iPhone Unlikely to Adopt AMOLED Display in Foreseeable Future

[Tom-Helge]

I tell you last time, I prefer IPS over amoled and no amount of test so far has convinced me otherwise. I look at both and i take the one i like more.

Here, let the professionals teach you something about this: http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm

The facts is right there. Super AMOLED screens today are the absolute best screens out there.

Here is something from that link:
The Galaxy Note 5 matches or breaks new records in Smartphone display performance for:

Highest Absolute Color Accuracy (1.4 JNCD), Highest Peak Brightness (861 nits), Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light (183), Highest Screen Resolution (2560x1440), Highest (infinite) Contrast Ratio, and Smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle (24 percent). In addition, almost every display lab test and measurement shows some improvements compared to the Galaxy Note 4, the previous record holder, including slightly lower Screen Reflectance (4.7 percent), an 18 to 23 percent improvement display Brightness, and a 21 percent improvement in display power efficiency, so the Note 5 display actually uses less power than the Note 4 in spite of its much higher brightness.

In short, even when the IPS LCD screen on the iPhone 6S Plus is pretty good, it still doesn't even comes close to how good the screen on the Galaxy Note 5 / Galaxy S6 edge+ is.

 

[AdonisSMU]

I have an Apple Watch. While its graphical interface looks fine enough, all it takes is someone to text me a photo and for me to see it on the watch to see what an oversaturated, poor-pixel mess the display can be.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Apple Watch. And an OLED display for a watch is adequate given the tradeoffs that needed to be made (and the fact that there are way worse smartwatch displays out there). But OLED is not a display I want to look at photos on for very long, because the color reproduction is nauseatingly bad to me, particularly with skin tones. With my smartphone being the device where I take the most photos - and view them - OLED would be a huge step backward.

Youre right about the photos.

 

[Piggie]

Have to smile at some posting here.

Apple fans said a smaller than 9.7" Tablet screen like others made was stupid and rubbish, until Apple did it, THEN it was amazing.

Apple fans said very high resolution screens were rubbish, then Apple make one, and it was amazing.

Apple fans say how stupid more megapixel camera's that others has was stupid, then Apple added more and it was amazing.

Apple fans said how BIG phones like others made were too big, dumb and stupid, then Apple made them, and now they are amazing.

See a pattern here do we? LOL....

Now it's the turn of AMOLED Screens which Apple don't yet offer and they are stupid and rubbish.
Also Apple does not offer OSX on a tablet yet so that's a dumb idea also.

Lets see what the future holds shall we

 

[dannys1]

Here comes the world class stupid fanboys who think this is the best move for consumers.
AMOLED is just perfect... You can't compare to LCD right now. We're are being forced to use inferior technology because Apple doesn't want to give Samsung more money.

No it isn't it has horrendous energy consumption for white pixels - and iOS is mostly white and bright colours, there's no way i'm going to a white text on blackground Samsung world just to get equal battery performance with an LCD screen.

Its flawed mobile technology, its great in prob OLED form on TV's.

I expect Apple will eventually employ nano crystal LCD type technology in a mini form, but at the minute I don't see the point in the iPhone screen changing at all, its perfect to my eyes.

 

[Andres Cantu]

The iPhone 6/6s Plus has 1080p display.

It does, but I want it in the smaller model.

 

[Siris4]

yeah, cuz Samsung hasn't let us down before (cough A9 chips cough)

 

[dk001]

LCD has 3 subpixels (1 red, 1 green, 1 blue) to display every pixel, and AMOLED has only 2 (1 green and 1 of either red or blue). Every software writing to the screen still expects normal LCD-style pixels, so AMOLED screens use various hackery to emulate normal colours - which doesn't always work correctly, and occasionally results in jagged text and misaligned straight lines.

Normal LCD-pixels are possible with AMOLED but are more expensive, so nobody uses them. Instead manufacturers try to compensate by cranking up red or blue levels on screens, which results in oversaturated images.

So basically with AMOLED screens you get only 2/3 of subpixels of LCD, despite normal image reproduction requiring the same number. It provides 100% of green subpixels, and only 50% of red and blue subpixels - all in the name of lower prices.



