All of Apple's OLED 'iPhone 8' models to use curved Samsung panels - report

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 47
    1983 said:
    Not even sure the curved OLED display makes any sense on my Watch. I often trigger the icon in the lower left of my Modular watch face when grasping it (to move it out from my cuff to read it for example). My fingertip rolls up over the edge thanks to that lovely curved screen. That's endurable on a device that is seldom handled, but on an iPhone . . .?
    ? - I have an Apple Watch too...its OLED display is not curved, the cover glass/crystal is at the edges. If you look closely, the display area itself is flat with a blanked out area around it.
    Sounds even worse in that case. Whenever you grasp the edge of the phone you run the risk of triggering what's on the curve. see Radiospace's post above for support of this. 
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 42 of 47
    Curved OLED does not mean it will be an edge display like Sammy's phones. Apple watch has a flexible OLED display. Still think the OLED screen will cover the entire front of the phone with Touch ID and earpiece hidden as well. Apple does have patents for the OLED display to be wrapped around the entire phone so even the back will be part of the screen, we shall see. If they wrap it all around you can do/have gesture available on the rear of the iPhone for more controls or buttons. 
    repressthis
  • Reply 43 of 47
    I think the idea of a "premium" IPhone is a good one -- NOT because the world needs a premium IPhone but because smart phone technology has peaked and leveled off.   New products now offer evolutionary, incremental advances.   And, most of the world is not willing to pay premium prices for incremental advances.   Some are -- they always want the latest and the greatest.   But most just want a product that will meet their needs....

    To equate this to laptops:   Why would somebody pay $2,500 for a laptop when they can get the same functionality out of a $500 laptop?   How far can prestige take you?

    Apple NEEDS to go to a two tiered system -- just as Honda and Toyota did when they added their premium lines.  Apple doesn't need to go so far as to create a separate company, but it will begin losing increased market share if it only targets the top 10, 9, 8, 7, 6%... of the market.

    Too many Apple loyal are stuck back in the 80's and 90's where tech advance was revolutionary.   Today, increasingly it is evolutionary.   Apple needs to adjust to today's world.
    Actually, Apple has long been about iterative improvement. In fact Gruber wrote about this back in 2010:

    http://www.macworld.com/article/1151235/macs/apple-rolls.html

    ...iterative improvement is the name of the game.  


  • Reply 44 of 47
    Ian S said:
    So this is how they're going to get rid of the home button. In order to go "home", you'll squeeze both sides of the device using force touch, and to enter "multitasking" you'll double squeeze. The curved edges will round the corners, more than they do on the Galaxy S 7, so it can register your force touch every time. I'd imagine that, depending on the app, the curved sides would also display relevant controls. In camera, for instance, there would probably be a dedicated "button" to force touch to take a picture, or a slide to zoom in and out with. Perhaps even the volume controls, power button, and ringer switch will all become digital as well. Simulating that in my hand, I actually really like it. With haptic feedback, this would make the phone feel very organic and alive. Over time, I could see this actually becoming more natural than using the home button. The only thing that sticks out is how to activate Siri, but since she's voice controlled anyways it may make sense to only activate her through "Hey, Siri", rather than long pressing on the sides (which will be hard to distinguish from pressing to go home).
    Who are you, and where the heck have you been?! Welcome. I really like your ideas. The best feasible use of wrapped displayed I've heard. Very imaginative and realistic. Well done. I hope to hear more of your interesting speculations in future AI posts. 
  • Reply 45 of 47
    AI_lias said:
    Sorry but the iPhone is too slippery to use without a case, and the edges too rounded, also. Hard to get a good grip. I use best case ever skin to make it usable without a thick case. I also go to the Apple Store and dream of a new design. The glass not being recessed ensure a cracked screen with each drop. So now I just use it with a cracked screen. Wish they'd change the design more often, it increases the chance of coming up with something better by accident. Welcome to the new Apple, I guess. 
    Perhaps the iPhone feels to slippery to you.  Coming from a Samsung Edge phone, it feels like it has handlebars on it by comparison.  

    If you could post a link or full name of the case that you use I will consider getting one like it when I upgrade, if I also find it too slippery in the long run.
  • Reply 46 of 47
    brucemc said:
    I think the idea of a "premium" IPhone is a good one -- NOT because the world needs a premium IPhone but because smart phone technology has peaked and leveled off.   New products now offer evolutionary, incremental advances.   And, most of the world is not willing to pay premium prices for incremental advances.   Some are -- they always want the latest and the greatest.   But most just want a product that will meet their needs....

