iPhone 7's 'Best LCD Display Ever' Marks 'Major Upgrade Over iPhone 6'

[NavyDude065]

It's not fud, search on good images for "OLED burn in Phone" and you'll see lots of examples.

Every device will burn in 6-8 months, specifically the keyboard, Nav bar and status bar

Which smartphones currently have OLED screens, you mean AMOLED? And your statement is false, I used a Galaxy S6 for a year and it still has an amazing screen. I don't use it anymore for the battery sucked, and upgraded to the S7.

 

[LordVic]

It's not fud, search on good images for "OLED burn in Phone" and you'll see lots of examples.

Every device will burn in 6-8 months, specifically the keyboard, Nav bar and status bar

I have now had the S6 for almost 2 years and there's absolutely ZERO burn in.

so again. Keep spreading FUD. the mindless BIAS is real my friend. Keep drinking the coolaid
[doublepost=1474400433][/doublepost]

Which smartphones currently have OLED screens? Can't keep up with the technology and thus I'd like to see that screen. The LG OLED TV looks great but still expensive.

I can't wait till OLED TV comes down to reasonable levels. I know i'll likely stick with my current TV's till OLED comes down to < $1000 for 42" varieties

 

[NavyDude065]

I have now had the S6 for almost 2 years and there's absolutely ZERO burn in.

so again. Keep spreading FUD. the mindless BIAS is real my friend. Keep drinking the coolaid
[doublepost=1474400433][/doublepost]

I can't wait till OLED TV comes down to reasonable levels. I know i'll likely stick with my current TV's till OLED comes down to < $1000 for 42" varieties

I hear ya. I currently have a 55 & 65 inch LG 4K TV's and they're great. The OLED looks so amazing but way to expensive here in Canada.

 

[LordVic]

I hear ya. I currently have a 55 & 65 inch LG 4K TV's and they're great. The OLED looks so amazing but way to expensive here in Canada.

WHY MUST WE PAY SO MUCH FOR THE EXACT SAME THING.

I blame Wynne.

I've got a Samsung 42" right now that is absolutely gorgous to watch, despite only being 1080p. But I'm not really keen on spending 1-2k right now for a lower end 4k TV. It's not even the TV that is daunting. it's paying Roger's for 4k service that would hurt the most, since that would be the only way to get the Blue Jays and Maple leafs in 4k

 

[Ulisescm]

I love apple but I have an Oled lg tv and it kicks LCD ass...

 

[Zirel]

I have now had the S6 for almost 2 years and there's absolutely ZERO burn in.

How much does Samsung pay you?

Because the S6 is 1 ½ years and there are lots of cases of burn in problems

[doublepost=1474403831][/doublepost]

Which smartphones currently have OLED screens, you mean AMOLED? And your statement is false, I used a Galaxy S6 for a year and it still has an amazing screen. I don't use it anymore for the battery sucked, and upgraded to the S7.

AMOLED is a subtype of OLED.

For the rest, I don't care, of course you are going to defend it.

 

[rjohnstone]

It's not fud, search on good images for "OLED burn in Phone" and you'll see lots of examples.

Every device will burn in 6-8 months, specifically the keyboard, Nav bar and status bar

I've got a Galaxy S2 that proves that statement wrong. Still use it for testing kernels.
Screen is still just as good as it was when I bought it.
I have an S4 in my bag as a backup phone that was used daily for over two years by my daughter, screen is still as good as the day it was bought.

The only way to burn in ANY display is to stick it on a static image at full brightness for months at a time.
[doublepost=1474404822][/doublepost]

How much does Samsung pay you?

Because the S6 is 1 ½ years and there are lots of cases of burn in problems

[doublepost=1474403831][/doublepost]

That's a display phone. You can still see the demo burned in on the screen.

This iPhone shows the same issue. It was left on a static image too long.

