Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's iPad 5 Set to Continue Driving Market Shift Toward In-Cell Display Technology

Informal user opinions aside, is there an objective survey done/reported out there that consumers are actually seeking thinner, lighter tablets?! I wonder! What's actually fuelling Apple to go after thinner, lighter in 2013? Is this, like they say, only a part of the incremental biscuits thrown before the big ticket features arrive?

Don't we want *some* heft to what we hold in our hands?!
 
Last edited:
No survey. This "thinner" wish is solely the faithful being moved to believe it's some benefit. Now it's become about the first "benefit" quoted when we post dreams of the next thing from Apple. Apple spun "thin" as a benefit and now it's become/becoming a problem. To make Apple things thinner, functional parts within are getting jettisoned to support the "benefit" but the price isn't falling as such things are removed. Worse, the faithful are rationalizing the stuff that is jettisoned as if they are on the PR payroll, using the gamut of tired rationalization arguments including the worst of them (IMO) like: "I don't see a need to keep that, so no one else should either", the over-used statistics argument of "99% never use that" (minus the actual survey of course to support the number), etc.

When will Apple things be "thin" enough? Does everything have to get to the thickness (and fragility) of a piece of paper before they are thin enough? Do we want iDevices as thin as a piece of paper (knowing intuitively, how easily they will bend under even modest pressure)? Do we really want to try to hold an iPhone thinner than a movie ticket up to our ear?

I'm with you "santy". I'd rather quit with the race to "thinner" and focus on growing benefits like battery life (which is not accomplished by shrinking the battery so that we can spin "even thinner than last year's model" in the marketing). What some of us are doing now is paying full price for a thinner iDevice and then paying up for a battery case to give it the battery life we need. In other words, we're such spin suckers, we're craving thinner and then paying for a second device to make it thicker in daily use. Think about that.

Nevertheless, look through this very thread and you see it over and over: how most think making the phone or mini even thinner will somehow deliver some tangible benefit. At this point the biggest benefit it delivers is helping Apple justify removing functional parts so that the margin can remain "thick" or grow "thicker."
 
Last edited:
santydolby said:
Informal user opinions aside, is there an objective survey done/reported out there that consumers are actually seeking thinner, lighter tablets?! I wonder! What's actually fuelling Apple to go after thinner, lighter in 2013? Is this, like they say, only a part of the incremental biscuits thrown before the big ticket features arrive?

Don't we want *some* heft to what we are hold in our hands?!
Click to expand...

This is not all JUST about the iPad. Could the iPad have come out in 2005? No. Parts weren't small enough or light enough, and batteries didn't last long enough.

Apple keeps researching smaller/thinner/lighter, and this will help in their FUTURE products, like the rumored iWatch. Carry an iPhone around, no problem, but strap an iPhone to your wrist all day - it has a noticeable weight. Apple needs to get smaller/thinner/lighter for it's new products.
 
I don't understand this article.

"...the iPad mini and fourth-generation iPad also feature GF2 technology."

"...the upcoming fifth-generation iPad...will feature GF2 touch technology. That technology will allow the new iPad to be thinner and lighter than previous models..."

But according to the previous quote, the fourth-gen already has that technology. What am I misunderstanding?
 
grapemac said:
I don't understand this article.

"...the iPad mini and fourth-generation iPad also feature GF2 technology."

"...the upcoming fifth-generation iPad...will feature GF2 touch technology. That technology will allow the new iPad to be thinner and lighter than previous models..."

But according to the previous quote, the fourth-gen already has that technology. What am I misunderstanding?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I also noticed that. At least one of the articles linked to also claims the next iPad will be thinner than the current one due to adopting GF2. Does the fourth-gen actually NOT have a GF2 screen?
 
I'm curious, which non-Apple devices (smartphones or tablets) also use in-cell technology?
 
HobeSoundDarryl said:
No survey. This "thinner" wish is solely the faithful being moved to believe it's some benefit. Now it's become about the first "benefit" quoted when we post dreams of the next thing from Apple. Apple spun "thin" as a benefit and now it's become/becoming a problem. To make Apple things thinner, functional parts within are getting jettisoned to support the "benefit" but the price isn't falling as such things are removed. Worse, the faithful are rationalizing the stuff that is jettisoned as if they are on the PR payroll, using the gamut of tired rationalization arguments including the worst of them (IMO) like: "I don't see a need to keep that, so no one else should either", the over-used statistics argument of "99% never use that" (minus the actual survey of course to support the number), etc.

