You're overstating when you said that Apple can pick it's price and their customers will pay for it. Apple customers will pay a premium, but that doesn't mean they will pay anything. If the iPad came out starting at $999, as some people guessed, it's highly, highly doubtful it wouldn't have the marketshare it does now.. And if the OLED was used in the new iPad, it sounds like they'd have to tack on another $500-$1000 onto the price. That would price the iPad out of range of the majority of potential customers, making it a niche product.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Supply Constraints Said to Prevent Apple From Adopting OLED for iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're overstating when you said that Apple can pick it's price and their customers will pay for it. Apple customers will pay a premium, but that doesn't mean they will pay anything. If the iPad came out starting at $999, as some people guessed, it's highly, highly doubtful it wouldn't have the marketshare it does now.. And if the OLED was used in the new iPad, it sounds like they'd have to tack on another $500-$1000 onto the price. That would price the iPad out of range of the majority of potential customers, making it a niche product.
wtf its already been discussed that both your points are inaccurate, did you read any of the other posts in this thread?
cost effective? yes, devices below $300 have SAMOLED
viewable in daylight? Yes again see SAMOLED posts, its better than the iphone 4 screen
Nah, those devices aren't really below $300. They are heavily subsidized by mobile operators.
Those devices are generally $500-$700 retail, unsubsidized. And they aren't tablets. They're phones.
Well...in case you haven't heard...life still goes on and Samsung will deliver next year.
http://www.gottabemobile.com/2010/11/10/samsung-shows-off-super-amoled-tablet-prototypes/
I know, 7", but Samsung will continue development there - so get off the high horse, will you? And---well---you know you can get these tabs heavily subsidized? I don't know about the US, but depending on your contract you basically get the Galaxy tab for 1€.
Last edited:
the Samsung Wave is $299 with NO CONTRACT from Bell mobility in Canada
http://www.bell.ca/shopping/en_CA_A...fP30g6jRRTBgJnWTZqmLs3dJw4GSq58GQf!1934140882
its got a 3.3" SAMOLED screen, lets say we triple that size and we got a 10"
the screen does not cost $300 by itself, the additional cost could not possibly make it more than $600-800, samsung has also developed a screen that allows the capacitive touch portion to be integrated so there is no digitizer ontop of your LCD, its both touch and screen in 1 package.
well you can't blame apple if this is the case. hopefully this tech will be ready for the iPad 3
What's your problem, dude? I am not on any "high horse." A claim that SAMOLED devices don't add to cost was made, and backed up with a claim that there are $300 "devices" out there. Since this thread is about iPad, the obvious question is whether there are $300 10" tablets - clearly, by your defensive and irrelevant response, the answer is "no."
So obviously SAMOLED devices at 10" size cost much more than iPad.
My problem is not only that I got your real short message wrong but the fact that people in this thread are pulling numbers out off their ass.
Obviously we both have no clue whatsoever what cost a 10" SAMOLED display will have. My point was mainly that it's a matter of "economy of scale". You could paraphrase it into:
If Apple would consider SAMOLED a vable option, they sure would bulk order the sheer amount of displays (i.e. millions). Therefore the SAMOLED tax may be rather insignificant.
In other news it seems pretty obvious, that in mid 2011 the Galaxy Tab version 2 will arrive with SAMOLED. So there you go.
And all this talk from the RDF-crowd that SAMOLED sux is just BS. But they are happy with their stuff - as Apple CONSUMER ELECTRONICS stopped innovating years ago and their marketing magic makes it the "best since sliced bread".
If Steve really was into innovating, we'd see a Samsung/Apple joint venture for SAMOLED. Actually the transparent display prototype was pretty impressing and reminded me of that sick iMac pipe dream mockup that was floating the forums here all over the years.
Dude will say anything even if it doesn't make sense and the stupid people believe him. When they do finally make the switch to OLED he'll proclaim it the best technology ever because Apple uses it. If he doesn't die from aids first.
I don't think Apple wants OLED displays for the iPad for now due to the very high production cost of OLED panels.
A more likely possibility is active-matrix OLED (AMOLED) screens in the 4 to 4.3" (diagonal) size for the iPhone and future iPod touch models.
A more likely possibility is active-matrix OLED (AMOLED) screens in the 4 to 4.3" (diagonal) size for the iPhone and future iPod touch models.
Again, what does any of this garbage have to do with me? Here's the thread so far:
You- "there are lots of samoled devices less than $300"
Me- "really? 10" tablets?"
You- "get off your high horse"
Me- "huh?"
You- "blather blather blather RDF blather"
The majority of people frankly don't care what type of screen is in a device. As long as it does what they want, users are happy.
Take the Nintendo DS (DSi XL especially), quite a nasty screen - but it just keeps printing money for Nintendo.
Take the Nintendo DS (DSi XL especially), quite a nasty screen - but it just keeps printing money for Nintendo.
Nope...it was:
Other guy - "there are lots of samoled devices less than $300"
You - *arrogant sneering* "Really? 10" tablets?"
Me - "Stop being arrogant. If Apple would bulk order millions of displays, you'd know that by economy of scale the production cost would drop significantly."
you - completely ignoring the facts and rather insulting
Proof for my theory: Watched the prices for SSD options lately? Or for NAND-Flash?
me - waiting for next stupid insult
Please explain to me which part of the following quote is "arrogant sneering?"
They have a label for people who interpret simple questions in crazy ways and who respond with increasingly irrelevant accusations and assertions. I'm not saying you have a problem, but judging by the many messages I've received in response to this exchange, you may want to take a closer look at how this interchange has evolved.
Once again, the assertion that samoled iPads would be no more expensive than existing iPads, as proven by the assertion that cheap "devices" already exist, is nonsense since, based on the deflecting responses to my simple and innocent query, no comparable tablet exists in the claimed price range.
Get a grip, guys. OLED isn't that expensive. And in the end (a few years from now) it will cost LESS than LCD since it's cheaper to manufacture, not needing backlighting and the extra apparatus around it.
Samsung is already producing 3 million OLED screens (of smartphone size) a month and as of mid 2011 when the new gen 5.5 plant comes online will be producing 30 million per month. FAR more than enough for Apple and Samsung both. Plus they will be able to build 65" OLED HDTVs with that plant as well. And on the gen 8 OLED plant they just invested US $4.8 billion on several weeks ago, which will likely be doing nothing BUT televisions and possibly laptop displays.
Yeah, right... and you believed him?? It was cheaper and in plentiful supply. You can't really think that the 20-year-old LCD tech is better than the next-gen OLED? If you do, you must not know much about OLED...
Last edited by a moderator:
A chart is all well and good, but I was hoping for an article. I'm skeptical of the prices on the larger panels, especially given that no one makes a tablet using them. I haven't seen any OLED product larger than a phone screen at a realistic price. Especially given that Sony just announced a 17" OLED broadcast monitor at $15,700, 25" at $29,000.