Apple Looks To Introduce OLED Displays In iPhone Models From 2018 (thestack.com) 225
An anonymous reader writes: Apple is expected to integrate organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display technology in its iPhone handsets from 2018. The Cupertino-based giant will jump from liquid crystal display (LCD), which has been used in iPhones since 2007, to OLED – turning to suppliers like LG Displays, according to Japanese reports. The switch follows the steps of other smartphone makers such as Samsung and LG, which have both already integrated OLED technology in their mobile device ranges.
Oh, really? (Score:3, Informative)
My I9100 has OLED too. In 2018 it will be 5 years old. Really up to date hardware reseller, this apple inc. is.
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Informative)
My Nokia N85 (which still works) has a OLED screen.
In 2018 it will be 10 years old.
Re: (Score:2)
The N series phones were too far ahead of their time. I remember my N73 had a physical shutter in the camera. Never seen that trick again.
Re: (Score:2)
nokia 808 had one too iirc. also oled. good for time display.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hehe, I thought the same thing. But seriously: As I understand it, current iPhones use IPS (in-plane switching) displays, which, while more expensive offer superior color reproduction. I'd bet that by 2018 OLED will have caught up or exceeded IPS in this regard and therefore it makes sense to switch at this time.
Re: (Score:2)
OLED has caught up and surpassed IPS in everything: http://www.displaymate.com/Gal... [displaymate.com]
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Informative)
"As I understand it, current iPhones use IPS (in-plane switching) displays, which, while more expensive offer superior color reproduction."
What?
Pardon?
I think you got your technology backwards. OLED is the one which is superior in color reproduction, always has been, by a leaping mile.
There are some good IPS displays out there but OLED is superior technology, has been for years (burn in issues aside, I'm talking colour / blakcs)
Re: (Score:2)
OLED is the one which is superior in color reproduction, always has been, by a leaping mile.
Then why, when two phones are side by side in the store, do the customers not even notice which has OLED without Samsung's huge AMOLED+ signs pointing at their phones?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure where you're getting your evidence here but I think you need to go and do some googling and read up on OLED technology, colour depth, black levels and what have you. This stuff is tried, tested, proven, documented and ... honestly, I thought well known?
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the help. Next time I see them side by side in a store, I'll be sure to note that as the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IPS displays offer more accurate colour overall, but AMOLED has better blacks and colour seem to "pop" more. Having said that, AMOLED is already 99% as good as IPS now, when properly calibrated. LG AMOLED TVs are pretty accurate, for example.
There are some other advantages too, like they can go into a low power black and white mode for display notifications while the screen is "off", or rather in an ultra low power state. AMOLED also reproduced motion much better than LCD, with much lower transition times.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oh, really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it's called the internet .. that's kind of what if does.
And it's been like that since before you could explain it to your mom.
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the day when Gopher was still useful, and 2400 baud was enough for anybody.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine if they used different manufacturers for their OLEDs and one had slightly better color accuracy.
They have done this in the past. When MacBooks first started getting "retina" displays they used two LCD panel suppliers, LG and Sharp. The Sharp displays were perfect, but the LG ones suffered from quality issues. Most of them had ghosting to some degree. People found a way to determine if they had an LG or Sharp panel and were demanding to have their MacBooks swapped for Sharp models because they knew that problems with the LG panels were inevitable. The command used was:
Re: Oh, really? (Score:2, Redundant)
Actually the macbook display wasn't the issue. Apple determined that it was caused by users simply looking at the screen the wrong way.
Mystery solved.
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Informative)
It's one thing to ship a couple thousand OLED screens, it's an entirely different thing to ship millions of them.
The Galaxy SII (I9100) sold 40 million units in the first 18 months after release.
Like OP said: really up to date hardware reseller, this apple inc. is.
Re: (Score:3)
Just because something is newer doesn't make it better. The OLED in the Samsung got lots of Samsung press, but the reviews and side-by-side comparisons didn't see the difference Samsung claimed. Maybe Apple was waiting for it to actually be better than the LCD before moving to it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only a sucker buys products from a company that boasts of a high markup on their products.
It's just weird when people come on here praising Apple, as consumers of Apple products, with this as one of the 'virtues' they prize.
Is there some sort of secret form of self esteem boost that comes of proudly proclaiming that you are a sucker for a company?
