OLED Displays in iPods?

[Sayer]

In typical Apple fashion...

In typical Apple fashion, everyone else will be using OLEDs in their products months before Apple.

DELL and Gateway will introduce computers/displays/devices with OLED screens right before Apple making Apple's use seem reactionary and not revolutionary as usual.

And Apple's prices will be higher than anyone elses further driving people AWAY from Apple products.

Learn Steve, sometimes it pays to be FIRST and CHEAPER than the competition. Imagine the shock and awe of having an ultra thin flat panel display with an Apple logo being the ONLY OLED display you can buy for a few months.

Ditch ADC and make it with DVI and you could actually sell them to non-Mac users! Imagine that! It could even be compatible with third party wall-mounting hardware so it could be MORE USEFUL and have MORE VALUE and possibly sell MORE UNITS!

ATTENTION:

All you whiners signing petitions to get Apple to listen to you: BUY a share of Apple stock, get together and form a proxy vote and force Steve to recognize the Mac market for real! Hold the company accountable the only way it can be, by becoming a stockholder. Stand up in the stockholder meeting and list off all the stupid business decisions Apple makes every year and see if they can ignore THAT for very long.

 

[Laslo Panaflex]

Originally posted by Mudbug
But what was the product you saw it on? That's a pretty big screen for a consumer product...

Like I said, I don't know what the manufactuers name was, it was just a small stand alone screen showing a video demo, from an uknown source, probably DVD. I don't think that it was a cinsumer product, I don't know, I didn't see a price tag. I only looked at it for a minute becuase I was at store with my brother, he was looking for a new TV, and we were leaving. Nevertheless, I was impressed, anyone who looks at an OLED screen will be able to see a big difference.

 

[nickgold]

Re: In typical Apple fashion...

Originally posted by Sayer
In typical Apple fashion, everyone else will be using OLEDs in their products months before Apple.

DELL and Gateway will introduce computers/displays/devices with OLED screens right before Apple making Apple's use seem reactionary and not revolutionary as usual.

Yeah -- just like USB, Firewire, 802.11b, 802.11g, Bluetooth, LCD screens (which Apple sold long before most PC manufacturers), etc. etc. etc.

Survey says.... BZZZZZZZZZZZZT!

Go crawl back under your slimey rock, troll, and BEGONE!

 

[AidenShaw]

That's absolutely incredible!

Originally posted by Laslo Panaflex
I stood just about 180 degrees to the side and I could still see it.

Hmmmm - in my Euclidean world 180 degrees is half a circle - that would mean you could still see it from behind!?!?

Could you see it from 360 degrees as well?

 

[andyduncan]

Originally posted by Tim Flynn
They are not cheaper (yet). OLEDs use more power than LCD. OLEDs are transmissive, hence need power.
But .... the view is way more cool than a LCD.

Actually LCDs are transmissive, IE: there is a white backlight that shines through red/green/blue filters.
Most OLEDs are Emissive, they consist of red/green/blue transistors that emit only those colors of light. Though depending on the implementation, some use filters, and their efficiency suffers accordingly. (I guess you would call that a hybrid emissive/transmissive display)
Prototypes have been achieving the same brightness of LCDs at about 1/3 the power.
You are right about them being more expensive, for now. However, the overall process has the potential to be much cheaper at equivalent volumes.

Nobody has mentioned operating life, however. OLEDs still degrade much quicker than LCDs (particularly the blue transistors). Not much of an issue for an iPod, but it's definitely an issue for desktops/laptops.

on another note, the thinksecret article didn't say anything about them using color OLED displays, its entirely possible they will use a monochrome version.

 

[RAMd®d]

OLED Tech is really promising

In point of fact, LCDs do use less current than OLEDs.

But LCD displays usually have a backlight for indoor/night viewing, and will draw far more current than OLED displays.

I don't know that the iPod battery life will benefit from OLED tech. Personally, I don't need color on my 'Pod, although it *is* very cool. And since the Gen III 'Pods have less battery life, I'd hate to see OLEDs shorten it. However the Gen I backlight doesn't work well for me. The latest updater did make it a bit more liveable.

I'm looking forward to folding displays. Open up a 12" iB or PB, and unfold a 15" screen. Very cool, and actually practical. OLED tech meets Transformers Tech. Mega Prime Video enabled!

And Sayer may not be far from wrong- Apple *is* slow to adopt some technologies, and they have always been very proud of their work. Our wallets can verify that.

nickgold is right on with USB (not even Stevie's technology!), Firewire, 802.11b, 802.11g, Bluetooth, although I didn't realize they were also first with selling LCD displays.

Still, I can't wait to see what Apple does with OLEDs. Hopefully Jonathan will be heavily involved in their execution.