 

[Krevnik]

There is more to it than this simple math. The light behavior and eye sensitivity depend on the color (wave length). The blue color is the least critical: "PenTile relies on the human eye design - if you reduce the number of blue subpixels, you barely reduce the image quality." (Link). So Samsung displays have higher pixel density where it matters most.

The issue there is while you are technically correct, this doesn't always follow through all use cases. Again, think about hard edges where you have sharp contrasts. That's the worst case scenario for Pentile, which relies partly on the fact that in many cases, two pixels next to each other will have similar red/blue values. But I'll also point out that human eyesight isn't 50% lower in the blue/red. So you still need higher density to make up for what you give up. Your article even kinda points out the real reason this is done: the lifespan of the different OLEDs aren't equal, and blue/red require larger OLEDs to equal the light output of green. Last thing you want is the blue subpixels of your screen fading faster than the green and leaving you with a green-tinted screen after a couple years of use.

But here's the kicker, that worst case scenario for Pentile has a common use case: text. Something that's just as common as photography. And considering how much text I read on my devices over the course of a day, I've yet to really find a Pentile display that really makes those harder edges look right.

The main thing I'm trying to point here is that while I'm not knocking PenTile per se, but that you can't measure resolution 1:1 between a display with 3 sub-pixels to one with a Pentile layout. Especially when you start getting to the realm of high contrast (text). Is it a fair trade off to make? I think so for certain use cases, but in no way is it on the same footing of a non-Pentile display of the same resolution. That higher resolution Samsung is using is there to ensure they don't fall behind their LCD-using competitors. Especially when it comes to text.

I'm not sure what you mean saturated color look. That may be so in your case due to the phone you were viewing. My Galaxy S7 screen surely doesn't look saturated and looks much better than an iPhone 6S plus and an iPhone 6S .

Are you using Adaptive Display mode rather than Cinema/Basic/Photo? Adaptive is specifically oversaturated on Samsung phones (intentionally by Samsung to make the screen "pop", not to make content look like the creator intended). Cinema/Basic/Photo are not, and are a better way to compare. Making a display pop isn't quite the same as making it display content as it was intended.

 

[xmonkey]

That's a display phone. You can still see the demo burned in on the screen.

This iPhone shows the same issue. It was left on a static image too long.

Hey man, get your facts and stuff out of here, no place for that.

 

[KillaMac]

It's not fud, search on good images for "OLED burn in Phone" and you'll see lots of examples.

Every device will burn in 6-8 months, specifically the keyboard, Nav bar and status bar

Not every device. We have a 4 year old iPhone 5, that has no burn in at all. We have a few old iPads as well, no burn in and one actually stays on a lot. AMOLED is known for Burn In. It's a common issue with that tech.
[doublepost=1474412334][/doublepost]

How much does Samsung pay you?

Because the S6 is 1 ½ years and there are lots of cases of burn in problems

[doublepost=1474403831][/doublepost]

AMOLED is a subtype of OLED.

For the rest, I don't care, of course you are going to defend it.

Yep, very common.

http://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...70083-how-bad-amoled-screen-burn-problem.html

http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s6/help/screen-burn-t3080164
[doublepost=1474412457][/doublepost]And you proved how stupid you are. The S2 has an LCD not AMOLED. It doesn't have a burn in issue.

That iPhone is not burn in. That is the background that is actually on the phone when you enter your password it fades out like that. Geez.

I've got a Galaxy S2 that proves that statement wrong. Still use it for testing kernels.
Screen is still just as good as it was when I bought it.
I have an S4 in my bag as a backup phone that was used daily for over two years by my daughter, screen is still as good as the day it was bought.

The only way to burn in ANY display is to stick it on a static image at full brightness for months at a time.
[doublepost=1474404822][/doublepost]
That's a display phone. You can still see the demo burned in on the screen.

This iPhone shows the same issue. It was left on a static image too long.

 

[NavyDude065]

How much does Samsung pay you?