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Is there some sort of secret form of self esteem boost that comes of proudly proclaiming that you are a sucker for a company?
Ask anybody who purchased a Dreamcast.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and when Sega didn't make enough money it died a pre-mature death. Think about it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't buy soda or bottled water?
Re: (Score:3)
You don't buy soda or bottled water?
Do you buy it due to the high margin or because you like/need it?
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Interesting)
> Only a sucker buys products from a company that boasts of a high markup on their products.
How does this follow? Nintendo and Apple are both famous for this- their per unit profit is always a record high within the industry.
Nintendo has had this policy since at least the 80s, and Apple since right about the time they stopped being broke as all hell.
So why would you be happy to be ripped off? You aren't- but you might be happy to:
1- Pay money to a company who is trying to *make money in a market*. When you see someone come along and give away their product, like Microsoft, this isn't charity- it's an attempt to grab marketshare. Do they want the marketshare just to drive out the competition? What's next after that? Once you injure Nintendo, do they keep selling at a loss? Most phones are Android, and a lot are priced sub commodity- what's their business model, because it obviously isn't selling you a phone, right?
2- Pay money to a company that is rewarding itself by selling to consumers instead of monetizing them, betraying them, or monitoring them. If the hardware is the loss leader, do they just want to get you subscribed to something so that they can pile on adware, bloatware, and crapware endlessly, and now you are locked into their product? Buy an iphone, it has all the stuff an iphone comes with. Buy and Android and start trying to remove all the vendor crapware, that varies from place to place.
3- Pay for a status symbol.
(1) and (2) are fully and completely rational. (3) is usually not rational, but it's still a reason.
Now, many Androids are sold at profit, and many vendors are honestly trying to earn money by selling you a product- but some are not.
As one final note in (1) and (2)- this isn't some vague "vote with your dollars" thing that maybe benefits society eventually- this benefits you personally immediately, because the company you just bought the product for is heavily motivated to please you and keep you around. If you buy and iphone and never buy a single app or anything, Apple loves you. If you buy a break-even or sell-at-loss phone, and then don't ever buy stuff, you're basically playing a "freemium" game- the devs have every motivation to dick you around until you open wallet. But unlike a freemium game, this is not obvious to most buyers- they don't realize they are "freeloading" and that the company is looking for ways to make them either become a real user, or gtfo to another brand.
Anyway, "high profit margin" doesn't only mean "you're getting ripped off". It can, and whether Apple products are worth their "Apple Tax" is certainly not any manner of given.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple goes for color accuracy, which OLED isn't known for previously.
Of course, all the haters love to pile on just for fun.
Re:Oh, really? (Score:5, Informative)
It's one thing to ship a couple thousand OLED screens, it's an entirely different thing to ship millions of them.
Samsung has sold hundreds of millions of phones with OLED screens in. Even their new entry level Galaxy J3 will have an OLED screen.
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung manufactures OLED screens. They don't have to worry about a supplier not being able to meet demand, because they are the supplier. If they have to throw more money at it to bump up production, they will. If the yield is too low, they can make up for it by cranking up the price of OLEDs disproportionately for everyone else that they supply panels to, or by cutting off those other companies entirely.
A company buying panels from so
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung has sold hundreds of millions of phones with OLED screens in. Even their new entry level Galaxy J3 will have an OLED screen.
By the time the Galaxy S3 was released they had run out of OLED screens and went back to their horrific LED "Pentile" displays. So it's not like OLED worked out all that great for Samsung. Then to try to get production back up, they combined OLED with Pentile, taking a screen with lovely colors, and totally destroying it's color accuracy and eveness. Samsung has done a horrible job of keeping up with OLED demand. I'd rather take an accurate LED display, than a bright but inaccurate OLED.
To try to make up fo
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Informative)
Couple thousand? i9100 sold more than 40 million units. i9300 has sold over 80 million units. i9500 sold 40 million within the first 6 months of release. Need I continue?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Couple thousand? i9100 sold more than 40 million units. i9300 has sold over 80 million units. i9500 sold 40 million within the first 6 months of release. Need I continue?
No this is the point where the morons who didn't know what they were talking about, they suddenly shut up and you don't see them posting in this thread again. Suddenly the cat's got their keyboard-tongue. Never do they say "hey, you made a compelling point, I was all wrong and didn't remotely have any acquaintence with the facts, thanks for setting me straight on this". Such grace is beyond the reach of douchebags who shoot off at the mouth because their feelings are offended at hearing the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the equally silly stuff comes from both sides.