    To equate this to laptops:   Why would somebody pay $2,500 for a laptop when they can get the same functionality out of a $500 laptop?   How far can prestige take you?

    Apple NEEDS to go to a two tiered system -- just as Honda and Toyota did when they added their premium lines.  Apple doesn't need to go so far as to create a separate company, but it will begin losing increased market share if it only targets the top 10, 9, 8, 7, 6%... of the market.

    Too many Apple loyal are stuck back in the 80's and 90's where tech advance was revolutionary.   Today, increasingly it is evolutionary.   Apple needs to adjust to today's world.
    It is true that smartphones have reached a point of maturity when most features are evolutionary / incremental.  The upgrade cycle for smartphones (at least premium ones) is certainly lengthening.

    However, you seem to want to spin a narrative that goes against reality.
    - Humans are not drones who only purchase "what they need".  Look at *every* market (clothes, cars, electronics, houses, furniture,...) - the purchasing criteria in each one is much beyond "what they need".  You can say that it is illogical, it is just vanity, whatever.  The point is that this is what people do.
    - In computers specifically, a significant portion of the market (10%+) are buying units above $1000.  While more expensive upfront, they last longer, perform better, and are valued by their owners.  Macs of course absolutely dominate this category.  Apple's products are more expensive, but many value thin & light (portability), ease-of-use, no bloatware / adware installed, etc.  Resale is higher.  
    - In smartphones, there is absolutely a difference between a $250 phone and a $650 phone.  Screen, camera, battery, performance, security, durability, resale - pretty much every aspect of a phone.  For a device which many use more than any other product they own, why would they not want a good one if they can afford it?

    Perhaps you need to adjust your perception to how the world is, rather than how you want it to be.
    So, you believe that the world is defined by the 5% - 10% willing to pay $2,500 for a laptop or $3,000 for washing machine in a false hope that it will make their lives better?

     A Macintosh was a revolutionary product.  A MacBook Pro is an evolutionary product.
  • Reply 47 of 47
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,532member
    brucemc said:
    I think the idea of a "premium" IPhone is a good one -- NOT because the world needs a premium IPhone but because smart phone technology has peaked and leveled off.   New products now offer evolutionary, incremental advances.   And, most of the world is not willing to pay premium prices for incremental advances.   Some are -- they always want the latest and the greatest.   But most just want a product that will meet their needs....

    To equate this to laptops:   Why would somebody pay $2,500 for a laptop when they can get the same functionality out of a $500 laptop?   How far can prestige take you?

    Apple NEEDS to go to a two tiered system -- just as Honda and Toyota did when they added their premium lines.  Apple doesn't need to go so far as to create a separate company, but it will begin losing increased market share if it only targets the top 10, 9, 8, 7, 6%... of the market.

    Too many Apple loyal are stuck back in the 80's and 90's where tech advance was revolutionary.   Today, increasingly it is evolutionary.   Apple needs to adjust to today's world.
    It is true that smartphones have reached a point of maturity when most features are evolutionary / incremental.  The upgrade cycle for smartphones (at least premium ones) is certainly lengthening.

    However, you seem to want to spin a narrative that goes against reality.
    - Humans are not drones who only purchase "what they need".  Look at *every* market (clothes, cars, electronics, houses, furniture,...) - the purchasing criteria in each one is much beyond "what they need".  You can say that it is illogical, it is just vanity, whatever.  The point is that this is what people do.
    - In computers specifically, a significant portion of the market (10%+) are buying units above $1000.  While more expensive upfront, they last longer, perform better, and are valued by their owners.  Macs of course absolutely dominate this category.  Apple's products are more expensive, but many value thin & light (portability), ease-of-use, no bloatware / adware installed, etc.  Resale is higher.  
    - In smartphones, there is absolutely a difference between a $250 phone and a $650 phone.  Screen, camera, battery, performance, security, durability, resale - pretty much every aspect of a phone.  For a device which many use more than any other product they own, why would they not want a good one if they can afford it?

    Perhaps you need to adjust your perception to how the world is, rather than how you want it to be.
    So, you believe that the world is defined by the 5% - 10% willing to pay $2,500 for a laptop or $3,000 for washing machine in a false hope that it will make their lives better?

     A Macintosh was a revolutionary product.  A MacBook Pro is an evolutionary product.
    You completely missed the point.  I assume that was your intention.
Sign In or Register to comment.