Because the S6 is 1 ½ years and there are lots of cases of burn in problems

[doublepost=1474403831][/doublepost]

AMOLED is a subtype of OLED.

For the rest, I don't care, of course you are going to defend it.

I used a Galaxy S6 for a year and currently being using S7 for almost 6 months. Several of my friends have Galaxy smartphones with no issues also. I have seen Samsung smartphones that were on display at places like Best Buy that had burn in, because they were often on the same screen for 24 hours a day. But seriously, who leaves their smartphone on the same screen or leaves their screens on for 24 hours a day??? Not sure of your goal. The photo included looks like it's taken of a store demo phone.
[doublepost=1474414366][/doublepost]

Not every device. We have a 4 year old iPhone 5, that has no burn in at all. We have a few old iPads as well, no burn in and one actually stays on a lot. AMOLED is known for Burn In. It's a common issue with that tech.
[doublepost=1474412334][/doublepost]

Yep, very common.

http://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...70083-how-bad-amoled-screen-burn-problem.html

http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s6/help/screen-burn-t3080164
[doublepost=1474412457][/doublepost]And you proved how stupid you are. The S2 has an LCD not AMOLED. It doesn't have a burn in issue.

That iPhone is not burn in. That is the background that is actually on the phone when you enter your password it fades out like that. Geez.

Lots of discussion online about iPhone screen Burn in. One is no better than the other, only that the AMOLED is better to look at in my opinion.
IPhone 6 burn in discussion

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/6595680?start=0&tstart=0
[doublepost=1474414876][/doublepost]

The issue there is while you are technically correct, this doesn't always follow through all use cases. Again, think about hard edges where you have sharp contrasts. That's the worst case scenario for Pentile, which relies partly on the fact that in many cases, two pixels next to each other will have similar red/blue values. But I'll also point out that human eyesight isn't 50% lower in the blue/red. So you still need higher density to make up for what you give up. Your article even kinda points out the real reason this is done: the lifespan of the different OLEDs aren't equal, and blue/red require larger OLEDs to equal the light output of green. Last thing you want is the blue subpixels of your screen fading faster than the green and leaving you with a green-tinted screen after a couple years of use.

But here's the kicker, that worst case scenario for Pentile has a common use case: text. Something that's just as common as photography. And considering how much text I read on my devices over the course of a day, I've yet to really find a Pentile display that really makes those harder edges look right.

The main thing I'm trying to point here is that while I'm not knocking PenTile per se, but that you can't measure resolution 1:1 between a display with 3 sub-pixels to one with a Pentile layout. Especially when you start getting to the realm of high contrast (text). Is it a fair trade off to make? I think so for certain use cases, but in no way is it on the same footing of a non-Pentile display of the same resolution. That higher resolution Samsung is using is there to ensure they don't fall behind their LCD-using competitors. Especially when it comes to text.



Are you using Adaptive Display mode rather than Cinema/Basic/Photo? Adaptive is specifically oversaturated on Samsung phones (intentionally by Samsung to make the screen "pop", not to make content look like the creator intended). Cinema/Basic/Photo are not, and are a better way to compare. Making a display pop isn't quite the same as making it display content as it was intended.

I use photo and sometimes Basic. I'll post a couple pictures later of my S7 beside a iPhone 6S, the Galaxy looks much better. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone has a nice screen and I hope the next iPhone will be even better. Some people have said their iPhone 7 screen looks worse than their 6S.

 

[rjohnstone]

And you proved how stupid you are. The S2 has an LCD not AMOLED. It doesn't have a burn in issue.

That iPhone is not burn in. That is the background that is actually on the phone when you enter your password it fades out like that. Geez.

First. The S2 uses a Super AMOLED Plus display.

http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-II_id5106

Second. The iPhone pic I posted came from a user complaining about screen burn in.
Look closer at the pic. It's not his wallpaper, it the actual desktop icons burned into the screen. I know how iPhone lock screens work. I own more than a dozen.