Re: (Score:2)
40 mil units over the lifetime of a product, a 2 year period, vs 40 mil units in one quarter, is a little different. Not as much as a couple of thousand vs 40 mil in a quarter, of course. But as others have mentioned, OLEDs aren't known for color accuracy when it first came out.
Apple screens _are_ known for color accuracy. Until OLEDs can match the color accuracy, Apple wouldn't move to them.
Re: Oh, really? (Score:2)
Read up. OLED is as color accurate as any LCD.
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung is the only android phone manufacturer who has earned profits for several years now.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as Samsung makes enough money to stay in business and continue selling phones, their customers should be happy to get 'the latest stuff' while Apple trails behind.
Unless you're a hooker who works out of a hotel in Cupertino, or an Apple employee, it's just weird to be so elated that Apple sells a trailing edge product at a jacked up price.
I too have never understood why some Apple fans are so happy about having huge profit margins extracted from them. Unless the criticism of Samsung having too low profit is actually some sort of passive aggressive envy of their devices giving more bang for the buck for the users.
Re:Oh, really? (Score:5, Informative)
I've had my AMOLED phone for 3 years now, using it aggressively for several hours a day, and no visible sign of wear as of yet. If you place it right next to a spanking-new phone and squint your eyes, you can make out the slightest amount of color tint. But so what? LCD backlights degrade too.
I wouldn't recommend an OLED screen for something like a desktop computer where it's on 24 hours a day every day. But for a phone, it's perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
A desktop computer screen that's on 24 hours a day??!
My work computer screens are turned on for 8 hours a day. My phone screen would be on for almost that amount too (most of the evening while "watching" tv). I'd venture that in an average week my phone screen would be turned on for longer than any computer screen I use. Perhaps with the exception of my TV screen, which is OLED...
2015 (Score:3, Insightful)
The switch follows the steps of other smartphone makers such as Samsung and LG, which have both already integrated OLED technology in their mobile device ranges
Plus, Apple, in 2015, is still not able to provide Macbooks with matte screens. Working while watching a mirror for hours is an eye killer..
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Maybe if you put a paper bag over your head?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Fine grain sandpaper will sort that out for you... *snigger*
Re: (Score:2)
And who in their right mind would buy such a defective product?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My condolences on that. Can you at least connect an external display?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple plays "catch up" on a lot of tech. But I think matte screens are like mice with multiple buttons- their company position is that the glossy solution "is better". I don't think they even believe they need to get on stuff like that, oddly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The IBM T221 monitors had 'retina' resolutions and matte screens in 2001.
They had some down sides - they needed quad-DVI connections, couldn't manage a 60 HZ refresh, and they were $8400. But they were matte and 204ppi.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple CEO: Little understanding of marketing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple CEO Tim Cook: Announces things before they are ready.
Slashdot reader Futurepower(R): doesn't actually read articles or even article summaries enough to understand that Tim Cook and/or Apple didn't announce anything here. It was speculation by some douchebag "analyst."
There are plenty of good reasons to criticize Apple. Making shit up is not one of them. Please don't give fuel to flamewars by just posting anti-Apple shit without actually even reading either the article or the goddamn summary.
Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm actually a fan of OLED displays when they're perfect, yes, even the bright colors.
But dammit it's hard to find a really good *actual* OLED display in an *actual* unit.
Went through five phones before I got a Note 4 with a good display. Went through four Galaxy Tab S units to find a good one new out of the box. Let's see, what are the problems encountered in the various and sundry displays?
- Strong yellow cast, like ridiculously strong
- Pink/green gradient, usually from corner to corner, with "white" only in display center
- Uneven brightness, i.e. dark "splotches" on white backgrounds or "dark gradients" at one edge of the screen to about 1-2" in from bezel
- Terrible pixelation/pixel noise at low brightness, not unlike digital camera "noise" in low-light exposures
- Burn-in (even in supposedly factory-new devices)
Either QC or the production process or both appear to be nearly fatally flawed for Samsung, and they're currently the biggest shipper of OLED screens in gadgets, and have had years of experience. You'd think they'd have it sorted out by now.
I love the *potential* of OLED, but it seems like for the most part right now, attempts to actually ship them in consumer devices leave a lot to be desired.
