LG Aims To Beat Apple's Retina Display

angry tapir writes "LG Display has introduced a 5-inch full HD LCD panel for smartphone displays — the highest resolution mobile panel to date. The widescreen panel is based on AH-IPS (Advanced High Performance In-Plane Switching) technology and has a 1920-by-1080 pixel resolution or 440 pixels per inch (ppi), according to LG. That compares well to Apple's Retina display, which has 264 ppi on the new iPad and 326 ppi on the iPhone 4S."

Comments

Cool tech, but

[93 Escort Wagon]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve - what's more resolution going to get you?

Re:Cool tech, but

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry I couldn't read your comment, can you increase the font size.

Re:Cool tech, but

[dgatwood]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve - what's more resolution going to get you?

Bigger numbers. Also, it is beyond the resolution that the human eye can resolve at a typical usage distance. That doesn't necessarily mean that you can't see the difference if you're holding it wrong.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Spaseboy]

Apple locks up component supplies by negotiating massive amounts, this has been known for years. The retina displays may be available to other manufacturers, but most likely not until 2015 or so

Re:Cool tech, but

[PCM2]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve - what's more resolution going to get you?

Single-pixel tracking GIFs that are only visible under a scanning electron microscope.

Re:Cool tech, but

[SQL Error]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve - what's more resolution going to get you?

You want the pixels to be smaller than the eye can resolve so that you can stop futzing around with anti-aliasing. That's why decent printers are 1200 dpi or more.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Anonymous Coward]

HTC Rezound, 4.3" and 720p display which came out like 6 months ago, among others of course...or just go back to reading Apple news and how all their stuff is the bestest evers

Re:Cool tech, but

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

1a) Yes its a spec
1b) Yes Android Manufactorers compete on specs
1c) No, some bigger specs do make better phones within reason. I'd gladdly take a 4 inch screen over a 3 inch. I'd gladdly take two cores for one. Apple increases specs ever version of the iphone, that doesn't make them idiots, does it?
2) No, Competition is fierce, so they must make a better product. Why is that a bad thing? The phone will be foreced to be sold at the same price point as last years best phone due to competition. Who loses in that scenario? Not the consumer.

Re:Cool tech, but

[xevioso]

This makes no sense. Silly foreigners have no idea how to tell a fat joke. The fat joke you just told has nothing to do with how fat a person is, and is merely a thinly veiled attempt at racism.

A proper fat joke would be something along the lines of "You are so fat, I swerved to avoid you while I was driving, but I ran out of gas."

Re:Cool tech, but

[sootman]

You beat me to it. What we need is a chart like this but for handhelds. Then, print it out, wrap it around a 2x4, and smack OEM presidents in the head with it until they quit making tiny screens better and start shipping a goddamn laptop screen at something better than 1366x768.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Fluffeh]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve - what's more resolution going to get you?

The Apple display is "Beyond what the human eye can resolve" while holding it at a certain distance. That means if you hold it closer, you will start to see the pixels. This makes the LG display able to be held closer to the eyes while still not being able to see the pixels. Does it mean much for the average user who always holds their phone at a distance of two feet from their eyes? Nope, but it is still bragging rights.
 
/Rant/
Now if only the folks that make monitors started playing this game, I would finally be able to get a monitor that has a higher resolution than my phone. Seriously, what's with the huge drop in screen resolution on both laptops (unless you buy the $5k model) and run-of-the-mill desktop screens? 1366x768? The nineties called, (Yes, I did warn them about the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan) they want their resolution back!

Re:Cool tech, but

[oxdas]

Nearly all the current retina displays are made by Samsung (with a small percentage made by Sharp). Do you really believe that Samsung (which shipped nearly 25% more smartphones than Apple last quarter) could not simply switch to the display they sell to Apple if they so chose? Samsung has chosen to go with their AMOLED displays because they offer more contrast and lower power consumption than the "retina display." AMOLED displays currently can not be produced at the pixel density desired by Apple, however, so Samsung is using more conventional technology on the display they sell to Apple.

Re:Cool tech, but

[mdmkolbe]

If the Apple Retina display is already beyond the point a human eye can resolve

Sort answer: It isn't beyond the point a human eye can resolve if by that we mean the resolution beyond which there is no perceptable improvement.