When will Apple things be "thin" enough? Does everything have to get to the thickness (and fragility) of a piece of paper before they are thin enough? Do we want iDevices as thin as a piece of paper (knowing intuitively, how easily they will bend under even modest pressure)? Do we really want to try to hold an iPhone thinner than a movie ticket up to our ear?

I'm with you "santy". I'd rather quit with the race to "thinner" and focus on growing benefits like battery life (which is not accomplished by shrinking the battery so that we can spin "even thinner than last year's model" in the marketing). What some of us are doing now is paying full price for a thinner iDevice and then paying up for a battery case to give it the battery life we need. In other words, we're such spin suckers, we're craving thinner and then paying for a second device to make it thicker in daily use. Think about that.

Nevertheless, look through this very thread and you see it over and over: how most think making the phone or mini even thinner will somehow deliver some tangible benefit. At this point the biggest benefit it delivers is helping Apple justify removing functional parts so that the margin can remain "thick" or grow "thicker."
Click to expand...

To my observation, less than 5% of the smartphones are regularly used with a case packing extra batteries, and even much much less for tables. You are one of the extreme minorities, how could you ever imagine all of the other majorities should have to carry the extra weight they don't need all the time, just to do you a small favor?!!!
 
tongxinshe said:
To my observation, less than 5% of the smartphones are regularly used with a case packing extra batteries, and even much much less for tables. You are one of the extreme minorities, how could you ever imagine all of the other majorities should have to carry the extra weight they don't need all the time, just to do you a small favor?!!!
Click to expand...

Again: one of my points is making up numbers to support Apple spin. "To my observation"??? Really? So if you only observe 1 person adorning their iDevice in feathers, are 100% of all iDevices adorned in feathers?

"To MY observation" more than 5% make their iDevices thicker by wrapping them in something and many in my observable pool seem to wrap them in something to give them more battery life.

Which "to my observation" is more accurate? Your "less than 5%" or my "more than 5%"?

Here's a bit of actual information: http://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-iphones-have-cases-or-skins-from-third-parties and here's another: http://gizmodo.com/5420874/forty-percent-of-you-clowns-use-a-case-on-your-phones. One claims 80% and the other 40%. Neither close to <5%.

And no one's doing ME any favor by using a case or not using one. My point was "when is thin, thin enough?" If we keep achieving "thinner" for marketing spin by jettisoning guts (like battery), we increasingly have to make up for the loss of such utility by adding it back in via external gadgets (like battery cases).

As is- in my own situation- an iPhone can't get through a day of use without a re-charge. So minimally (for me), that means carrying along a cable & charger and looking for opportunities to charge. Or, I can wrap it in a protective, battery case to give me a day's use and make it just a bit thicker. The latter works for me. I'm not the only one. And 5% of us are not the only one's either.

Of course, I'd rather have the bigger battery inside instead of the extra baggage of product walls against product walls but heaven forbid that the next iPhone would keep the same thickness in the name of a tangible benefit like more battery life. It must be thinner, d*mnit. Hopefully, Apple just jettisons the entire battery so that the next one can be much thinner (WOW!) and then we can return to a corded phone world (where the cord provides the juice). I want much thinner! Com'on Apple, do me a "small favor" and get rid of everything you can inside the next iPhone so that you can make the case as thin as possible. But keep the price the same of course; it's also very important to "me" that a massive corporation makes as much money as possible (even by jettisoning consumer utility by making us believe that there is some tangible benefit in making these things even thinner than they are now).
 
Last edited:
Just buy buy like me! Ive been enjoying my iPad 4 and my iPad mini for a good 6-8 months now :)

bpcookson said:
I have the iPad 3 and find it to be too heavy. When the iPad Mini came out, I was really excited but became determined to wait for the retina release.

Seeing now that the full size iPad will get the same facelift and a corresponding decrease in weight, I can no longer say with certainty that my next iPad purchase will be a retina Mini. So, assuming they release the iPad 5 soon and then the rMini later, I'll be in a difficult position where I'm itching to make an upgrade without knowing what I'm missing out on. The reasonable thing to do is simply wait until they release both and then make an informed purchase, but... well, hey, I like shiny new things and I've got cash to burn.

