Apple Granted Patent for 'In-Cell' Touchscreen Display Concepts

[battlefieldfan1]

It just really saddens me that it seems like he truly believes what he says. I don't know how anyone can be so ignorant.

And it really saddens me that people actually think Apple engineers the components in their own products. It just shows how much damage Apple's propaganda has done. I think only Americans are this delusional. Is it because Apple is an American corporation that you defend them to no end?

Look, I like my Samsung *cough*, excuse-me... I mean Apple devices, but I can't deny that it was the work and intelligence of other corporations that made the iphone and ipad possible. The only thing Apple really did was design a stripped-down, training wheel OS.

 

[DeathChill]

Well, at least I know you're just trying to be ridiculous and don't seem to really believe it.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

Well, at least I know you're just trying to be ridiculous and don't seem to really believe it.

So prove me wrong. What component in the iphone and ipad did Apple design except the OS?

 

[chrmjenkins]

So prove me wrong. What component in the iphone and ipad did Apple design except the OS?

Besides the SoC A5, the PCB and other meachanical/cable modules, apple designed the Apple 338S0973, a power management IC in the iPhone 4S.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

Besides the SoC A5, the PCB and other meachanical/cable modules, apple designed the Apple 338S0973, a power management IC in the iPhone 4S.

We went over this already.

SoC A5 - Samsung designed and fabbed. Apple branded. Just because it says Apple designed in wikipedia doesn't mean Apple designed it. Apple bought the ARM processors and gave them to Samsung to optimally fab them. Apple then rebranded the final product as the A5. All of it was Samsung designed.
PCB and other mechanical/cable modules - Apple bought it from other companies and wired them together. That's not inventing.
Apple 338S0973 - LOL... Okay, I'll give you this one. The 4s does a "wonderful" job at power management even without LTE... ROFL... Just proof that if Apple tries to make something on its own, you end up with something that makes Vista look like the best thing ever since sliced bread.

 

[chrmjenkins]

We went over this already.

SoC A5 - Samsung designed and fabbed. Apple branded. Just because it says Apple designed in wikipedia doesn't mean Apple designed it. Apple bought the ARM processors and gave them to Samsung to optimally fab them. Apple then rebranded the final product as the A5. All of it was Samsung designed.
PCB and other mechanical/cable modules - Apple bought it from other companies and wired them together. That's not inventing.
Apple 338S0973 - LOL... Okay, I'll give you this one. The 4s does a "wonderful" job at power management even without LTE... ROFL... Just proof that if Apple tries to make something on its own, you end up with something that makes Vista look like the best thing ever since sliced bread.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

Image

So you're comparing a non-LTE, 3.5", sub-HD phone that was released toward the end of 2011 with phones released early 2011 that had large screens and LTE?
The iPhone should have had at least 3 times the battery life. Those results are pathetic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/galaxy-s3-vs-iphone-4s_n_1615824.html

No **** web browsing saps battery life on LTE phones. Apple wanted to use a cheap battery, so they avoided LTE with the 4s.

Another test: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/ph...rola-droid-razr-maxx-1063116/review?artc_pg=9

iPhone 4s gets smoked by HTC One X, S3, AND razr. I don't expect Apple to put in 4g LTE on the iphone 5. Its battery life will go all the way down to 1 hour.

 

[fertilized-egg]

I mean, Apple doesn't really make anything except the OS.

That's just a smear attack on Apple without understanding the nuance of the situation. I'd like to address it since many North Americans often don't under stand this. The telling part is that all the companies you've listed are Asian conglomerations. They make everything because that's how the economy of Japan and Korea has evolved with strong government intervention and concentration on large interconnected corporate structures.

Before LG split into two, you could've bought - with differing brand names but all owned by the same holding company - LG toothpaste, use the LG creditcard, pump gas at the LG gas stations, buy your snacks on an LG grocery stores, buy an LG branded phones with an LG displays and use the phone on the LG U-Plus, a mobile carrier. Likewise Samsung is a company that's technically owned by a theme park(really) and they sell insurance, build skyscrappers, provide corporate IT system, have an ad agency, develop real estates, Samsung hotels, etc.

Does that head-spinning spectrum make Samsung or LG technically superior because they have expertise in so many things? No it's just the way the Korean government has decided to grow its economy and the subsequent results. Using this as a validation that Samsung, LG, Sony, etc is superior to Apple is showing your lack of understanding on how they grew in the first place.