It only matters on mostly black screens - where AMOLED has about 20% savings. For every other situation LCD is either same or better.



I think the main reason is that Apple cares about truthful colour reproduction in their products - they always did.

I think you missed it a bit. Your AMOLED info is a bit out of date.
AMOLED are typically more expensive than LCD. Then there is the whole new OLED technology that is being used in devices like the Note 5 and Edge +. http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm gives a good expenation of how the latest OLED tech works.
Then for a growing number of OLED devices you have options to change the display type from Cinematic to stock RGB.
The only reason I can see at this time for Apple to stay with it's LCD technology is either cost or a resistence to change as they have something new in the pipeline.

 

[Serban]

Sorry to say but the best display on the planet right now is the LG tv OLED 4k 55 or 65"
so OLED is better in 2015 now...maybe in 2010 or 2012 no but the tech behind OLED is spectacular

 

[Luis Mazza]

I'm not sure I'm convinced of this, actually. And not from a fanboy perspective.

AMOLED uses the PenTile matrix. It basically skips certain sub-pixels. This allows them to get higher resolutions, cheaper, but in fact, at the same resolution, an IPS or TFT LCD looks sharper.

I've always theorized Apple is choosing to go with IPS over OLED because you get better color accuracy and image accuracy out of it. OLED is brighter, but not clearer or more accurate. There's an added bonus: If Apple with an LED display can be 1920x1080 (see: iPhone 6S) but have equal sharpness and better color accuracy to a 2560x1440 OLED display (see: Galaxy S6), Apple gets a performance advantage by rendering in lower resolution. That performance advantage also is a battery life advantage. The graphics card is pushing less pixels at any given time.

Here's a quote:
OLED displays have gotten a bad rap on mobile devices primarily because of a thing called PenTile. PenTile mimics how our eye works: 72% of the luminance we perceive is determined by the green wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The RGBG arrangement of sub-pixels lets a display get brighter without increasing the overall number of transistors needed. This, of course, keeps manufacturing costs down. Unfortunately this physical layout of the light emitters also makes colors grainy and text hard to read.

Don't worry. You'll get your great IPS for another 4 years, it seems.

 

[Luis Mazza]

No it isn't it has horrendous energy consumption for white pixels - and iOS is mostly white and bright colours, there's no way i'm going to a white text on blackground Samsung world just to get equal battery performance with an LCD screen.

Its flawed mobile technology, its great in prob OLED form on TV's.

I expect Apple will eventually employ nano crystal LCD type technology in a mini form, but at the minute I don't see the point in the iPhone screen changing at all, its perfect to my eyes.

Then all is perfect for you. Happy customers are the best ones!

 

[69Mustang]

LCD has 3 subpixels (1 red, 1 green, 1 blue) to display every pixel, and AMOLED has only 2 (1 green and 1 of either red or blue). Every software writing to the screen still expects normal LCD-style pixels, so AMOLED screens use various hackery to emulate normal colours - which doesn't always work correctly, and occasionally results in jagged text and misaligned straight lines.

Normal LCD-pixels are possible with AMOLED but are more expensive, so nobody uses them. Instead manufacturers try to compensate by cranking up red or blue levels on screens, which results in oversaturated images.

So basically with AMOLED screens you get only 2/3 of subpixels of LCD, despite normal image reproduction requiring the same number. It provides 100% of green subpixels, and only 50% of red and blue subpixels - all in the name of lower prices.



It only matters on mostly black screens - where AMOLED has about 20% savings. For every other situation LCD is either same or better.



I think the main reason is that Apple cares about truthful colour reproduction in their products - they always did.

Apologies. Maybe I should have worded my reply with less snark and more clarity. I know what LCD and AMOLED are. You should really update your info on AMOLED though. It's really dated. AMOLED tech has long since outstripped what you described, especially Samsung's AMOLED. Your use of dated AMOLED info was ancillary to that really rough descriptor: fake pixels. Does that mean they were imaginary? JK. I admit to yankin' your chain a bit. I knew what you meant. It just comes across in the same vein as Samedung, Crapple, Micro$oft, and others. It's all good. Like what you like. But seriously, update your AMOLED info. Technology is a wonderful thing.

 

[Michael Goff]

Good.

