Yeah, those Samsung display panels are a real let down. /s
Post of the thread
flaneur wrote: »
I believe you're talking about the first phase of IGZO development. There's a second phase with a different set of processes.
I forget the details. You have the visible means of support to do the research. Please get back to us with an update. Sharp and another Japanese research institution were involved in that one. Different patents, probably.
No mentioning of these recent events?
This page really is the Pravda of the tech-world...
Well, here are un-censored Apple Insights:
- iPad Air EXPLODES INTO FIREBALL as terrified fanbois flee Apple Store
("The key factor that inspired Römer to fight back was a gagging clause. At first the US company had offered a compromise whereby she could use the Apfelkind logo on her own franchise products but not on any electronic equipment.")
Surely if it's a low percentage, it could potentially only show up at the 11th hour when production ramps up? The numbers produced for mass distribution are far greater than the numbers produced for testing - it's entirely possible that the dev devices just didn't suffer from this issue because it's fairly uncommon (5%? 2%? Whatever). This sort of thing isn't uncommon - Intel recently had to push back the launch of Broadwell by a quarter or so due to manufacturing defects that only became apparent once they started preparing for release.
As for the topic, good. When it comes to components, Apple should be sourcing the best they can regardless of who makes them - and that's what they seem to be doing.
Ouch, that sounds nasty. Wonder what caused it - presumably a battery issue of some sort?
gatorguy wrote: »
Yeah, my" visible means of support to do the research" is me and a Google Search, same as everyone else.
Perhaps the other institution you remember was the Toyko Institute of Technology? If so they were operating with funding from the same JST who licensed the IP to Samsung, Sharp, LG and reportedly several others over the past two years. There's an article here that should explain things pretty clearly:
There are "burn-in issues" alright....
Favorite line "An Apple iApparatchik was straight on the scene to work out why the Air had caught fire."
Dont feed the troll. MaestroD is full of BS.
"An Apple iApparatchik was straight on the scene to work out why the Air had caught fire."
flaneur wrote: »
No, I was thinking of the Semiconductor Energy Laboratory, who with Sharp found themselves making a crystalline IGZO:
Someone else was saying here that this development put Sharp ahead of the rest of the manufacturers. I certainly don't know, but one can wonder if this is partly why both Apple and Samsung were investing in Sharp.
LOL. I seriously think Samsung and Apple will be stronger if they can get along. All it will take is for Samsung to license Apple's IP the same way Microsoft did. I think the same about Apple & Google too - Google software & services like Google Now are far more impressive than what Apple comes up with.
Are you saying that Microsoft is paying Apple $30/phone & $40/tablet to Apple?
Where'd he mention any amount? They are licensing, however.
gtr wrote: »
Yeah, "Daddy" has been responsible for a lot of Apple's success.
Ummmm, several companies beat Apple to the personal computer market.
< Utter uneducated internet-regurgitated drivel >
Your Kool-Aid is spiked by Cupertino. Toss it down the sink and begin an immediate detox diet.
God in Heaven.
Me and the fellas at my work were absolutely crying tears of laughter (but not rolling on the floor) at this response, so points to you for inventing the internet acronym ACTOLBNROTFL.
But what next?
A good laugh can heal the soul but where to begin in correcting such an obvious lack of education?
In the end, I decided this was probably the best response to your comments:
I hope it’s not too complicated for you.
You’re putting me to sleep.
Whatcha gonna do if I don’t stop?
You’re not going to go crying to your mum, are you?
By "Daddy" you are referring to Xerox as it developed GUI and mouse first?