Next time you choose to violate MR rules on personal insults, (calling people stupid) you may want to at least have your facts in order.

 

[KillaMac]

First. The S2 uses a Super AMOLED Plus display.

http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-II_id5106

Second. The iPhone pic I posted came from a user complaining about screen burn in.
Look closer at the pic. It's not his wallpaper, it the actual desktop icons burned into the screen. I know how iPhone lock screens work. I own more than a dozen.

Next time you choose to violate MR rules on personal insults, (calling people stupid) you may want to at least have your facts in order.

Funny because about 80 % of the people in this thread have violated mr rules before me. And you are not a mod so that's violating a rule as well.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Doesn't the Apple Watch use AMOLED? Must be a piece of junk. LCD is the future and by far the best until Apple switches to AMOLED. Then it'll be great. No reason to argue. It's always the same with this stuff.

 

[Keirasplace]

Not every device. We have a 4 year old iPhone 5, that has no burn in at all. We have a few old iPads as well, no burn in and one actually stays on a lot. AMOLED is known for Burn In. It's a common issue with that tech.
[doublepost=1474412334][/doublepost]

Yep, very common.

http://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...70083-how-bad-amoled-screen-burn-problem.html

http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s6/help/screen-burn-t3080164
[doublepost=1474412457][/doublepost]And you proved how stupid you are. The S2 has an LCD not AMOLED. It doesn't have a burn in issue.

That iPhone is not burn in. That is the background that is actually on the phone when you enter your password it fades out like that. Geez.

I've got a 15 year old LCD with no burn in... Though, you could get them at that time for sure with static images. The back light is a bit dim though.
Got a 3GS that's been used A LOT (and still is; it is used as an Ipod for my secondary stereo); you guess it. No burn in.
What happens though with those old LCDS
is the backlight grows dimmer with time and so you have to pump up overall brightness.
Eventually max brightness gets too low and that's basically the faillure mode for a LCD. That takes A LOT of on time though.
Anyone talking about burn in for a LCD, except maybe an airport one that's been on non stop with the same lines for a decade, is full of it.
[doublepost=1474422054][/doublepost]

Doesn't the Apple Watch use AMOLED? Must be a piece of junk. LCD is the future and by far the best until Apple switches to AMOLED. Then it'll be great. No reason to argue. It's always the same with this stuff.

Aren't you spoiling for a fight there huh?
When Samsung produced crap AMOLED for a 4 years before them being any good people like you were saying Apple should switch because it was fantastico (even though it was saturated garbage).
Apple switches when the tech is ready, that's it.
Using OLED in a watch first makes sense because of the power advantage and a watch is on less time than a phone (you know the whole glance thing they've been pushing). The Watch screen is probably on 1/3 the time the phone is in a day.
Samsung uses total crap, even before it is ready, because they own the patents for it.

 

[phoneme]

AMOLED sucks up until the point that apple starts to use it. then it's magical and innovative. typical apple fanboy logic.

 

[Tom-Helge]

At arm's lenght, it doesn't matter if it has 1440p or 1080p, everything above 280-300 dpi looks the same.

No it absolutely doesn't. Don't confuse seeing the pixels to see things much sharper and clearer. Because the higher the PPI is, the more sharper and clearer everything will be independend from seeing the pixels or not.

If you can see the pixels on a screen that have 480x800 in resolution and still see the pixels at another screen with 1280x720 in resolution, you will still have a much sharper screen on the 540x960 resolution screen even if you still see the pixels.

 

[springsup]

Ok, I'm not sure about you, but vast majority of people working in offices have their phones on their desks. When in meetings, they have their phone on the tables. etc, etc. My phone spends most of its daylight hours with the screen off but in sight. AMOLED screen allows for permanent notifications on the screen, since only the text has to be powered, not the entire screen. Note 7 does it pretty well already, and it only uses about 10% extra battery. Being able to just glance at the screen without having to pick the phone up would be worth the trade off, especially in meetings when constantly checking your phone is not good business etiquette.

