Apple Investigating Thinner, Lower Power IGZO Displays Across iPad and iPhone Product Lines for 2013

[fertilized-egg]

The article is a bit misleading. iPhone already uses LTPS which arguably is better than IGZO but too expensive. It'll be the iPad line up that'll really better off by using IGZO, and the biggest benefit from from the reduced power usage, not the thinner panel. I can't wait to see a iPad mini display with a IGZO panel.

Also the article at least gives an hint that Sharp owns IGZO, they don't. IGZO is owned by a different Japanese company and AFAIK both Samsung and LG have licensed them separately from that company.

Originally Posted by tdream

IPS will never be superior to OLED because the black level cannot be reached due to the inherent backlight feature of IPS technology.

But that's only if you deeply care about black level in dark environments. In normal usage, LCD's black level is sufficient enough because there's always light leaking onto your device. Then we have life span (hello burn-in), color accuracy, power consumption, cost, manufacturing, etc, all are currently in favor of IPS. OLED has a great mesmerizing look due to its black level and has wonderfully short response time, but I wouldn't call it superior to IPS yet. For mobile I'll still pick IPS everytime but AMOLED still makes for great marketing for some.

[iLLUMI]

Originally Posted by JS82712

we've been hearing about this whole IGZO thing since early 2012, when will this ever come to fruition.

Ditto!

This isn't a new rumour, just a rehash of everything we've already read. The whole IGZO thing is getting ... well lets just say I was all for it but now I'm really over it.
Sighh...

But lets just cross our fingers once more and hope that it will come with the iPad 5 in March 2013. If both the iPad 5 and iPad Mini have IGZO then I'll buy both.
I guess we'll find out in 3 months time.

[tdream]

Originally Posted by fertilized-egg

But that's only if you deeply care about black level in dark environments. In normal usage, LCD's black level is sufficient enough because there's always light leaking onto your device. Then we have life span (hello burn-in), color accuracy, power consumption, cost, manufacturing, etc, all are currently in favor of IPS. OLED has a great mesmerizing look due to its black level and has wonderfully short response time, but I wouldn't call it superior to IPS yet. For mobile I'll still pick IPS everytime but AMOLED still makes for great marketing for some.

Now this is Apple talk at it's finest. Quite simply it is superior, just because Apple hasn't adopted it yet for cost reasons and other reasons (sourcing the oled panels since Samsung manufactures the largest amount) does not mean it isn't ready for the bigtime.

And the argument that you simply don't need it is just laughable on an Apple forum. You don't need to have any Apple product. You want an Apple product because of the 'assumed' quality it supposedly possesses. It's like when everyone had 3g and Apple didn't. It's not ready yet... It's like when everyone had LTE and Apple didn't. It's not ready yet... It's like when everyone had a bigger screen and Apple didn't. It's not ready yet... Do you need a high resolution retina display? No but it sure is nice.

For mobile screens it makes perfect sense to have an OLED screen. If you want to do serious colour work, you'll use a large monitor not a tiny 4 inch screen. And the burn in issue is a non issue, older panels might have suffered, but not the current models and definitely not the Galaxy Note 2. The quality of the black level is noticeable any time of the day indoors. Just put an OLED side by side an IPS screen and you will notice the difference. It's not that hard to spot.

[fertilized-egg]

Originally Posted by tdream

Now this is Apple talk at it's finest. ... It's like when everyone had LTE and Apple didn't. It's not ready yet

No, I speak from years experience using AMOLED. Also looking back it's clear LTE wasn't ready before the latest Qualcomm chip. Did you see the battery life of the first gen. LTE phones?

Originally Posted by tdream

Quite simply it is superior ... For mobile screens it makes perfect sense to have an OLED screen. If you want to do serious colour work, you'll use a large monitor not a tiny 4 inch screen.

That doesn't make sense at all. Your logic is:

1) AMOLED is superior

2) AMOLED doesn't have good color accuracy but it doesn't matter

See how 1) and 2) directly contrast each other?? Who decided color accuracy doesn't matter in a mobile display?