All that being said, I honestly CAN'T expect Apple to release a retina Mini at the same time as the iPad 5, even if both products are fully prepared for a release. It's just too good of a marketing opportunity to position their respective releases in a staggered fashion. People might b!tch about it, but I'd do the same if I worked for Apple and it were my decision.
Click to expand...
 
santydolby said:
Informal user opinions aside, is there an objective survey done/reported out there that consumers are actually seeking thinner, lighter tablets?! I wonder! What's actually fuelling Apple to go after thinner, lighter in 2013? Is this, like they say, only a part of the incremental biscuits thrown before the big ticket features arrive?

Don't we want *some* heft to what we are hold in our hands?!
Click to expand...

Survey, no--but weight drives some people (me included) away from the iPad and toward the iPad Mini. Fix that about the full-size iPad, and I'll take it!
 
HobeSoundDarryl said:
If we keep achieving "thinner" for marketing spin by jettisoning guts (like battery), we increasingly have to make up for the loss of such utility by adding it back in via external gadgets (like battery cases).
Click to expand...

Just looking at iPhone from the 1st to the iPhone 5, battery life has improved or stayed constant with each iteration, no?

What utility are we losing again? My 5 has quite a bit more of everything than my 4S did.
 
iphone 1 to 5 did not offer all-day battery life. Instead of thinning the case for little bragging rights for us users, they could decide that it's thin enough and fill internal freed-up space with more battery. Then, as the guts gain ever-more power efficiency, the added battery would give us a tangible benefit important to many of us. Thinner is no benefit when something gets thin enough.

I can't believe anyone could make a real argument that the iPhone 5 is still just too thick... that it needs to be thinner. Instead, we "dream" of thinner because we know that's one of Apple's favorite things to spin. Apple thinks it's important so it must be important.

Cue up a discussion of what we want to see in a next-generation of anything from Apple and one of the first things listed will be "thinner". Taken at face value, apparently we all think Apple stuff is still too thick. Else thinner is a solution in search of a problem. We'll make up rationale to support the idea but the rationale typically slung is unfortunately pretty (ahem) thin.
 
HobeSoundDarryl said:
Again: one of my points is making up numbers to support Apple spin. "To my observation"??? Really? So if you only observe 1 person adorning their iDevice in feathers, are 100% of all iDevices adorned in feathers?

"To MY observation" more than 5% make their iDevices thicker by wrapping them in something and many in my observable pool seem to wrap them in something to give them more battery life.

Which "to my observation" is more accurate? Your "less than 5%" or my "more than 5%"?［/QUOTE]

When I use this type of expression, I know for sure that, as long as you are honest to yourself, it doesn't matter at all if you insist to use your own observation results. 5% is already a very generous number.

HobeSoundDarryl said:
Here's a bit of actual information: http://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-iphones-have-cases-or-skins-from-third-parties and here's another: http://gizmodo.com/5420874/forty-percent-of-you-clowns-use-a-case-on-your-phones. One claims 80% and the other 40%. Neither close to <5%.
Click to expand...

LOL, LOL, after reading these two articles you referred, I greatly regret assuming your honesty during the debate. You are now using "people who use any type of case" to substitute "people who use cases with embedded battery", just to make you sound more likely to be WINNING?!!! If you are the type of person who care much more about winning a debate than reaching the real truth via the debate, there is no honesty in your attitude can ever be imagined.

HobeSoundDarryl said:
As is- in my own situation- an iPhone can't get through a day of use without a re-charge. So minimally (for me), that means carrying along a cable & charger and looking for opportunities to charge. Or, I can wrap it in a protective, battery case to give me a day's use and make it just a bit thicker. The latter works for me. I'm not the only one. And 5% of us are not the only one's either.
Click to expand...

I am sorry to have doubted your honesty, since you are admitting that this percentage is more or less around 5%.

You see, with Apple's balancing, 95% don't need to carry the extra weight everywhere which they never use, and the rest 5% gets the chance to customize with a battery case.

Alternatively, if Apple made the phone thicker for more battery juice, the people who suffer the extra weight has no option of ever dumping that extra weight.

HobeSoundDarryl said:
Of course, I'd rather have the bigger battery inside instead of the extra baggage of product walls against product walls but heaven forbid that the next iPhone would keep the same thickness in the name of a tangible benefit like more battery life. It must be thinner, d*mnit. Hopefully, Apple just jettisons the entire battery so that the next one can be much thinner (WOW!) and then we can return to a corded phone world (where the cord provides the juice). I want much thinner! Com'on Apple, do me a "small favor" and get rid of everything you can inside the next iPhone so that you can make the case as thin as possible.
Click to expand...

