backtop


Print 32 comment(s) - last by icanhascpu.. on Feb 12 at 4:51 AM


Samsung is about to announce the world's first mass produced AMOLED display to have touch sensors built in.  (Source: OLED Display)
The pace of adoption for this promising new technology quickens

Did you fall in love with the Nexus One's brilliant AMOLED screen? It's easy to see why you might -- the active matrix organic light emitting diode screens features lower power consumption, lower cost, and superior image/color quality to traditional TFT LCD screens found in other smartphones such as the Blackberry or the iPhone.

Now Samsung is looking to push more AMOLED smartphones onto the market with a superior iteration of the technology.  Photos have leaked of the company's new mass produced 3.3-inch AMOLED displays.  While these displays are slightly diminutive when compared to the 3.7-inch Nexus One AMOLED display, they are the first mass-produced AMOLED displays to directly incorporate touch into the screen (Google's phone uses a separate capacitive layer).

The new displays feature .001mm thin touch sensors on-cell sandwiched between the panel's substrate and the bottom polarizer film.  That means you no longer need the bulky layer on top of the screen.  It could be eliminated altogether, or, more likely, replaced with a more robust protective layer.

Samsung's AMOLED panel is five times as bright as a comparable LCD TFT panel, and it performs 20 percent better under sunlight.  

The company is expected to formally announce new AMOLED products at the 2010 Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.  The new screens are reportedly codenamed "Super AM OLED panel".

Not to be outdone, LG Display, Samsung's big display rival, is cooking up AMOLED displays of its own.  Describes a spokesperson in an interview with 
The Korea Times, "LG Display will put more focus on AM OLED panels due to higher consumer appetite for advanced products."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Here's hoping
By amanojaku on 2/8/2010 12:09:24 PM , Rating: 2
Samsung and LG piss each other off so much we end up with $1,000 46" AMOLED monitors in ten years.

And then I woke up.




RE: Here's hoping
By plewis00 on 2/8/2010 1:19:53 PM , Rating: 4
You think it will take 10 years for that? 10 years ago Pentium III was seriously high-end, flat-panel anything other than laptop displays was a dream, I'm not even sure colour screen mobile phones had come out.

If you said to someone that 10 years ahead of 2000 we would be practically giving away flatscreen TVs, people would be turning their noses up at massive rear-projection TVs for poor image quality and there was a consumer film format (Blu-ray) and broadcast 1080p HDTV which had 6 times higher pixel count than DVD in the home, they wouldn't believe you.

My point is that in 10 years, a lot happens and if anything I'd say you are underestimating what is possible. 46" $1000 AMOLED sounds like something for 5 years time if anything.


RE: Here's hoping
By porkpie on 2/8/2010 3:18:26 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, a Dr. Dobbs contest in 1994 to predict what computers would be like in 15 years (in other words: today) had thousands of entries, most of which were wildly optimistic. IIRC, the winning entry predicted the average computer with wraparound holographic displays, voice recognition had replaced the mouse and keyboard entirely, and AI routines did most of the grunt work for the user.

Large OLED monitors have been 'just around the corner' for the past 10 years. If you seriously think we'll have $1000 46" OLED monitors in 5 years, I'd like to make a bet with you. Process improvements in lieu of major technology shifts occur at a usually-easily predictable pace...and a radical new production method for OLED would take more than 5 years to commercialize anyway.


RE: Here's hoping
By scrapsma54 on 2/8/2010 3:59:10 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone think that Oled pretty much put SED technology under besides the lawsuit with Cannon.


RE: Here's hoping
By porkpie on 2/8/2010 4:05:58 PM , Rating: 2
Naw, it wasn't OLED or even the Nano-Proprietary suit. It was the steep decrease in prices for LCD and Plasma screens.

SED has significantly better image quality, but are you going to pay quadruple for your TV, just to get deeper blacks and a bit less motion blur?

Last I heard, Canon was trying to reposition SED for high-end studio monitor use, rather than a consumer product.


