Rumor: Apple considering going back to 'glass-to-glass' touch panels for 2016 iPhones

Posted:
in iPhone edited September 2015
Apple is reportedly testing the notion of reverting to G/G (glass-to-glass) touch panels for 2016 iPhone models, out of alleged frustration with obstacles presented by the in-cell technology the company has been using in recent years.




Panel suppliers have started sending fully-laminated G/G samples, and glassmakers Corning and Asahi Glass have sent samples of their own, DigiTimes said on Wednesday. Apple is allegedly sticking with the in-cell format for its 2015 iPhones, which should be announced at the company's Sept. 9 event.

Although in-cell technology allows for thinner displays, it's also allegedly creating production bottlenecks for Apple that are impeding new features and higher resolutions. The iPhone 6 Plus sports a 1920x1080-resolution display, but some competing smartphones are already at quad HD resolution (2560x1440), and the future may be 4K.

DigiTimes has a mixed track record with Apple product details but is typically more reliable when talking about its focus, the Asian supply industry.

The publication claims that Apple's hope is a slimmed-down version of G/G could replace in-cell panels without adding bulk. It could also potentially enable bezel-free phones, since in-cell panels reportedly have problems with sensitivity around their edges.

Any 2016 iPhones would likely still be in early development stages, with core features unsettled.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 55
    Digitimes is moving up in the world of rumor mongering. They're now "more reliable" :lol:
  • Reply 2 of 55
    rp2011rp2011 Posts: 159member
    I'm glad I'm on the S cycle, but I'm going to see if i can skip the 6 altogether. Such an ugly and huge for it's screen size device.

    I was at Verizon with a friend yesterday and the Samsung and most other phones looked better, even the 5C
  • Reply 3 of 55
    I don't buy this last minute rumor sharting from these jokers.
  • Reply 4 of 55

    1080, 1440, 4K... Why do we need such high resolutions in a screen no larger than the palm of your hand? The majority of eyes can't even resolve this level of detail. We're already practically at the point where a magnifying glass is required to appreciate any increase in resolution as it is.

     

    New phone owner to friend: "Check out the screen on THIS new baby!" *hands phone and magnifying glass to friend*

  • Reply 5 of 55
    zroger73 wrote: »
    1080, 1440, 4K... Why do we need such high resolutions in a screen no larger than the palm of your hand? The majority of eyes can't even resolve this level of detail. We're already practically at the point where a magnifying glass is required to appreciate any increase in resolution as it is.

    New phone owner to friend: "Check out the screen on THIS new baby!" *hands phone and magnifying glass to friend*

    Pretty much. The current 6 screen is so small the resolution is already excessive. If Apple's now firmly in the spec chasing game then that's another strike.
  • Reply 6 of 55
    poksipoksi Posts: 481member

    Bollocks. Resolution stumbles upon much bigger constraints in performance and battery resource than in panel itself. Next....

  • Reply 7 of 55
    rp2011 wrote: »
    I'm glad I'm on the S cycle, but I'm going to see if i can skip the 6 altogether. Such an ugly and huge for it's screen size device.

    I was at Verizon with a friend yesterday and the Samsung and most other phones looked better, even the 5C

    The 5c really is a nice phone.
  • Reply 8 of 55
    sog35 wrote: »
    So you buy smartphones based on looks?  LOL.  

    No reasonable person can say the 4.7 iPhone6 is huge.

    NEXT.

    I do, and I'm reasonable!
  • Reply 9 of 55
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    So you buy smartphones based on looks?  LOL.  

     

    No reasonable person can say the 4.7 iPhone6 is huge.

     

    NEXT.




    Some people marry based on looks. A smartphone seems a much less unreasonable investment :)

  • Reply 10 of 55
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    I do, and I'm reasonable!



    I also do. I don't know if I'm reasonable. I can be reasoned with, though, or bought off if the price is right.

  • Reply 11 of 55
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,957member
    The 1440 panels have an effective Rez of 1080 if they're actually Pentile, or similar displays. No point to goi g to 1440, as we can't see that anyway, in a display this size. 1220 would make sense if only because it's the triple size Apple uses, and then brings down to 1080. It would save processing cycles and give better performance than 1080.
  • Reply 12 of 55
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    And Huawei just announced a new phone with...wait for it..."force touch". Can accompany get any more pathetic ripping off another company's marketing term? Force touch is not an industry-standard term it's a marketing term from Apple. The fact that Huawei would rip off that name is absolutely pathetic.

    http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/2/9244015/huawei-mate-s-force-touch-availability-price
  • Reply 13 of 55

    A 2560x1440 resolution on a 4-5" device is just insane.  Waste of processing power to push that many pixels the human eye can't discern (at that size) anyway.