 

[AidenShaw]

Re: OLED Tech is really promising

Originally posted by RAMd®d
nickgold is right on with USB (not even Stevie's technology!), Firewire, 802.11b, 802.11g, Bluetooth, although I didn't realize they were also first with selling LCD displays.

Actually, Apple wasn't first with USB standard in systems, nor 1394 standard. There were lots of 802.11b parts available when Apple added it to the iBook. LCDs were in use long before "Stevie" announced the "death of the CRT" - a bit prematurely, since Apple is *still* releasing new CRT-based systems.

Apple has led in popularizing some of these technologies, and making them standard in the products. Don't confuse that with "first", though.

 

[Kid Red]

Originally posted by Tim Flynn
They are not cheaper (yet). OLEDs use more power than LCD. OLEDs are transmissive, hence need power.
But .... the view is way more cool than a LCD.

More power? Do you even know what you are talking about?

When used to produce displays, OLED technology produces self-luminous displays that do not require backlighting. These properties result in thin, very compact displays. The displays also have a wide viewing angle, up to 160 degrees and require very little power, only 2-10 volts.

OLED displays have other advantages over LCDs as well:
-Increased brightness
-Faster response time for full motion video
-Lighter weight
-Greater durability
-Broader operating temperature ranges

 

[Sol]

New technology, PDAs & GBA SP

I do not think it is important for Apple to be first with OLED displays or any other technology. The fact that Apple adopts a technology is enough to make it mainstream, like USB, FireWire, Airport, SuperDrivers, LCDs, etc.

Perhaps PDAs will use these OLED screens before the iPod. Palm can very easily introduce an OLED display for their Tungsten line since its customers would pay the premium for it.

By the way, I have a GameBoy Advance SP. The screen has the option to switch the light off and doing so increases the battery life. With the light on there appears to be a blue tint over the image. No complaints on my part; I highly recommend it.

 

[Vroem]

If I'm not mistaken, this is another result of a discovery from the 90s that enabled polimers to conduct current. Very interesting is the Lithium-Polimer (LiPol) battery in the iPod, because LiPol was the first public result of this discovery. (But I'm not an electrician and neither a chemist or fysician so...)

 

[Hattig]

Originally posted by coumerelli
I think that there's just too much going on for the 23rd for us to be worried about NEXT year. But, as far as dreaming goes, that would be sweet! I'd like to see a screen that looks something to the effect of the game boy stuff - you know, color and hi res (though I know it would be a battery drainer.

OLED displays use a lot less power than TFT displays - up to 1/10th of the power draw in fact. Also, they are much brighter - up to 1000 candela/m², whereas TFTs get around 500 in the highest end models, and more typically 350. I don't know how much power the passive monochrome display the iPod uses though.

The one drawback is that after 10,000 or so hours of use, OLED displays start to fail. That is, after 416 days of continuous use. Some OLEDs last a lot longer though - up to 40,000 hours.

 

[whooleytoo]

Re: Re: OLED Tech is really promising

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Actually, Apple wasn't first with USB standard in systems

But they were significently the first to drop legacy ports in favour of it, and include OS wide support for it. Which meant Apple's adoption stirred the USB takeup when many PCs at the time had USB ports but were gathering dust.

, nor 1394 standard.

I didn't know this, who was ahead of Apple?

There were lots of 802.11b parts available when Apple added it to the iBook.

But very, very few vendors who include 802.11 antennae across their entire desktop and laptop range.

Apple has led in popularizing some of these technologies, and making them standard in the products. Don't confuse that with "first", though.

Well, very few large companies are innovation leaders (except IBM, who rarely get enough credit as innovators, IMO), but Apple are invariably one of the first, if not the first, large company to commit wholeheartedly to emerging technologies. (And they generally make a better job of it too)

Mike.

 

[andyduncan]

Originally posted by Hattig
The one drawback is that after 10,000 or so hours of use, OLED displays start to fail. That is, after 416 days of continuous use. Some OLEDs last a lot longer though - up to 40,000 hours.

Actually it's difficult to compare life-hours. In some cases, like CRTs and OLEDs, they are usually referring to half-lifes. OLEDs and CRTs start to "fail" the moment you turn them on, and their degradation can be plotted as a curve. Their life expectancy is usually listed as the point at which they are only outputting 1/2 the light they started with.

LCD life usually refers to the backlight, which has a relatively (though not entirely) steady life until it dies completely. At which point it may be able to be replaced. The filters themselves degrade, but incredibly slowly. Usually only in projectors with powerful lights focused on small LCDs do you see heavy degradation, mainly due to heat which isn't really a problem in other implementations. DLPs are even more durable, but that's another topic.