RE: Here's hoping
By BansheeX on 2/9/2010 1:21:41 AM , Rating: 2
SED might have served as a stopgap between LCD and OLED, but it looks like even that won't happen. SED and OLED are similar in performance, but SED is still a phosphor technology. OLED has better blacks and brightness. OLED can be made razor thin, small or large, translucent, and flexible. Thus, heavily investing in things like SED and Laser rear projection just doesn't seem to make much sense.


RE: Here's hoping
By porkpie on 2/9/2010 9:46:15 AM , Rating: 2
"SED is still a phosphor technology. OLED has better blacks and brightness"

Huh?? This isn't true. SED (or OLED, or pretty much any emissive-based display technology) all tie on black levels. As for brightness, phosphor-based technologies like SED or even CRT still do better than OLED, which is limited due to innate power levels the organic matrix can handle.

You're right about the rest though. Long-term, OLED looks to be a better bet, due to fabrication and size issues.


RE: Here's hoping
By notfeelingit on 2/8/2010 7:35:57 PM , Rating: 1
IMHO we're well ahead of that. I'm running Windows 7.


RE: Here's hoping
By kontorotsui on 2/9/2010 3:38:40 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you seriously think we'll have $1000 46" OLED monitors in 5 years, I'd like to make a bet with you.


In 5 years we'll have RMB1000 46" OLED monitors.


RE: Here's hoping
By amanojaku on 2/8/2010 4:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
You think we'll be buying 46" $1,000 AMOLED TVs in five years? FIVE? Today you can only get ONE OLED TV: an 11" Sony XEL-1 for $2,500. It's been out for two years and hasn't seen a competitor, replacement or price drop larger than $300. In 10 years we should be lucky if we can buy a 46" OLED PERIOD. There's too much wrong with OLED at the moment, and the worst of it is the limited lifespan.


RE: Here's hoping
By plewis00 on 2/8/2010 7:49:00 PM , Rating: 3
No, I just think you're narrow-minded and foolish. I'm not saying we will be able to buy these TVs in five-years, I'm just saying technology advances a lot in five-years and it totally wouldn't surprise me. I'm nearly 100% certain you didn't predict plasma flatscreens would be on their way out by 2010 back in 2000 either but I'm sure if I'd said it you'd be screaming and writing pointless tautologies in capitals and bold to get your weak point across. All it will take is a breakthrough in the next 1-2 years and everything changes.

But yes, I am sure, you (some random nobody) probably knows more than Samsung and LG combined and they will never work round this 'too much wrong with OLED' problem, in just the same way the processor manufacturers never got round what they thought was a minimum threshold node construction size for CPUs (they said 65nm was the limit - or something like that).

P.S. 'limited lifespan'? Didn't everyone say this about plasma screens? Didn't stop people buying them did it? Not even the astronomical power consumption, heat or weight put people off.


RE: Here's hoping
By plewis00 on 2/8/2010 7:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe this will make you reconsider your stance:

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kit-eaton/technomi...

And:

http://www.hdtvinfo.eu/news/hdtv-articles/40-inch-...

Probably all just hype though...


RE: Here's hoping
By dagamer34 on 2/8/2010 11:28:52 PM , Rating: 3
Actually LG has a 15" OLED TV for $2600. It's important to note that the price drop for tech like this is NOT linear, but geometric (like a half-pipe). Technology doesn't become mass market for a LONG time after it's introduced. And because of the fact that OLED has more theoretical uses, can be bent, generates it's own light, more power efficient, brighter and is conceptually simpler to build than LCD screens, once OLED starts hitting cheaper and cheaper prices, it's going to accelerate rapidly to the bottom.


RE: Here's hoping
By Captain Orgazmo on 2/12/2010 12:50:45 AM , Rating: 2
In December I had a conversation with an LG rep who said they should have full size OLEDs for sale by 2011, latest (aiming for winter 2010 release), and current technology yields OLEDs with a brightess half-life of 30,000 to 50,000 hrs. The first plasma displays had lower useful lifespans.