Yeah I'm not saying it doesn't have any use at all, but it's a tiny win and the technology isn't stable enough. You normally don't need to convince Apple to use a technology which would allow for thinner screens; they've done their homework and apparently it wasn't worth it yet. Maybe they'll do it next year, who knows?

Also, people can see you glancing down at your phone on the desk. It's not good business etiquette to even have it on the table. Your focus is supposed to be on the meeting (that's the theory).

 

[dotnet]

Doesn't the Apple Watch use AMOLED? Must be a piece of junk.

It's not. It uses an LG OLED screen with a proper RGB matrix. I took this picture last year, when the watch came out:

This display is capable of producing crisp text and edges, unlike Samsung's AMOLED mush.

 

[NavyDude065]

It's not. It uses an LG OLED screen with a proper RGB matrix. I took this picture last year, when the watch came out:

This display is capable of producing crisp text and edges, unlike Samsung's AMOLED mush.

Who walks around with a magnifying glass in their pocket so they can zoom in on their devices. Not really sure what your point is. My Galaxy S7 AMOLED screen is great and I see no issues with it.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Who walks around with a magnifying glass in their pocket so they can zoom in on their devices. Not really sure what your point is. My Galaxy S7 AMOLED screen is great and I see no issues with it.

His point was exactly what he posted, the watch uses OLED and there could be a possibility that Apple would use the same for the iPhone when they decided to switch screen tech.
[doublepost=1474453673][/doublepost]

AMOLED sucks up until the point that apple starts to use it. then it's magical and innovative. typical apple fanboy logic.

Apple might just use OLED or micro LED instead. It is interesting how Apple seems to improve on even established tech.

And there are posts from people saying LCD sucks compared to AMOLED.

 

[DakotaGuy]

This display is capable of producing crisp text and edges, unlike Samsung's AMOLED mush.

This is the only place on the Internet that you'll hear Samsungs new AMOLED QHD displays are crap and 1080 LCD is the future. Lol.

 

[dotnet]

Not really sure what your point is.

That much is clear. I was simply providing proof (by posting a close-up of the RGB matrix) that the Apple Watch does not use the same display technology as Samsung, and therefore isn't a piece of junk, as a previous poster had implied.
[doublepost=1474466275][/doublepost]

This is the only place on the Internet that you'll hear Samsungs new AMOLED QHD displays are crap

You obviously haven't been clicking on any of the links posted in this thread.

and 1080 LCD is the future.

Nobody says that.

Lol.

LOL indeed.

 

[Keirasplace]

This is the only place on the Internet that you'll hear Samsungs new AMOLED QHD displays are crap and 1080 LCD is the future. Lol.

They're not crap, but they're not way above either; the current 7+ is arguable above it once all factors are taken into account. Depends more on how you use your phone.

The pentile OLED on their phone means the actual rez of their phone is barely above that of the 7+.

QHD displays in PHONE are currently fracking stupid cause they impact battery life and performance, so your argument is basically non sequitur.

 

[newby11]

How did you make these pictures? If you used a magnifying glass or a macro lens their optic may introduce all sorts of aberrations and effects.

More importantly, at such high magnification, it does not matter what pixel arrangement is. If you have a "regular" (there is actually nothing special or regular about it) RGB pixel arrangement you also have edge sub pixels there (for simplicity - R on the left and B on the right). The only thing that mitigate this issue is the size of subpixels (pixel density) and Samsung displays have the same or better density than iPhone displays.

Yes, I understand that you can see "abberations and effects" when using a glass.
But
Take a look at my pics of the iPhone 6s screen (same loupe used, same 15x magnification) and you DONT see the same thing. No subpixel ill-effect.. because iPhone LCD doesn't use that pestilence-diamond subP pattern.

Then, take a look at the LG true 1440p LCD closeup. Same post... no pixel hang.