LG and Samsung Still Struggling with 'Retina' iPad 3 Display?

[theosib]

High-res, high-DPI not really all that new

The assertion that a display of this resolution has never been done before is misleading. Consider the IBM T221 (http://www.amazon.com/IBM-T221-22-2-3840x2400-Monitor/dp/B00006HS5R). It's a 22" display with a resolution of 3840x2400, for a DPI of 204. This isn't quite as high as what they want for the iPad 3, but it's very fine and with even more pixels. And it was produced in volume. (I could be wrong, but I think IDTech made the panel.)

 

[KnightWRX]

The assertion that a display of this resolution has never been done before is misleading. Consider the IBM T221 (http://www.amazon.com/IBM-T221-22-2-3840x2400-Monitor/dp/B00006HS5R). It's a 22" display with a resolution of 3840x2400, for a DPI of 204. This isn't quite as high as what they want for the iPad 3, but it's very fine and with even more pixels. And it was produced in volume. (I could be wrong, but I think IDTech made the panel.)

The more you shrink a panel, the harder it becomes to get proper yields at higher PPI.

 

[MacSince1990]

How would a res of 1600x1200 be surprising? And explain to me how another 4:3 aspect ratio resolution would be difficult to scale to... it would not be difficult for Apple to write code into the OS to automatically scale to the higher resolution (albeit obviously with a loss of sharpness/quality).

There are no other "multiples" of 1024x768.... 1536x1152 isn't exactly a standard.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I'll pre-order a retina display iPad, no doubt. It's one way apple can step WAY ahead of the competition.

 

[lilo777]

How much money does each company spend annually for R&D anyway?

Samsung - $9.3 Billion
Apple - $1.78 billion for the first 9 months (you can pro-rate)

The discrepancy is much more profound in capital expenditures.

----------

I'll pre-order a retina display iPad, no doubt. It's one way apple can step WAY ahead of the competition.

They would only be able to step WAY ahead of competition if they produced something that competition was unable to reproduce. They don't. In fact they buy almost all components from competitors. Only Samsung is in a position to get way ahead of competition (like they do with their SAMOLED displays)

 

[jaygenuine]

Welcome to Samsung and LG. They are the ones who will perfect it, not Apple.

Go wake up ! Apple is the master driving those cheap companies!

 

[Goratrix]

it would not be difficult for Apple to write code into the OS to automatically scale to the higher resolution (albeit obviously with a loss of sharpness/quality).

Which would be quite substanitial, so this is no option for them. Try setting your notebook screen to various non-native resolutions, the results are terrible.

 

[840quadra]

Samsung - $9.3 Billion
Apple - $1.78 billion for the first 9 months (you can pro-rate)

The discrepancy is much more profound in capital expenditures.

Thanks. looked it up out of curiosity. Numbers (for both companies) are actually reported higher for 2011.

Would be neat to see which silos the money was put into (i.e. 1 billion in Digital TVs, 2 billion in cellular radios, etc) , but that would give away potential inside information.

 

[D.T.]

Toshiba's technology looks promising as well with this regard.

Very true. So many of the large[r] electronics companies that produce display technology (TV, phones, monitors, etc.) are really pushing the envelope in that product area. Improved power consumption, higher resolutions, better viewing angles/color/contrast. It's like the golden age of display tech

 

[something3153]

Go wake up ! Apple is the master driving those cheap companies!

If by "driving" you mean "contracting out to", then yes. However, that still means the innovative work is being done by the contractee. I swear, it's like half of the people here have no idea how business works.

If you hire someone to mow your lawn, do you say "I mowed my lawn" or do you say "the kid down the street mowed my lawn"?

 

[shawnce]

So why do they need these partners? That's rather inconvenient for your claims.

Apple has partners for economic, capacity and expertise reasons.

Apple also does have teams (generally small) that research many things outside of just software and high-level system design. These teams have also been known to patent prototypes, etc.