We don't need everyone using the same technology anyway.

 

[dannys1]

Here, let the professionals teach you something about this: http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm

The facts is right there. Super AMOLED screens today are the absolute best screens out there.

Here is something from that link:
The Galaxy Note 5 matches or breaks new records in Smartphone display performance for:

Highest Absolute Color Accuracy (1.4 JNCD), Highest Peak Brightness (861 nits), Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light (183), Highest Screen Resolution (2560x1440), Highest (infinite) Contrast Ratio, and Smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle (24 percent). In addition, almost every display lab test and measurement shows some improvements compared to the Galaxy Note 4, the previous record holder, including slightly lower Screen Reflectance (4.7 percent), an 18 to 23 percent improvement display Brightness, and a 21 percent improvement in display power efficiency, so the Note 5 display actually uses less power than the Note 4 in spite of its much higher brightness.

In short, even when the IPS LCD screen on the iPhone 6S Plus is pretty good, it still doesn't even comes close to how good the screen on the Galaxy Note 5 / Galaxy S6 edge+ is.

But key here is we're talking very very tiny differences and its not the same to everyones eyes. I find the total black too harsh, and I can see jagged edges (like I can on my Apple Watch) but the biggest issue is I demand black text on a white background and if you start doing that on an AMOLED screen like Samsung you have to have white text on a black background on the battery will drain in twice the speed - which is not acceptable. I don't want to half my battery life and I don't want white writing on a black background, it feels like i'm using DOS again!!

I think OLED is the future of large scale TV's where power consumption doesn't matter (so long as they get the over saturation correct) but I think its flawed for mobile devices. I expect Apple will employ some form of nano crystal LCD over type which ironically is the technology Samsung are going for instead of OLED in their large screen TV's ha.

 

[John Mcgregor]

Here, let the professionals teach you something about this: http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note5_ShootOut_1.htm

The facts is right there. Super AMOLED screens today are the absolute best screens out there.

Here is something from that link:
The Galaxy Note 5 matches or breaks new records in Smartphone display performance for:

Highest Absolute Color Accuracy (1.4 JNCD), Highest Peak Brightness (861 nits), Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light (183), Highest Screen Resolution (2560x1440), Highest (infinite) Contrast Ratio, and Smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle (24 percent). In addition, almost every display lab test and measurement shows some improvements compared to the Galaxy Note 4, the previous record holder, including slightly lower Screen Reflectance (4.7 percent), an 18 to 23 percent improvement display Brightness, and a 21 percent improvement in display power efficiency, so the Note 5 display actually uses less power than the Note 4 in spite of its much higher brightness.

In short, even when the IPS LCD screen on the iPhone 6S Plus is pretty good, it still doesn't even comes close to how good the screen on the Galaxy Note 5 / Galaxy S6 edge+ is.

I don't care. I like IPS more. I have a Galaxy S6 and i just had enough of android and bought iPhone 6S Plus. Samsung is collecting dust on a bookshelf.

 

[Tom-Helge]

I don't care. I like IPS more. I have a Galaxy S6 and i just had enough of android and bought iPhone 6S Plus. Samsung is collecting dust on a bookshelf.

Sure, you can prefer whatever you like, but the facts still doesn't lie about what's the best screens out today.

Facts and opinions is not the same and is a bad mix.

 

[John Mcgregor]

Sure, you can prefer whatever you like, but the facts still doesn't lie about what's the best screens out today.

Facts and opinions is not the same and is a bad mix.

Even if it was the case the difference is negligible. If its not broken don't fix it.

 

[69Mustang]

I'm not sure I'm convinced of this, actually. And not from a fanboy perspective.

AMOLED uses the PenTile matrix. It basically skips certain sub-pixels. This allows them to get higher resolutions, cheaper, but in fact, at the same resolution, an IPS or TFT LCD looks sharper.

I've always theorized Apple is choosing to go with IPS over OLED because you get better color accuracy and image accuracy out of it. OLED is brighter, but not clearer or more accurate. There's an added bonus: If Apple with an LED display can be 1920x1080 (see: iPhone 6S) but have equal sharpness and better color accuracy to a 2560x1440 OLED display (see: Galaxy S6), Apple gets a performance advantage by rendering in lower resolution. That performance advantage also is a battery life advantage. The graphics card is pushing less pixels at any given time.