Long answer: Apple's display has pixels that are 1 minute of arc in size when the screen is held 18 inches from the eye. Apple's marketing would like you to believe that 1 minute of arc is is the limit of the human eye, but that isn't quite true.

First, the pixels are rectangular and the 1 minute of arc was only on the sort side of the rectangle (at least when they first came out, they may have improved the specs).

Second, if you hold the screen closer than 18 inches (which I think most people do), the pixels are larger than 1 minute of arc.

Third and most importantly, the 1 minute of arc number is determined by how small the parts of a capital letter "E" can be for a person with 20/20 vision to determine what letter it is. (The entire "E" is 5 minutes of arc tall.) For other tasks (e.g. determining if two lines are parallel or where the point of a thin wedge ends), humans can detect features 10 or more (100?) times smaller than 1 minute of arc. Aliasing is easily detectable at 1 minute of arc given the right conditions.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this where I brag about my U820 (5.6" netbook screen, 1280x800) and my self-upgraded Thinkpad T51 (15" laptop screen, 2048x1536) and my T221 (22" desktop screen, 3840x2400)?

No, no, this is where I say... How in hell can you blame them for selling WHAT EVERYONE BUYS; every time they offer an ultrafine display (like the three I listed), it makes very few sales, because ALMOST NOBODY will actually pay a premium for better displays. Unless and until Apple, or someone equally awesome at marketing, tells them they need it.

Re:Cool tech, but

[squiggleslash]

Here's an idea, rather than letting the manufacturers get away with making the dick waving contest be about screen resolution, why not force them to fix the fucking smartphone battery life problem?

Re:Cool tech, but

[Anonymous Coward]

BS Inkjet printers, which by definition can never be decent printers, have resolutions that high because they have to create dither patterns to make most colors. A good dye sublimation printer produces images which are substantially better, and dye sub printers are generally 300 dpi. The best photographic-process printers might be capable of slightly higher resolution (perhaps 600 dpi), but most of those also produce 300 dpi. It is considered photographic quality for the purposes of human perception. Actual photographic processes produce film image resolutions that can't really be matched by printers at all, and standard prints generally produce images that match the level of detail around 300 dpi.

Re:Cool tech, but

[mug funky]

a name like that doesn't bode well for it's autocorrect capabilities.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Darinbob]

You need one of those magnifying glasses from Brazil that you put in front of the screen.

Re:Cool tech, but

[MobyDisk]

That's why decent printers are 1200 dpi or more.

Actually, printers are 1200 dpi because they need to dither. You can print a perfect photo at 150 - 300 dpi if you don't dither. (Like dye-sub printers do).

Re:Cool tech, but

[oxdas]

Apple paid them less than $8 billion in total revenue last year (less than $6 billion by some accounts). This was in their low margin components business as well. Samsung Electronics division made more than $140 billion in revenue and more than 70% of their profits came from their own phones and tablets. The takeaway here is that Apple accounts for less than 6% of Samsung's Electronics revenue and less than that of their profits.

Samsung Mobile Display is still a integral part of Samsung. It is 100% owned by Samsung Electronics and Samsung SDI. Samsung uses a complex circular ownership structure so the company at the top of the pyramid, Samsung Everland, can retain control of the entire company despite only owning a small piece. Either directly, or through Samsung Everland, Lee Gun Hee owns the majority stake in Samsung Life (and other subsidiaries), which in turn own the majority stake in Samsung Electronics (with other Samsung companies owning pieces as well). The company is firmly in the control of Lee Gun Hee and this family. I suggest you read up on the "jaebol" system in order to understand Samsung better. That is not to say that Samsung Mobile Display (or its parent Samsung Electronics) cannot push their own direction, but ultimately all these pieces must answer to same people.

I agree with your argument about sunk costs, but I can't seem to find anything to back up the claim that Samsung receives "massive subsidies" from Apple. In addition, because Samsung is not using the same technology in Apple's displays, it weakens the argument that Apple's volumes drastically decrease Samsung's costs in their own products.

Re:Cool tech, but

[oxdas]

"Retina Display" is not a type of display, it is a marketing term for a dense pixel display. While LG has made dense pixel display's for the iPhone, they do not appear on the iPad3, marketed under the name "Retina Display." I responded to a claim that Apple had somehow locked up the supply of "Retina Displays," which seems to me to be demonstrably false.