Plus Apple, unlike many other manufacturers like HTC or Motorola, insists much more on getting their components customized instead of going off the shelf components and they have bought companies of various capacities (PA Semi and Intrinsity come to mind) that they can engineer whatever is needed for customization and demand top specs when needed from their suppliers.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

That's just a smear attack on Apple without understanding the nuance of the situation. I'd like to address it since many North Americans often don't under stand this. The telling part is that all the companies you've listed are Asian conglomerations. They make everything because that's how the economy of Japan and Korea has evolved with strong government intervention and concentration on large interconnected corporate structures.

Before LG split into two, you could've bought - with differing brand names but all owned by the same holding company - LG toothpaste, use the LG creditcard, pump gas at the LG gas stations, buy your snacks on an LG grocery stores, buy an LG branded phones with an LG displays and use the phone on the LG U-Plus, a mobile carrier. Likewise Samsung is a company that's technically owned by a theme park(really) and they sell insurance, build skyscrappers, provide corporate IT system, have an ad agency, develop real estates, Samsung hotels, etc.

Does that head-spinning spectrum make Samsung or LG technically superior because they have expertise in so many things? No it's just the way the Korean government has decided to grow its economy and the subsequent results. Using this as a validation that Samsung, LG, Sony, etc is superior to Apple is showing your lack of understanding on how they grew in the first place.

I NEVER said they were superior to Apple. I'm trying to get the facts straight because some Apple fanatics here are claiming Apple designed some of the hardware in their products when they really didn't design anything except the OS.

 

[fertilized-egg]

I NEVER said they were superior to Apple. I'm trying to get the facts straight because some Apple fanatics here are claiming Apple designed some of the hardware in their products when they really didn't design anything except the OS.

Depending on your definition of "design". Are you actually saying that some fairy came and designed the whole iPhone structure for Apple? Also somehow I'd think all the people with ARM processor knowledge Apple acquired are doing something while getting paid. Unless you think Apple just wanted to throw money away by buying up some companies for the sake of it.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

Depending on your definition of "design". Are you actually saying that some fairy came and designed the whole iPhone structure for Apple? Also somehow I'd think all the people with ARM processor knowledge Apple acquired are doing something while getting paid. Unless you think Apple just wanted to throw money away by buying up some companies for the sake of it.

If you read my posts, you'd understand that I think just like you. The reason why Apple's R&D budget is so low compared to other companies is that Apple doesn't invest in future tech. Most of their "research" is buying tech from other companies like Samsung and putting them together.

Also, smartphone circuitry are usually the same. Apple could hire a 5-year-old to study which parts go where in the smartphone, but that doesn't mean the kid designed the materials that go into the final product. All he did was assemble the parts together. Think buying parts for your PC and assembling them together: You buy an intel processor, an AMD GPU, etc. That's what Apple does. They don't design the intel processor nor do they design the GPU.

 

[fertilized-egg]

If you read my posts, you'd understand that I think just like you.
...
Apple could hire a 5-year-old to study which parts go where in the smartphone, but that doesn't mean the kid designed the materials that go into the final product. All he did was assemble the parts together.

Somehow I don't see where I "think just like you". Are you really saying a state-of-the-art mobile phone is something that anybody can design and Apple bought those companies with expertise *gasp* in designing&customizing chips just to throw away millions? Wow.

 

[chrmjenkins]

So you're comparing a non-LTE, 3.5", sub-HD phone that was released toward the end of 2011 with phones released early 2011 that had large screens and LTE?

A majority of the phones featured were not LTE. Non-LTE numbers were quoted for LTE phones. All phones in that test were non-HD. Those phones were released a variety of dates in 2010 and 2011. Screen sizes ranged from 3.7" to 4.3", batteries were 5% to 25% larger, yet battery life was 33% poorer or less. The results do not support hypothesis provided.

The iPhone should have had at least 3 times the battery life. Those results are pathetic.

Unsubstantiated argument unsupported by data. Regarded as emotional appeal from ignorance.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/galaxy-s3-vs-iphone-4s_n_1615824.html

Out of context article that mentions no qualitative data. Regard as emotional appeal.

No **** web browsing saps battery life on LTE phones. Apple wanted to use a cheap battery, so they avoided LTE with the 4s.

Unsubstantiated claim. Hypothesis fails to provide satisfactory conditions under which a feature was not included and the quality of components.

Another test: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/ph...rola-droid-razr-maxx-1063116/review?artc_pg=9

iPhone 4s gets smoked by HTC One X, S3, AND razr. I don't expect Apple to put in 4g LTE on the iphone 5. Its battery life will go all the way down to 1 hour.

False. Proposer makes blatantly false statement about one device. Fails to mention competitor batteries are 50% and 150% larger. Provides predictive, exagerrated unsubstantiated claim about future product. Regard as emotional appeal.