These teams inside of Apple are working on advancing various technologies with the aid of partners to build better products, to gain time to market advantages, or attempt to lock down (aka patent, exclusive bulk buy, etc.) new technology.

I cannot say if any of these teams are working on display manufacturing specifically ...but Apple has been known to drop a lot of cash on a partner to get the partner to invest in creating or manufacturing what they need (instead of just making due with what the partner may currently manufacture).

The level of innovation between partner and Apple of course varies greatly depending on the technology but to claim that Apple doesn't involve itself is myopic.

 

[something3153]

Apple has partners for economic, capacity and expertise reasons.

Apple also does have teams (generally small) that research many things outside of just software and high-level system design. These teams have also been known to patent prototypes, etc.

These teams inside of Apple are working on advancing various technologies with the aid of partners to build better products, to gain time to market advantages, or attempt to lock down (aka patent, exclusive bulk buy, etc.) new technology.

I cannot say if any of these teams are working on display manufacturing specifically ...but Apple has been known to drop a lot of cash on a vendor to get the vendor to invest in creating or manufacturing what the need.

Giving someone money to do something for you isn't doing it yourself, however much you want to give Apple credit for everything. Those "economic, capacity, and expertise reasons" you cited? Those are a result of innovation by other companies. Apple uses them because they're better at it than Apple would be.

 

[shawnce]

Giving someone money to do something for you isn't doing it yourself, however much you want to give Apple credit for everything. Those "economic, capacity, and expertise reasons" you cited? Those are a result of innovation by other companies. Apple uses them because they're better at it than Apple would be.

Look... I stated that Apple has teams that are researching technologies outside of just software and systems. They exist and they do attempt to give Apple an advantage in specific areas (change over time based on product needs). I made no claims that Apple does it all or even in part for many things. I made no attempt to give Apple credit for everything.

Please stop with the black and white or reading more into what some specifically says.

 

[something3153]

Look... I stated that Apple has teams that are researching technologies outside of just software and systems. They exist and they do attempt to give Apple an advantage in specific areas (change over time based on product needs). I made no claims that Apple does it all or even in part for many things. I made no attempt to give Apple credit for everything.

Please stop with the black and white or reading more into what some specifically says.

The guy I initially responded to told Apple to take the time to perfect the screen. LG and Samsung are perfecting the screen. Apple may have hired them to do it, but Apple is not doing it. Full stop. That is black and white.

 

[dodo123]

I think apple is playing a big role here. Apple has indeed got teams that are researching different technologies, testing them, choosing the right technologies, financing the chosen technologies... and making all the rules on how the technology should and must be developed and produced by there partner. So in the end the manufactures does what the name tells you... manufacture!! Samsung doesn't research technologies for apple, they research whats the best way to produce the product. (they also research for there own needs and products but thats not the case here). They just buy the machines that are needed and produce what they are told.

 

[ericinboston]

Although such super high resolution is welcome...

1)Not even 1080 HD is that high...and although a high percentage of people own 1080HD tvs, very little true 1080 programming is available...and we've been drinking the 1080 HD KoolAid since 2001. I love true 1080 HD but seeing stuff a bit lower is still very nice.

2)Why does Apple need to make such a massive jump? Why not go up to 1920x1280 or something that is already easier to manufacture AND above and beyond what people already currently have on their iPad 1 and 2?

Again, I welcome super duper hi rez that Apple is trying to get on the iPad 3 but the reality is it's way way way overkill for the common user AND for developers...even for the next few years. What am I actually going to look at in that resolution that will wow me compared to a 1920x1280 rez? My DSLR pix won't look any better...my videos I download/play won't...AppleTV integration surely won't...there is just absolutely nothing on this earth other than very high rez DSLR photos than can take advantage of such resolution.

Save it for iPad 5 or 6 when the world is creating stuff in that resolution.

But hey, if Apple can make it work and work perfectly by Spring 2012 for $499, sure, I'll buy one and see what all the fuss is about.

 

[rjohnstone]

They just buy the machines that are needed and produce what they are told.