I dont know how...
By chagrinnin on 2/8/2010 7:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
...they do it, but those Asian girls still look hot in full body suits.




RE: I dont know how...
By porkpie on 2/8/2010 7:20:56 PM , Rating: 3
Um, one of those is a guy, my friend...


RE: I dont know how...
By chagrinnin on 2/8/2010 10:03:35 PM , Rating: 3
"I'm not your friend, guy" :P


RE: I dont know how...
By RandallMoore on 2/9/2010 8:57:18 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not your guy, buddy.


RE: I dont know how...
By chagrinnin on 2/9/2010 10:58:33 AM , Rating: 2
"I'm not your buddy, pal" :P


yay
By Drag0nFire on 2/8/2010 1:11:35 PM , Rating: 2
Now I know what AMOLED means! =D

It's sad statement though that I don't know anything unless DT teaches it to me...




RE: yay
By RjBass on 2/8/2010 3:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
you and me both brotha


RE: yay
By chagrinnin on 2/8/2010 6:03:47 PM , Rating: 1
Tru dat,...I hop nobodee coms heer to lern Englesh? :P


Great news
By kensiko on 2/8/2010 12:11:26 PM , Rating: 2
Now waiting to see some of these in 40in TV :)




performance question
By shin0bi272 on 2/8/10, Rating: -1
RE: performance question
By omnicronx on 2/8/2010 12:29:05 PM , Rating: 2
I think thats an understatement, I'm looking at the Omnia II right now vs my HTC diamond and the difference is day and night. Putting both phones under a light I can't even read my diamond screen at all, the AMOLED is brighter in the light and has less glare, so I guess it all depends on the application.


RE: performance question
By bupkus on 2/8/2010 3:48:22 PM , Rating: 1
Ok, I don't know if anyone has ever posted this before but why TF would anyone expect a hand held display to be able to compete with the light of the sun??? At the very least you're gonna turn you body so your display is in your shadow.

What a shitty sweater this is... here I am at Antarctica and I'm cold!


RE: performance question
By melgross on 2/8/2010 4:18:18 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting, as every review of an AMOLED phone, as well as the Zune HD has said they were useless in sunlight.


RE: performance question
By bupkus on 2/8/2010 4:30:27 PM , Rating: 2
I can't imagine why.

We all want what we want but is that sometimes unreasonable?

No! Technology can do anything! I want a brain implant that can connect to the internet and project a partially transparent image over the image from my eyes thus bypassing whatever the sun does.

Post script: Phuc the sun.

Rusky reply:
You don't **** the sun,
the sun ****s you!


RE: performance question
By porkpie on 2/8/2010 6:11:45 PM , Rating: 2
Unreasonable? Good god man, are ye daft? A bloody scrap of PAPER is easier to read in bright sunlight than in a dark room. Why should we expect less of our 21st century technology?

Technology can't do "anything" -- but it can solve this problem for us. The key is non-emissive display technology. Displays that reflect ambient light to form their image (just as that piece of paper does) rather than create their own.


RE: performance question
By Omega215D on 2/8/2010 7:09:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's not only about brighter and better contrast but also power savings that come with OLED and AMOLED, that and really thin and light screens.


RE: performance question
By erple2 on 2/10/2010 12:26:29 PM , Rating: 2
That was one of the marvels of the crappy 2 color (on or off) screen that the old "LCD" display on my ancient Nokia (8260) phone had. Black and White. Worked in any lighting conditions (came with a backlight for when there was no light). Worked in direct sunlight just fine (provided the glass wasn't currently reflecting the sun directly into my eyeballs).

The flip side is that the phone could only make phone calls (and send those outrageously overpriced Text Messages at 10 cents apiece - roughly $1.20 per kB). No surfing the internet. No taking pictures. No streaming VCast nonsense. I suppose those days are gone.

I'd say get off my lawn, but functionality was lost (namely any lighting condition functionality) with the transition to color screens.


RE: performance question
By icanhascpu on 2/12/2010 4:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
A light?
Your lamp =! the sun.


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki