoled-fight/
Sorry, but did you just post an article about an AMOLED screen from TWO generations ago when it was barely even in its infancy? When even a PENTILE display couldn't get over 200 ppi barely, and Samsung didn't even figure out its FMM technology yet (and subsequently have LG spies e-mail all the details back to base, lol)?
The advances made since then have been incredible. Trust me, in ten years OLED TV will be the new standard for high end sets. Its over 20 grand for one now, but that will only last for so long.
Its by no coincidence that TV manufacturers are jumping on the OLED bandwagon. They know its the next big thing in display tech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CustardCar
If I'm honest I'd trade new touchscreen tech, a bigger screen, better camera, faster processor, better graphics, lighter form factor and other functions for Apple to just make a phone with battery that lasts a reasonable amount of time (5 days perhaps between charges). I recall most of my old Nokia mobile phones only needing to be charged once a fortnight. I know screens suck battery life, as do 3G/Wi-fi/music/videos etc. but why shouldn't we expect a little more battery life for when we're not near a plug socket. Why don't Apple spend some of their billions of cash sloshing about in their accounts on developing battery tech. It's urgently needed, and could be incredibly lucrative to Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I don't know but it is hard to believe Apple are not researching or at least assisting in researching new forms of battery technology. Anyone here know anything along those lines?
Apple has a high investment in battery tech. This one reason why Apple batteries can be made to fit the space available and not rely on off-the-shelf batteries. YouTube has a great video on Apple battery tech.
In addition, Apple employs software and hardware optimization to use less power to do more with limited power.
How often a phone needs to be charged is also a factor of what you use it for. Your old Nokia likely did little more then any other dumb phone of its day. Comparing that charge life to a smart phone is not a fair comparison.
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Its by no coincidence that TV manufacturers are jumping on the OLED bandwagon. They know its the next big thing in display tech.
Call me when they decide to make an OLED screen in Super Hi-Vision.
For my money, the ultimate display will be one that combines the best elements of the backlit Retina display with the best properties of e-ink (readability in direct sunlight). If any company can crack this and make it work, I think perhaps it will be Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Call me when they decide to make an OLED screen in Super Hi-Vision.
Call me when there's ANY Super Hi-Vision screen available. That being said, I don't see how an OLED screen with such resolution wouldn't be possible. I'd be surprised if it wouldn't happen in the next 10 years.
Originally Posted by Youarewrong
Call me when there's ANY Super Hi-Vision screen available. That being said, I don't see how an OLED screen with such resolution wouldn't be possible. I'd be surprised if it wouldn't happen in the next 10 years.
This year.
Last year.
Why.
As for the few problems they mention at the end, here's how you fix it. Take a Super Hi-Vision camera. Take a Lytro. Combine them.
By the way expecting more is all right as it drives industry forward, I just don't see the technology to deliver what you want in the next couple of years. At least not in a manageable pocketable cell phone. Today you can slap a battery pack onto an iPhone to extend the range but few do because it bulks up the device to much.
Last I knew Apple owned a company that in fact has developed much of the battery tech used in its machines. That is why they can build laptops that can run for 3 or 4 years without significant loss in battery capacity. A rational comparison of Apples battery technology indicates that they are very much technology leaders now. That isn't to say we don't need something better but improvements don't happen overnight. Further batteries are real safety issues and as such require extensive validation and safety research to make sure a design is valid for public consumption.
It is more likely though that you are simply using the hardware more than in the past.
It isn't a waste of money however your implication that research isn't being done is down right misinformed. Battery technology is one of the hottest spots in R&D as everybody has the same issue. That is they need higher capacity and safer batteries.
I dont care about the lawsuit possibilities of this. What I do want to know is, if this is used on the new iPhone will it cause a screen replacement to be $300 like the Galaxy S3. Cause when my wife drops her new iphone and cracks the screen I want to know it will cost a lot less. That is a huge disadvantage of the s3. The glass is fused to the screen and it is a very expensive replacement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoverlow
I dont care about the lawsuit possibilities of this. What I do want to know is, if this is used on the new iPhone will it cause a screen replacement to be $300 like the Galaxy S3. Cause when my wife drops her new iphone and cracks the screen I want to know it will cost a lot less. That is a huge disadvantage of the s3. The glass is fused to the screen and it is a very expensive replacement.
When you purchase an iPhone it is a good idea to also buy Apple Care for it. As I recall the last iPhone I purchased AC+ was $99 for 2 years but they also said if the screen needs to be replaced it is only $50.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy
Looks like innovation to me.
They aren't the first. I'm wondering what is different enough to gain a patent.
http://www.auo.com/?sn=107&lang=en-US&c=10&n=586
True.
Ok so anyway, now we've got the touch layer integrated, that makes room for...
More layers?
1) Transparent Photovoltaic layer? Would be a good work around for battery life issues.
2) Light sensing pixels? Like cones in the eye. A Real Retina Display. The possibilities:
i) Built-in fingerprint recognition
ii) Facial recognition
iii) Hover effects on finger proximity
iv) Greater multitouch input - shape of object, object tracking
v) Due to sensor effective size, huge aperture, 3D vision possible
vi) True face-to-face FaceTime, eye contact, a window, the goal for video conferencing
vii) Apps. There will be uses we can only dream of. Like a mirror.
3) Not really a "layer" but glasses-free 3D. Let Nintendo work out the kinks first.
Anyone for iPhone 7 speculation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy
Looks like innovation to me.
If you listen to Samscum Apple doesnt invent anything and if by chance Apple does and it becomes popular then it becomes the defacto standard and everyone including samsuck can copy it just because it is popular. What a dishonest company.