Re:Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score:5, Informative)
That's odd, all those sound like problems you get with LCDs, not AMOLED screens.
The uneven brightness is common with LCDs due to them being backlit, and I have to say that the iPad in particular is terrible for it (well, the older ones, I haven't looked at the new ones). Same for uneven brightness and splotches. AMOLED is generally immune to them, if it fails it tends to be via banding rather than blotching.
The yellow discolouration is the glue used to stick the screen layers together, affects LCD as well. The noise at low brightness was an issue but has been fixed on newer panels, from the last couple of years. Burn in with AMOLED clears up pretty quickly, I used to get it with the status bar on my old Samsung but after a few seconds in a full screen app it would fade away.
You have been incredibly unlucky it seems.
Re: Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score:2)
No, these arw characgeristic of OLEDs.
LCDs have their own problems:
- Backlight leakage
- "Bright" and "dark" edges (relative to backlight edge)
- Dim corners (usujally just one, due to slight LCD warping)
etc.
The iPad Air IZGO display had tons of problems at first, too. I remember seeing them at a store and thinking, "geez, there's not a single good display in this entirew row of iPad Air units."
But that doesn't absolve OLED of its problems. I think for me the big issues arew the color cast issues. The pink/gr
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung's Quality Control is Crap (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd lean towards this explanation, and not just in the matter of OLED displays. Over the years, I've noticed a trend of faulty hardware from Samsung. Samsung refrigerator/freezer whose temperature control is prone to go nuts after power outages (usually it stops bothering to cool the contents despite the temerature controls working and showing the current temerature accurately, though on one occasion getting stuck "on" and freezing everything in the fridge. Also, the ice maker ironically freezes up so it can't make ice), camera with a lens/focussing flaw that renders everything outside of a small circle in the center of every photo out-of-focus (sent in in for RMA, got it back unchanged a few weeks later with a note to make sure the battery was fully charged when using, WTF?), Galaxy "Mesmerize" (Galaxy S for US Cellular) whose 3G/wifi/gps/bluetooth radio would regularly completely die until the phone was power-cycled (its replacement actually was okay). My current phone is a Galaxy S4 (running Optimized CyanogenMod 12.1 [romhut.com]) that I'm actually pretty pleased with, but its USB port failed within a few months and I can't transfer data over it (it still charges and I can easily transfer data via sftp, so I haven't gotten around to getting the $5 replacement port and ripping the phone apart to fix it yet).
Samsung's Quality Control sucks. If I'd had the option of any other rootable phone from another manufacturer when I got the S4 I'd have gone with it instead, but US Cellular's selection is pretty meager. I'm just glad "have to use something other than USB to transfer files" is the only real problem I've had with it.
Re:Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score:4)
Perhaps that's why Apple isn't going OLED until 2018 - OLEDs have/had issues and Apple believes in 2018 they can get good ones.
Sure Apple doesn't implement the latest and greatest all the time - they often wait for technology to mature to the point where it meets existing quality. OLED displays are like that - they're bright and vibrant, but their color accuracy is often crap because the gamut is exaggerated on one end. And they're nice and people love the oversaturated look, but again, not accurate.
Then there's the whole RGB pixel versus PenTile displays which cause all sorts of resolution issues and color issues.
Also, since LCDs have hit 100% sRGB gamut, the next target is apparently AdobeRGB, where OLEDs are able to get 97%. Perhaps in 2018 Apple can make it 100% AdobeRGB, producing a wide gamut and accurate color.
OLEDs may have been on other phones for years, but that doesn't mean it's a technology that makes it "acceptable" to Apple - it's just a technology. Apple may be a latecomer, but when they do that, it usually means they've been waiting for the technology to mature and fulfill their requirements.
Apple to do what everyone else did 5 years ago (Score:2, Interesting)
Apple is going to do in 2018 what others have done in 2013, 2014, and 2015.
What is news is this:
Apple is no longer a trendsetter, an innovator, a company that others seek to follow.
Apple is a follower, a duplicator, the ass on the donkey of innovation.
E
Quantum Dots First (Score:4, Interesting)
My guess is that Apple will move to a quantum dot LCD on the iPhone 7. The main tangible advantage of these is that they are more efficient than existing displays that use RGB filters, which will mean they can make the phone a bit thinner (or more battery life, but then again this is Apple). They also can have better colour performance, which I imagine Apple will heavily tout, despite most people not really caring.