Basically you're accusing someone of seeing only things that favor Apple but here you're doing exactly that; you're seeing things only when it favors AMOLED. Color accuracy is an objective, measurable characteristic of a display just as with black level. Why suddenly it's not important? Oh because AMOLED doesn't have good color accuracy.

It wouldn't mattered as much if AMOLED betters LCD in resolution but it doesn't, LCD has better pixel density as well. LCD currently has advantages in resolution, outdoor visibility, power consumption, etc. (and believe it or not, some Galaxy S3 already suffered from burn-in, so I wouldn't be so sure about Galaxy Note 2)

I also think in the long term things will move toward AMOLED but currently it has many disadvantages. For you it comes down to black level and that's about it. That's fair but it seems to me that you cannot admit all the disadvantages of AMOLED. With the latest LTPS IPS screens, LCD still has an upperhand in many aspects.

Originally Posted by iLLUMI

Ditto!

This isn't a new rumour, just a rehash of everything we've already read. The whole IGZO thing is getting ... well lets just say I was all for it but now I'm really over it.
Sighh...

But lets just cross our fingers once more and hope that it will come with the iPad 5 in March 2013. If both the iPad 5 and iPad Mini have IGZO then I'll buy both.
I guess we'll find out in 3 months time.

Seriously. Will Sharp ever make good on their lofty promises with IGZO? It really is dragging on forever.

[tdream]

Originally Posted by fertilized-egg

No, I speak from years experience using AMOLED. Also looking back it's clear LTE wasn't ready before the latest Qualcomm chip. Did you see the battery life of the first gen. LTE phones?

What were your years of experience of AMOLED?

That doesn't make sense at all. Your logic is:

1) AMOLED is superior

2) AMOLED doesn't have good color accuracy but it doesn't matter

See how 1) and 2) directly contrast each other?? Who decided color accuracy doesn't matter in a mobile display?

Basically you're accusing someone of seeing only things that favor Apple but here you're doing exactly that; you're seeing things only when it favors AMOLED. Color accuracy is an objective, measurable characteristic of a display just as with black level. Why suddenly it's not important? Oh because AMOLED doesn't have good color accuracy.

It wouldn't mattered as much if AMOLED betters LCD in resolution but it doesn't, LCD has better pixel density as well. LCD currently has advantages in resolution, outdoor visibility, power consumption, etc. (and believe it or not, some Galaxy S3 already suffered from burn-in, so I wouldn't be so sure about Galaxy Note 2)

I also think in the long term things will move toward AMOLED but currently it has many disadvantages. For you it comes down to black level and that's about it. That's fair but it seems to me that you cannot admit all the disadvantages of AMOLED. With the latest LTPS IPS screens, LCD still has an upperhand in many aspects.

I think the disadvantages you describe are overblow out of proportion. Colour accuracy can be measured, but not really by the human eye. And if you have consumers out there that can't tell the difference between a Galaxy phone and an iPhone well then... suffice to say colour accuracy is not even on their radar.

The colour accuracy may not be perfect, but its not horrible or bad or anything like the old TN panels, in fact it is most certainly pleasing to the eye with a pop and vibrancy that cannot be achieved on IPS even if you wanted to. Yes I assume the majority of people would want a mobile display they can see clearly, it is a mobile device afterall and used in a variety of robust situations. The muted tones of a perfect colour accuracy display may be required when doing colour work indoors, but then how many people are doing this kind of work anyway. A fraction of a percentage point of total users. And these folks would spend thousands more than the average person on a display if perfect colour accuracy is their trade.

Outdoor visibility the OLED trumps IPS, the brightness difference on the GN2 vs the iPhone is huge. OLED clearly wins the outdoor visibility test. Power consumption is not a problem with the GN2 as it packs a huge battery two days of use without charging is no problem.

[twoodcc]

Sounds good to me. Looking forward to more retina macs as well.

[xofruitcake]

Originally Posted by fertilized-egg

Seriously. Will Sharp ever make good on their lofty promises with IGZO? It really is dragging on forever.