Already said above, it's all about good balancing.

It's Apple's job to balance the options for the majority of its customers, so that most of them can enjoy the output without bothering. In return Apple charges an extra premium for this balancing service. If this service fee sounds reasonable to enough people and Apple's balancing point is agreed by enough people, Apple gets profit from this balancing service (on top of all other profit Apple earns for other reasons).
Click to expand...
 
HobeSoundDarryl said:
iphone 1 to 5 did not offer all-day battery life. Instead of thinning the case for little bragging rights for us users, they could decide that it's thin enough and fill internal freed-up space with more battery. Then, as the guts gain ever-more power efficiency, the added battery would give us a tangible benefit important to many of us. Thinner is no benefit when something gets thin enough.

I can't believe anyone could make a real argument that the iPhone 5 is still just too thick... that it needs to be thinner. Instead, we "dream" of thinner because we know that's one of Apple's favorite things to spin. Apple thinks it's important so it must be important.

Cue up a discussion of what we want to see in a next-generation of anything from Apple and one of the first things listed will be "thinner". Taken at face value, apparently we all think Apple stuff is still too thick. Else thinner is a solution in search of a problem. We'll make up rationale to support the idea but the rationale typically slung is unfortunately pretty (ahem) thin.
Click to expand...
You had claimed that iPhone users had lost functionality as a result of a decision to make a thinner phone. In order to lose something, you must have had it first. Sounds like that's really not the case; you just wish the phone was different?
 
I for one like the thinning down of product ranges.

I'd choose a beautiful product over a a fat heavy one with a few hours extra battery life any day.

Just try holding a Surface Pro for more than a few minutes and you'll understand.
 
Jsameds said:
A lighter object impacts with less force when it hits the ground and so are less prone to cracking.
Click to expand...

lighter screen doesn't always mean a lighter device, thinner screen means space for more parts and more parts usually mean more mass.
 
Stylus

MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Digitimes reports that the adoption of new touch-sensor systems in both the iPhone 5 and iPad has caused a notable shift in the supply chain of the touch panel market, according to research carried out by the firm DisplaySearch.Calvin Hseih, research director at DisplaySearch, notes that Apple has been primarily responsible for this shift, despite the massive number of touchscreen devices already on the market. Apple's shift from a GG type touch-sensor system (glass on glass) to in-cell touch technology and GF2 (whereby the second layer of glass is replaced by an optical film) has rapidly influenced the entire supply chain

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2013/07/Touch-Display-Technology.png]Image​
​
[/url]
Touchscreen architectures (Source: Displaybank/ElectroIQ)​
Apple switched from GG to in-cell touch technology with the iPhone 5 release back in September 2012 and the iPad mini and fourth-generation iPad also feature GF2 technology. Another report by Digitimes reiterates previous rumors that the upcoming fifth-generation iPad, which is slated to be released sometime in Q4 2013, will feature GF2 touch technology.

That technology will allow the new iPad to be thinner and lighter than previous models, with the technology being supplied by TPK and GIS. The fifth-generation iPad has been rumored and shown in leaked parts to be significantly smaller and thinner than the current iPad, taking design cues from the iPad mini.

Article Link: Apple's iPad 5 Set to Continue Driving Market Shift Toward In-Cell Display Technology
Click to expand...


******************************************

I have a question:

Will this screen be able to use a fine stylus (not the brush and eraser-head types that now exist for the iPad) ?

While I agree that the human finger is the best tool for pointing, I disagree totally wen it comes to drawing, writing, and selecting with a shrink-wrap selection tool. I WANT A STYLUS iPAD !!!!!! The wonderful paint and draw and written annotation apps available for iOS are almost useless, due to the pig-headed insistence of Apple designers to kill the built-in stylus option.

Even my Prism PDA from Handspring had a stylus-compatible screen.
Samsung makes stylus mobile devices ......

Even the cool Bamboo stylus feels like I am writing with the eraser end of a pencil.

WAKE UP APPLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you,
 
saturn88 said:
What picture does not show is a backlit which required by LCD and adds significant bulk. AMOLED does not use backlit.
Click to expand...
Who cares about AMOLED?
We are talking here about quality displays for Apple devices.
AMOLED is inferior and Apple will not use something like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back