After that they will move to OLED, since this will allow them to go even thinner.
For the iPhone 7 I imagine they will:
iPhone 7S will probably just have wireless charging after all these years.
Re: (Score:2)
3. go back to a square style
Square phone? Nokia did that years ago. Apple could never be so daring.
https://www.google.com.au/sear... [google.com.au]
Anandtech for the Quantitative Results (Score:2)
http://anandtech.com/show/9686... [anandtech.com]
There is something for everyone there, depending on what metric you think is most important. It seems as though the iPhone 6 has one of the best screens in terms of accuracy, but probably the Samsung Galaxy 6 Edge is the best overall screen.
Here is the Anandtech iPhone 6 review from last year:
http://anandtech.com/show/8554... [anandtech.com]
At that time, the iPhone had easily the best display on a phone in display
They have done this for years. (Score:2)
Apple has been trying to play catch up for some time now. When the nice shiny Mac+ came out, that was them (partly) passing the Nexus5 generation. My daughters one seems nearly comparable to my Note4 except that her photos don't seem as sharp as mine.
Perhaps its just the inferior display?
It probably doesn't matter how far they are behind the market leaders. Few people by an iPhone because of its superiority.
Re: (Score:2)
Your old OLED screens don't compare to modern OLED displays - they're at least two generations behind. And black bars? That's the controller, not the 'phosphors'. It could be that a certain OLED panel had a bad production run, but try to keep proper separation of concerns.
A 4-year-old GS3 AMOLED screen looks great compared to any iPhone screen produced today, and the newer ones are even better (I considered switching to a 'better' phone (circuit-board level) after running a GS4 for years, and just couldn
Re: (Score:2)
And Samsung sucks. GS3 is not that old, and Samsung won't put out a recent firmware for the millions of people that are still on it. Samsung has one of the worst support cycles of anyone out there. But th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have a look at the latest OLED screens used in GS6 or Note 5. They beat everything else by such a huge margin that it's not even funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Create an image with pixels completely black. All channels zero. View it on screens side-by-side in the dark. Also, the brightness can go up insane high in AMOLED.
Re: (Score:2)
The stores don't like when you wipe their phones and install a custom test firmware, and shoot out all the lights in the mall, as your test would require for the parameters I gave.
Why would you need to do any of that to view an image? Just image search for "AMOLED black" and see. And you can see the difference without turning off all the lights. Although the effect is much more affecting in the dark.
I guess idiots prefer OLED because it would be better, if anyone ever ran across that one specific test, though nobody has yet.
I do not understand what's wrong. Do you want to know which is the best display tech right now and why? If yes, I gave you the answers. If not, then why are you reading this?
Re: (Score:2)
I do not understand what's wrong. Do you want to know which is the best display tech right now and why?
If it's clearly better, why is it not clearly better when two phones are next to each other in regular lighting conditions under regular use?
Downloading special apps and reading spec sheets to find which is theoretically better is a masturbatory act unrelated to which is best.
By your comments, one can only conclude that they are equal, and you have no facts contradicting that, but you prefer OLED.
It's fine to have an opinion, but opinions aren't fact.
I gave you the answers.
You didn't answer what I asked. "How do I tell in a s
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm... Anecdote from a random person on one side and detailed scientific analysis and comparison on the other [displaymate.com]. Wonder what to believe in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HTC is famous for using shitty OLED screens. Look at a Galaxy phone from the last 3 years, and gaze at the screen in stunned amazement. The brightness range is stupefying, the color reproduction is perfect, the contrast ratio is literally infinite.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm...is there a point in your comment? I'm unable to find any.
Re: (Score:2)
Dog-cow is the idiot. Math challenged. An OLED bit that is off has literally zero luminance. The same way a 60 watt light bulb with zero current flowing through it has zero luminance. The ratio of an on bit to an off bit is then literally infinite. Infinite in the true mathematical sense.
You can't get that in an LCD due to basic physical reality. Physically realizable LCDs can never block that backlight 100.0%.
Re: Disposable screens for disposable products? (Score:2)
That's exactly what I meant.