This one comment alone clearly show how clueless you are about the fab and manufacturing process.
There are no ready made machines to make these displays.
Samsung and LG have to make the machines that make the displays.
And before they can do that, they have to develop the technology behind the displays first.
Apple simply sends them specs of what they would like to have built.
Samsung and LG are the ones doing the R&D to see if it can be built in the first place.
They're the ones with their name on the display patents, not Apple.

 

[tbrinkma]

*Sigh*, a "quantum leap" is a seemingly impossible microscopic step, when looking at from a naive standpoint, that nonetheless happens easily. Here they have a problem that appeared relatively trivial to them, but proved to be more of a problem. The way it is used is in the sentence a bit like 'measuring' time in lightyears.

One of these days you're just going to have to realize that sometimes technical terms gain different (even contradictory) meanings in colloquial language. (Like how the phrases "I could care less", and "I couldn't care less" mean the same thing in common use, despite having opposite meanings when picked apart literally.)

It's just one of the ways language weirds itself.

----------

What's wrong with 128GB?

Nothing. He was just saying he wants at least 126GB.

 

[dodo123]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

They just buy the machines that are needed and produce what they are told.

This one comment alone clearly show how clueless you are about the fab and manufacturing process.
There are no ready made machines to make these displays.
Samsung and LG have to make the machines that make the displays.
And before they can do that, they have to develop the technology behind the displays first.
Apple simply sends them specs of what they would like to have built.
Samsung and LG are the ones doing the R&D to see if it can be built in the first place.
They're the ones with their name on the display patents, not Apple.

Your the one that is clueless. You think that LG or samsung makes machines by thereselfe. They also have partners that produce machines that they use to produce the displays. And yes the machines do exist.. There's only the problem that Samsung can't produce Enuff of then in a required pirioud of time. I have to agree with you that Samsung cooperates with the partner that develops the machines but than again so does apple with Samsung... Over and out. Got better things to do

 

[something3153]

Your the one that is clueless. You think that LG or samsung makes machines by thereselfe. They also have partners that produce machines that they use to produce the displays. And yes the machines do exist.. There's only the problem that Samsung can't produce Enuff of then in a required pirioud of time. I have to agree with you that Samsung cooperates with the partner that develops the machines but than again so does apple with Samsung... Over and out. Got better things to do

Actually, he's right. Samsung and LG are working on the technology to make these displays feasible. Apple is advancing them money on the contract to get it done (that's how these things work). Samsung and LG are doing the innovating on these screens. Apple wouldn't be paying them otherwise.

 

[Fairchild]

I'm thinking a smaller iPad will make an appearance soon, and this will allow for the required time to get iPad3 into production. Smaller tablets are a market Apple can capitalize on, especially at the right price. I've talked to many people who find the current pads too big for on the move, and their phones too small.

 

[Menneisyys2]

I can hear all the complaints now about developers taking too long to update their apps so that their graphics don't look like crap on the new display. You know how people complained endlessly when the iPhone 4 came out...

Well, text rendering using all the standard components (UIWebView, UIButton etc.) will make use of the hi-res from day one - and this is what counts (much better PDF / HTML etc. page rendering in all old apps). It's only old bitmaps and other stuff that will need to be updated.

 

[mrbyu]

So it begins...

So it begins again... a lot of people are waiting for the doubled resolution, and if Apple comes out with something else, everybody's going to cry.
"That's it, i'm moving to Galaxy Tab", "im very disappointed " etc.

I don't want to see another whining like the "no iPhone 5 just ****** iPhone 4S" story.

 

[jamesryanbell]

I think the iPad 2 is great, but I'm not buying another one until the text when scrolling is smoother, a retina display included, and 128GB is offered (I want ALL of my music on it with room to spare).

I would pull the trigger on a 128GB wifi unit.

 

[riveting]

Retina is really a marketing thing. I only care about the resolution, for the same resolution, the bigger the screen, the better.