 

[battlefieldfan1]

A majority of the phones featured were not LTE. Non-LTE numbers were quoted for LTE phones. All phones in that test were non-HD. Those phones were released a variety of dates in 2010 and 2011. Screen sizes ranged from 3.7" to 4.3", batteries were 5% to 25% larger, yet battery life was 33% poorer or less. The results do not support hypothesis provided.

Because you didn't factor in screen size. Derp.
The Samsung phones had newer display tech with better saturation and color density.
The iPhone has dim colors.

Unsubstantiated argument unsupported by data. Regarded as emotional appeal from ignorance.

It was an exaggeration, not to be taken literally. The iPhone's battery life was piss poor considering the fact that it has a 3.5" sub-HD display with no LTE.

Out of context article that mentions no qualitative data. Regard as emotional appeal.

What is qualitative data? Do you mean quantitative? The two are not the same.
Regardless, the iPhone 4s gets destroyed by the S3 and HTC One X.

Unsubstantiated claim. Hypothesis fails to provide satisfactory conditions under which a feature was not included and the quality of components.

LOL... Okay, man. So if Apple was that great at managing power, why didn't they include LTE?

False. Proposer makes blatantly false statement about one device. Fails to mention competitor batteries are 50% and 150% larger. Provides predictive, exagerrated unsubstantiated claim about future product. Regard as emotional appeal.

Samsung doesn't rip off their customers as much as Apple does, so they'll use better tech in their phones. It's only natural that they'll give us a better battery as well.
Also, you're forgetting that the S3 and One X are BOTH HD and 4.7-8". They're both also LTE. Those 3 facts alone should tell you something...

 

[chrmjenkins]

Because you didn't factor in screen size. Derp.
The Samsung phones had newer display tech with better saturation and color density.
The iPhone has dim colors.

Poster ignores that screen size was controlled for and offset by larger batteries. Appropriate scaling cannot match large gap provided. Regard as purposeful obfuscation.

Poster misdirects to color saturation, abandoning original argument. Poster invents new term 'color density.' Posters make abstract subjective generalization. Relevant luminance data and user provided data of in-sun use contradict unsupported opinion.

It was an exaggeration, not to be taken literally. The iPhone's battery life was piss poor considering the fact that it has a 3.5" sub-HD display with no LTE.

Poster explains exaggeration with foul colloquialism. Regard as emotional appeal.

What is qualitative data? Do you mean quantitative? The two are not the same.
Regardless, the iPhone 4s gets destroyed by the S3 and HTC One X.

Poster again fails to cite data. Repeats lie (as determined from source article).

Compare that to 60% on the HTC One X, 74% on the iPhone 4S and 84% on the Samsung Galaxy S3 and we've got a clear winner.

LOL... Okay, man. So if Apple was that great at managing power, why didn't they include LTE?

Poster establishes false equivalency. Regard as emotional appeal.

Samsung doesn't rip off their customers as much as Apple does, so they'll use better tech in their phones. It's only natural that they'll give us a better battery as well.
Also, you're forgetting that the S3 and One X are BOTH HD and 4.7-8". They're both also LTE. Those 3 facts alone should tell you something...

Poster uses undefined term 'better tech.' Argues display size whilst ignoring the effect of display density on user perception. Regard as emotional appeal.

Further evidence of poster contradiction and intent to incite is provided:

The A5 and A5X were designed by Apple, but they were incredibly weak processors. I mean ffs, their clockspeeds were like 800 mhz - 1 Ghz.
Not to mention the fact that it's ARM-derived, meaning Apple was using someone else's tech to build it.

We went over this already.

SoC A5 - Samsung designed and fabbed. Apple branded. Just because it says Apple designed in wikipedia doesn't mean Apple designed it. Apple bought the ARM processors and gave them to Samsung to optimally fab them. Apple then rebranded the final product as the A5. All of it was Samsung designed.

 

[kdarling]

Besides the SoC A5, the PCB and other meachanical/cable modules, apple designed the Apple 338S0973, a power management IC in the iPhone 4S.

All the "Apple" marked Power Management ICs were designed for them by Dialog Semiconductor.

Interestingly, for each Apple product, the internal Dialog die carries a female codename starting with "A".

Amanda - 3G, 3GS
Ashley - iPhone 4, iPad 1
Angelina - 4S
Alison - iPad 2
Amelia - iPad 3



Likewise, the "Apple 338S0987" Audio CODEC is actually a rebranded Cirrus Logic CLI1560B0.