Re: (Score:2)
Color accuracy is better than any other mobile screen available. http://www.displaymate.com/Gam... [displaymate.com]
Re: (Score:2)
1) OLED has gotten a lot better
2) people dispose of their phones after 24 months, not half a decade +
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Disposable screens for disposable products? (Score:3)
Apple stopped selling the iPhone 3GS new September 2011. Apple didn't drop support until iOS 7 - introduced September 2013. In fact, Apple released a patch for iOS 6 for the "goto fail" bug February 2014.
Re: (Score:2)
you mean about 2 years after the last one's sold, how interesting
Re: Disposable screens for disposable products? (Score:2)
If by "about two years" you mean 2 and a half years. Then you're right. But let's look at what Apple has done since then....
iPhone 4 - (introduced 6/2010) discontinued 9/2013, had the latest OS until 9/2015
IPhone 4s - (introduced 9/2011) discontinued (9/2014) has the latest OS at least until 9/2016.
Of course every iPhone since the iPhone 4s is still supported.
So if you cared about keeping a phone for as long as possible, why would you buy a 2 generation old phone? If you bought the iPhone 4s the day it went
Re: (Score:2)
that wasnt my point, my original statement which was in question by dog-cow was people ditch their phone after 24 months, you backed that statement up so relax
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Disposable screens for disposable products? (Score:2)
Apple stopped selling the iPhone 3G June 2010. It had the latest OS until September 2011 when iOS 5 was introduced. Even if you bought a 2 generation old iPhone 3G on the last day it was for sell, you still had 15 months where it had the latest OS.
Re: (Score:3)
This is likely by intent: Planned obsolescence can simply be implemented a lot better with OLED than with LCD. LCD was designed from the start as a long-lifetime technology. OELD is now correcting that mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
This is likely by intent: Planned obsolescence can simply be implemented a lot better with OLED than with LCD. LCD was designed from the start as a long-lifetime technology. OELD is now correcting that mistake.
You're missing a crucial point. The lifetime of LCDs is more or less indefinite. The lifetime of the backlight however is very much finite, and the backlights (whether LED or cold cathode) fade and dim over time.
The problem is that making light emitting things that don't dim with age is really hard, b
Re: (Score:3)
No, I am not. Historically, with CFLs you are right. With LED backlights that became unworkable as reliable self-destruct. Hence OLED (which has a lot lower lifetimes than standard LEDs used in backlights) to the rescue.
Re: (Score:2)
With LED backlights that became unworkable as reliable self-destruct
LED backlights do dim over time. I think the quoted lifetime you get in LED datasheets is the number of hours continuous operation until the LED reaches 50% brighteness.
Re: (Score:2)
They do. But too slowly.
Re: (Score:2)
It's spelled TurboGrafx-16 [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1015238-REG/sony_pvma250_25_professional_oled.html [bhphotovideo.com]
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=4k+oled&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=80219436733&hvpos=1t2&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8649967677167467747&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_332gpox0u4_b [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I need a laptop with the screen that samsung uses in their phones. Maybe the Surface Book 2?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't. At least not until the burn-in problem is resolved. There's a fundamental problem with dimming in OLEDs that is yet to be resolved. Worse still it doesn't affect all colours equally so the blues fade first. If I bring up a white screen on my old Galaxy S1 I can see the faded and very yellow outline of the notification bar on the top, and I only used that phone sparingly for 2 years.
I don't want that kind of degradation in a far more expensive device that I intend to use significantly more and keep
Re: (Score:2)
Burn-in is gone in the latest screens. Also, dimming is better on OLEDs now, compared to LCD. The Galaxy S is over 5 years old now. OLED tech has come a long way from those days.
Re: (Score:2)
No it isn't. No one has demonstrated that they've eliminated the degradation of the organic materials used in the manufacture.
The modern screens are *better* than the ones from 5 years ago, but only marginally. OLED tech hasn't fundamentally changed and the problem has not been addressed. It may be enough on a modern smartphone, but no where near enough on a laptop or desktop which could quite easily have several orders of magnitude more active use during it's usable life.
Re: (Score:3)
But organic LEDs are good for you and the environment, because chemical fertilizers and pesticides aren't used to make them.
Re: (Score:3)
All of which is not at all relevant on a disposable device like a smartphone.
But I agree. I'm not going to call for this technology in desktop or laptop monitors. But on a phone. I won't ever buy a phone without it. They are just so much better to look at. Also I don't see any difference in daylight visibility now. I did back in the Galaxy S vs iPhone 3G days. But I have no problem using my current phone in the sun.