Here's a quote:
OLED displays have gotten a bad rap on mobile devices primarily because of a thing called PenTile. PenTile mimics how our eye works: 72% of the luminance we perceive is determined by the green wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The RGBG arrangement of sub-pixels lets a display get brighter without increasing the overall number of transistors needed. This, of course, keeps manufacturing costs down. Unfortunately this physical layout of the light emitters also makes colors grainy and text hard to read.

Our opinions can sometimes be colored by our reference material. No offense to Craig over at furbo, but I'll personally take empirical data from Displaymate over anecdotal info from Mr. Hockenberry. Especially since Craig's quote ignores the advances that have occurred with AMOLED. The excerpt you quoted would have looked perfectly fine in a piece from late 2012. Things are a little different in 2015. Honestly, whether IPS or AMOLED, the screens on most flagships look perfectly fine to me.

 

[Tom-Helge]

Even if it was the case the difference is negligible. If its not broken don't fix it.

The differences are quite noticeable. The differences in brightness on the screens from the iPhone 6 Plus / iPhone 6S Plus to the Galaxy S6 edge+ outside in sunlight are huge for example. The Galaxy S6 edge+ and Galaxy Note 5 have a massive 861 nits with the 'Auto Brightness' mode on while the iPhone 6 Plus (iPhone 6S Plus uses the same screen) only have 556 nits. That's a HUUUUUUGE difference. You don't realize the huge difference before you actually see it in real life.

 

[John Mcgregor]

The differences are quite noticeable. The differences in brightness on the screens from the iPhone 6 Plus / iPhone 6S Plus to the Galaxy S6 edge+ outside in sunlight are huge for example. The Galaxy S6 edge+ and Galaxy Note 5 have a massive 861 nits with the 'Auto Brightness' mode on while the iPhone 6 Plus (iPhone 6S Plus uses the same screen) only have 556 nits. That's a HUUUUUUGE difference. You don't realize the huge difference before you actually see it in real life.

But i have the ****ing Galaxy S6 i see exactly. I only see over saturation. And blue is the ******** colour on amoled.

 

[RenoG]

Why does every Samsung phone I see has a blue/green tint to it. I hate that.

 

[John Mcgregor]

Why does every Samsung phone I see has a blue/green tint to it. I hate that.

Tell me about it.

 

[Aluminum213]

Good thing Jony Ive stated that the iPhone's LCD technology looks old, when talking about designing the Watch.

But but but LCD is just as good

 

[69Mustang]

The differences are quite noticeable. The differences in brightness on the screens from the iPhone 6 Plus / iPhone 6S Plus to the Galaxy S6 edge+ outside in sunlight are huge for example. The Galaxy S6 edge+ and Galaxy Note 5 have a massive 861 nits with the 'Auto Brightness' mode on while the iPhone 6 Plus (iPhone 6S Plus uses the same screen) only have 556 nits. That's a HUUUUUUGE difference. You don't realize the huge difference before you actually see it in real life.

Tom, you're preaching to a wall. Nothing you say is going to change John's opinion. Know what? That's totally okay. John has a right to his opinion, just like you, and just like me. I'm a car nut. I liken it to trying to convince a Viper fan that a Corvette is a better performance value. Data be damned, it ain't gonna happen. John likes the iPhone's current screen tech. Nothing short of a gun to the head is going to change that.

 

[John Mcgregor]

Tom, you're preaching to a wall. Nothing you say is going to change John's opinion. Know what? That's totally okay. John has a right to his opinion, just like you, and just like me. I'm a car nut. I liken it to trying to convince a Viper fan that a Corvette is a better performance value. Data be damned, it ain't gonna happen. John likes the iPhone's current screen tech. Nothing short of a gun to the head is going to change that.

I will take Viper any day.

 

[furi0usbee]

Apple works with their display partners to tailor make them to the characteristics they need...which costs more money to engineer and manufacture.

So before you spout this nonsense about cost cutting....how about you join us here in reality?

Any proof Apple's displays cost more? I was assuming they don't, but if you have PROOF, please show so I can change my mind on this one...