 

[el3ktro]

SoC A5 - Samsung designed and fabbed. Apple branded.

That is simply wrong. Apple bought several chip design companies a few years ago. The Ax CPU family is Apple designed. Samsung simply produces it.

----------

Also, smartphone circuitry are usually the same. Apple could hire a 5-year-old to study which parts go where in the smartphone, but that doesn't mean the kid designed the materials that go into the final product. All he did was assemble the parts together. Think buying parts for your PC and assembling them together: You buy an intel processor, an AMD GPU, etc. That's what Apple does. They don't design the intel processor nor do they design the GPU.

Sorry in advance, but this is the biggest ******** I've ever read in these forums. If you had ANY idea of the design of embedded systems, you wouldn't have said that. Do you REALLY think you can just buy a few componetns at an electronics shop, simply "put them together" and then you have a smartphone? Do you REALLY think that? If yes, I never want to hear a word about this topic from you again ...

 

[chrmjenkins]

All the "Apple" marked Power Management ICs were designed for them by Dialog Semiconductor.

Interestingly, for each Apple product, the internal Dialog die carries a female codename starting with "A".

Amanda - 3G, 3GS
Ashley - iPhone 4, iPad 1
Angelina - 4S
Alison - iPad 2
Amelia - iPad 3

View attachment 353365

Likewise, the "Apple 338S0987" Audio CODEC is actually a rebranded Cirrus Logic CLI1560B0.

Yes, I am aware. Certain things were said to illustrate a certain person's type of actions.

I imagine Cirrus and Dialog provide Apple the taped-out silicon and then Apple works with the packaging and foundry people to get their end product delivered. EEtimes has had a few good articles about how Cirrus is wrapped around their pinky finger and I'm guessing the situation is similar with Dialog.

I don't find it that surprising. Apple uses codenames for products all the time

 

[lukarak]

That is simply wrong. Apple bought several chip design companies a few years ago. The Ax CPU family is Apple designed. Samsung simply produces it.

----------



Sorry in advance, but this is the biggest ******** I've ever read in these forums. If you had ANY idea of the design of embedded systems, you wouldn't have said that. Do you REALLY think you can just buy a few componetns at an electronics shop, simply "put them together" and then you have a smartphone? Do you REALLY think that? If yes, I never want to hear a word about this topic from you again ...

Everything he said was completely wrong. Saying that Samsung design's Apples AX chips is like saying that TSMC designs NVIDIA's or that GlobalFoundaries designs AMD's CPUs

Also, Apple is investing faaar more into RnD then what you can read in the traditional reports, just that RnD is not in-house, which is a system that has worked great for them.

Also, you can clearly see what kind of an idiot the guy is when he's using screen sizes for comparison of battery tests, not realising that a bigger screen also means more space for a bigger battery.

 

[phentex]

People saying "NEEDZ BIGGER BATTERY!11!!!" need to relax, this isn't an Android phone.

Oh for fcks sakes stop trolling

 

[hchung]

No, seriously. Do you honestly think increasing die sizes is hard to do? That's the easiest thing to change on a processor or a GPU.
When we say architecture, we mean something like AMD's APU. Both CPU and GPU are located on 1 die to give you better performance/watt.

.......snip.....

Wow... just wow. You seriously have no idea about what happens in the industry or what any of the things you talk about even means.

Your idea of using FRAND as a benchmark for innovation ignores that most FRAND patents are due to standardization and are vital because they're necessary for interoperation because of nuances in data formats, regardless of whether or not they might be the best idea. (like the Samsung 3G patents and most likely as well as Apple's MPEG/Quicktime/H264 patents)

If you want an example of how wrong of a benchmark that is, you should read Samsung's patent abstracts, and then read about Qualcomm's. The difference in importance between Samsung and Qualcomm in 3G is along the lines of "we think wheel nuts should be hexagonal because it means we just need bigger versions of our existing tools" versus "no more carburators; we present you the future: fuel injection."

You're making boldly ignorant statements about the A4/A5/A5x SoCs while missing that the design process for those SoCs is the same for the S3C/Exynos series. You also appear to confuse logic design versus fabrication process, unaware that Apple designed CPU north/south-bridges for over a decade, well before buying PASemi and Intrinsity.

You're apparently completely unaware of the effort it takes to change process sizes. You're also unaware that die size and process size are two different things, and why they're picked.

You've also demonstrated that you don't know the basics about how a phone's pieces connect together on even an abstract level. I mean, who in their right mind says "That's because quad cores are incompatible with 4g LTE in the US"? They're not even related.

Why are you trying to assert yourself in a discussion on any of this stuff?