Sharp already has a tablet, SHT21, and a smartphone, SH-02E out in Japan in mid Dec using the IGZO dispaly. The early review seems to be pretty decent (but hint on some color accuracy issue). The battery saving seems to be real. You have to translate the reviews from Japanese.

http://review.kakaku.com/review/K0000428847/

[adder7712]

Originally Posted by pgiguere1

Sure, I wasn't saying those desired characteristics were mutually exclusive, just that there aren't any flagship smartphone with OLED screen on the market today that offers all of them. You have to make a bunch of compromises compared to the best smartphone LCD displays in order to have deeper blacks.

I'm calling "IPS" for short LCD screens like the ones in the iPhone 5, Nexus 4, One X and Lumia 920 but I know those screens aren't good strictly because they're IPS. I simply wasn't going to list all their specs so you know what I'm talking about. I could have called them "Super LCD3+ HD" or whatever what Android manufacturers call them these days.

It's not technically impossible for OLED displays to have a better color gamut and real RGB matrix, but somehow it doesn't happen, which leads me to believe it's pretty hard (or expensive) to do.

Theoretical optimal performance is meaningless if it never makes it to consumer products because companies aren't willing to manufacture displays with said optimal theoretical performance.

The Galaxy S II with an AMOLED display has a real RGB matrix.

[fertilized-egg]

Originally Posted by tdream

What were your years of experience of AMOLED?

Owned Cowon S9 and Samsung Galaxy S. Also have used all the major Samsung phones with AMOLED.

Originally Posted by tdream

I think the disadvantages you describe are overblow out of proportion. Colour accuracy can be measured, but not really by the human eye.

Yes they can. The first thing my wife said when she looked at the Galaxy S was "ew the colors are all off".

This is made worse by Samsung's decision to set the white balance much too blue, which makes things look sharp and bright but messes up the color balance. However the trickery obviously works because you claim:

Originally Posted by tdream

the brightness difference on the GN2 vs the iPhone is huge.

Galaxy Note 2's brightness clocks at less than 500 cd/m2



iPhone 5 does over 500: http://www.displaymate.com/Smartphone_ShootOut_2.htm

I understand your love for AMOLED, as I once was a lover of it too and it has many charming qualities. Also I believe one day we'll move to AMOLED when things are all ready. However it's disingenuous to brush aside all the short comings of it even when they are measurable. AMOLED currently right now has many problems and some people do notice them. Also it really does use more battery when there's a lot of white and saying a bigger battery solves the problem isn't the honest answer.

[spatlese44]

Just thought I'd mention that it's 1 week and 1 day from the average update schedule for the iPad. Apple never officially called the "4th gen" a new version and I'm not either. From the buyers guide:

73 + 230 = 303 days vs 311 days avg.

I for one am waiting with gift cards in hand.

[gto55]

Maybe apple is already testing a 4.8" IGZO display for its next iPhone or a 7.9"/9.7" for their upcoming iPads

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderd...ore-smart-tvs/
Sharp at CES: Talks Up IGZO Technology; Will Apple Follow?


This is a technology, you may recall, that has been rumored to be considered by Apple (AAPL) for the iPhone.

The display has the advantages of having electron mobility 20 to 30 times faster than conventional amorphous silicon. It can get 80% battery savings and can continue to display an image when the power is turned off.

IGZO is already being used in Sharp's “Aquos” line of smartphones and tablets. They can have battery life that's two to three days. It is also finding its way into Sharp TV sets that support the 4K “ultra high def” specification, in set sizes up to 32 inches.

Takahashi says the company has not done it alone: Corning (GLW) is an important partner. He welcomes on stage Corning Glass president James Clappin. Clappin says IGZO promises stunning color, ultra high resolution, and low power consumption. The glass used will be Corning's “Lotus Glass.”

[unfrostedpoptar]

Originally Posted by vikpt

Am I the only one here who wants a thinner bezel for the iPad? :/

No, but I want it on all of their displays! I couldn't care less about the iMac's edge being thin. I want narrow bezels to put multiple displays next to each other without the 1 1/2" black bar I have now.

[louis.b]

who cares it AMOLED is the "future" if its present form is still pathetic? Sorry but that screen on the s3 AND the note2 is the WORST screen on any flagship device released in 2012? I dont care if you call me idiot and what not. I trust my eyes.