 

[MacBandit]

I was watching a show the other day about OLEDs in it they referenced the Kodak digital cameras many many times. In one of there references it was stated that the OLED in the new Kodak cameras were good for 3 years of heavy use. I don't know about you but I think that sucks.

Also I know someone with one of these new Kodak digital cameras and the display while larger then the one in my Canon S230 (it should be the camera is 2-3 times the size) is much much grainier. It appears to me that it probably has about the same number of pixels as the TFT in my S230 but it's half again the size. I hope that they have better pixel density on the up coming monitors.

 

[Tim Flynn]

OLEDs are emissive like and Light emitting Diode (LED).
LCD are either; reflective, transflective or transmissive.
Reflective means no backlight. Looks good in sunlight, can't see anything in the dark.
Transflective is a combination of reflective and transmissive, look good in sunlight (or ok) and look ok in the dark using a backlight. This I believe in an iPod.
Transmissive mean it uses a backlight. Bright light behind the LCD panel and block out what you don't want to generate image. This what LCD TFT are.
Most computer monitors are (now) of the TFT variety.
The actual LCd panel itself uses very little power. Some use no power (ZBD displays). The majority of power used in by the backlight.
So a lot of small portable equipment, Palms, Newtons for example use transflective LCD displays. The last a long time on batteries, until you turn on the backlight

 

[AidenShaw]

Re: Re: Re: OLED Tech is really promising

Originally posted by whooley
Which meant Apple's adoption stirred the USB takeup when many PCs at the time had USB ports but were gathering dust.

Apple helped popularize it, but remember that Windows 98 came out at about the same time with USB support. It didn't hurt the USB uptake that millions of PCs suddenly had support as well.

, nor 1394 standard.
I didn't know this, who was ahead of Apple?

Several Sony VAIO models had iLink ports standard before the first Mac.

But very, very few vendors who include 802.11 antennae across their entire desktop and laptop range.

Right - Apple's first with universal antennae.

]

 

[york2600]

Why we would want OLEDs:

Cheaper to make
Thinner
Brighter
Higher contrast ratio
Last longer
Less prone to breaking
Use much less power

 

[stompy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: OLED Tech is really promising

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Apple helped popularize it, but remember that Windows 98 came out at about the same time with USB support. It didn't hurt the USB uptake that millions of PCs suddenly had support as well.

.... yet continued to be sold with PS/2 keyboards and mice.

 

[RandomDeadHead]

Several Sony VAIO models had iLink ports standard before the first Mac.

Please excuse me if I am being stuipid but, isnt iLink just a diffrent name for firewire? And didn't Apple create or help create that standerd? So how did sony get it before Apple?

 

[steveh]

Re: Re: OLED Tech is really promising

Originally posted by AidenShaw
LCDs were in use long before "Stevie" announced the "death of the CRT" - a bit prematurely, since Apple is *still* releasing new CRT-based systems.

Apple was shipping LCD product a *long* time before Jobs' announcement.

The Mac Portable, for example, was introduced in September, 1989.

The first clamshell portable was the GRiD 1100 Compass, in 1982. (For about 10K clams...magnesium case and ruggedized for military applications.)

The Apple//c even had an LCD display option; I played with a prototype at Apple around the beginning of '85.

 

[stompy]

Originally posted by RandomDeadHead
Please excuse me if I am being stuipid but, isnt iLink just a diffrent name for firewire? And didn't Apple create or help create that standerd? So how did sony get it before Apple?

iLink is essentially FireWire 400 without power, ie 4 pin connectors.

Apple invented FireWire, and for some time did not allow others to use the name. Sony came up with the iLink moniker, preferring this to the IEEE designation, 1394. (so FireWire = 1394)

 

[AidenShaw]

Originally posted by stompy
iLink is essentially FireWire 400 without power, ie 4 pin connectors.

Sony was actually shipping computers with S100 and S200 iLink, even before 400Mbps was out.

As far as the previous question "Why Sony before Apple?", look at the use of 1394 on camcorders. Sony was making camcorders with 1394, so they made some computers with standard ports for importing the video. Quite simple and obvious.

 

[stompy]

Originally posted by AidenShaw
Sony was actually shipping computers with S100 and S200 iLink, even before 400Mbps was out.

That's why I said 'essentially.' The poster seemed more concerned with what iLink is, rather than it's history. (I realize other q/a preceeded the question I attempted to answer, that were concerned with history.)

 

[stompy]

Haven't seen anyone comment on a different part of the ThinkSecret article, not about OLEDs, but about the next iPod.

"Set for announcement in early 2004, this iPod will boast a design and functionality radically different than current models."

ThinkSecret promises more details soon. Well, we're a long way away from an iPod update, any rumor so far in advance of actual product might not turn out to be too accurate. But TS did get the details of the current iPod right.

 

[stompy]

edit: oops double post