  • Reply 14 of 55
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    And Huawei just announced a new phone with...wait for it..."force touch". Can accompany get any more pathetic ripping off another company's marketing term? Force touch is not an industry-standard term it's a marketing term from Apple. The fact that Huawei would rip off that name is absolutely pathetic.



    http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/2/9244015/huawei-mate-s-force-touch-availability-price



    Is "force touch" a part of Android? Or did Huawei add it themselves?

  • Reply 15 of 55
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    formosa wrote: »

    Is "force touch" a part of Android? Or did Huawei add it themselves?

    As far as I know it's not part of Android M. These are Huawei specific customizations.
  • Reply 16 of 55
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,184member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zroger73 View Post

     

    1080, 1440, 4K... Why do we need such high resolutions in a screen no larger than the palm of your hand? The majority of eyes can't even resolve this level of detail. We're already practically at the point where a magnifying glass is required to appreciate any increase in resolution as it is.

     

    New phone owner to friend: "Check out the screen on THIS new baby!" *hands phone and magnifying glass to friend*


     

    Exacly!!!  These Super High Resolution screens are crazy.  What's the point other then then say you're better then your Android Competition or better then the iPhone.  When in reality, you can't see a large percentage of the pixels.  Instead you have a screen that sucks up more power and slowing performance because the CPU/GPU has to work a hell of a lot harder moving a bunch of pixels on screen you can't even see.

     

    You're right, Whip out that Magnifying glass.   Was it that Sharp TV with 4 colors, that added Yellow to their Displays for a supposedly better picture?  In the store there was a Magnifying glass attached to the display tv on the floor so that you could look on it and actually see the 4 different colors including yellow used to make the picture.  Of course that's on a much larger screen so didn't need much magnification at that close range.

     

    I think people look at these Samscum displays which are using OLED and don't have natural colors.  It's more FLASH, like in the store TV displays to catch your attention.  One of the reasons Plasma lost out to LED's even though the Picture is far better. It was that bright Vivid mode that would catch people's attention in the store.  They're not using that at home, at least I hope not.  People see the fake colors that kind of POP and think it's just the higher resolution that's doing that when it's not.   Your eye's can't possibly pick out that kind of Detail.  Anything in the 300-400PPI (Pixels Per Inch) Is more then enough to where you can't see any pixels on the screen,

     

    I mean come on, 4K 5.7" or whatever screen? WHY?  That's what you look at when going to a Movie Theater and watching on a HUGE screen.  My 50" 1080P Plasma is around 80PPI I believe.  When I get up close I can see the Pixels.  I look right up close to my iPhone 6 screen and I can't see any pixels. As far as I'm concerned, Anything higher is just overkill and something to check off on a Comparison chart.

  • Reply 17 of 55
    mytdave wrote: »
    A 2560x1440 resolution on a 4-5" device is just insane.  Waste of processing power to push that many pixels the human eye can't discern (at that size) anyway.

    Yes, but you won't have to deal with the shame of using a phone with "2 year old specs" like so many Android users fear.
  • Reply 18 of 55
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post



    I don't buy this last minute rumor sharting from these jokers.



    Rumor on a product that will be announced in about 53 weeks is last minute?

  • Reply 19 of 55
    jbdragon wrote: »
    Was it that Sharp TV with 4 colors, that added Yellow to their Displays for a supposedly better picture?

    That was epic lame. RGB to RGBY color space? How does that even work? Full yellow lights up 2/3rds of the sub-pixels on an RGB display, and human vision can't tell the difference. What does an extra Y channel gain? Technology for the sake of specs.
  • Reply 20 of 55
    rogifan wrote: »
    And Huawei just announced a new phone with...wait for it..."force touch". Can accompany get any more pathetic ripping off another company's marketing term? Force touch is not an industry-standard term it's a marketing term from Apple. The fact that Huawei would rip off that name is absolutely pathetic.

    http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/2/9244015/huawei-mate-s-force-touch-availability-price

    They won't be advertising that "feature" in the U.S., those scumbags.
Sign In or Register to comment.