Re:Cool tech, but

[jbolden]

There are phones with excellent battery life:

1 Motorola Droid Razr Maxx 19.78
2 Apple iPhone 4 (with 3G off) 14.55
3 Apple iPhone 3GS (with 3G off) 13.4
4 HTC Legend 12.75
5 RIM BlackBerry Curve 9360 12

Re:Cool tech, but

[Svartormr]

Until those battery lives are measured in days and not hours, there's still a lot of work to be done.

Re:Cool tech, but

[Joce640k]

My Android phone lasts a week with light use, 12 days if it's just in standby. I can drain it in a couple of hours if I turn everything on (eg. GPS navigation).

The worst culprit for draining the battery was the screen auto-rotate. You'd think they'd turn it off when it's in standby, but, nooooo....

Re:Cool tech, but

[psiclops]

You get 6 hours out of a +1GHz multicore computer with +1GB of RAM and a screen bright enough to overpower the sun? I completely fail to see how battery life needs addressing.

He gets 6 hours use out of a device that would be a lot more useful to him if it had longer battery life. As it would be a better device with longer battery life then battery life is something to be addressed.

Increasing display will further reduce battery life (possibly quite drastically) while probably providing zero benefit as human eyes are unlikely to be able to discern the difference.

Re:Cool tech, but

[coinreturn]

no.. it's like buying a sports car to drive down your 200ft driveway and get your mail. if you're going to use car analogies, at least have them make sense.

Why is it called a driveway if you are using it as a parking lot?

I'm so tired of this particular "observational" humor, that I will explain.

There are two ways to your house: the WALKWAY (you walk to your house) and the DRIVEWAY (you drive to your house) Simple enough for you?

And while I'm at it, the PARKWAY is typically called that because it goes through a PARK (or once did), not because you park your car there.

Re:Cool tech, but

[organgtool]

Until those battery lives are measured in days and not hours, there's still a lot of work to be done.

1 Motorola Droid Razr Maxx 0.82 days
2 Apple iPhone 4 (with 3G off) 0.61 days
3 Apple iPhone 3GS (with 3G off) 0.56 days
4 HTC Legend 0.53 days
5 RIM BlackBerry Curve 9360 0.5 days

Better?

Apple's display?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple doesn't make their own displays.

Re:Apple's display?

[oxdas]

Apple only details specs, they do not design displays. The specs for the displays (size, pixel density, contrast, etc.) are sent to various manufacturers who design a display to meet the specs and submit examples to Apple. Apple then chooses displays that meet their targets and places orders. For the "retina display", only one company could originally meet all the requirements set by Apple, Samsung. Since then Sharp has also met their specs and will make some displays. LG is still trying to meets Apple's quality requirements. The result of this is that the vast majority of the "retina displays" were made by Samsung.

finally the war i wanted.

[musikit]

pixel density. it will be heaven to have clean graphics and now that portables get higher resolutions then desktops, people will start asking why. only thing i ask is more antiglare displays.

What about laptops?

[torkus]

Seriously, phones and tablets are getting ~1080P screens but most of the laptops on the market are stuck with the crappy 1366x768 even though they're MUCH larger and it would make a visible and FUNCTIONAL difference.

Re:What about laptops?

[DarwinSurvivor]

Yep, when your $600 phone has twice as many pixels as your $1500 laptop, something has most definitely gone terribly wrong.

Re:What about laptops?

[adisakp]

Seriously, phones and tablets are getting ~1080P screens but most of the laptops on the market are stuck with the crappy 1366x768 even though they're MUCH larger and it would make a visible and FUNCTIONAL difference.

I'd like to see larger resolutions on desktop LCD Panels as well. You used to be able to get 1600X1200 21" 4:3 monitors everywhere. Now nearly all consumer grade LCD's are 1920X1080 / 16:9. For coders that's a bad thing to lose 120 vertical pixels (it's probably 6-10 lines less code you can see).

An iPad can do on 2048x1536 on 1 9.7" display. It's sad when you get 50% more pixels in the short dimension on a tablet with a screen 1/2 as big.

but all I want is an upgraded screen!

[Chirs]

I don't care about the rest. An i3 is fine for a cpu, I only need a couple gig of RAM. A full 1900x1200 screen would be awesome though, and currently there are only two laptops on the planet that I know of that still have them available.

Re:Yes, because we need more pixels we can't see!

[mark-t]

20/20 vision acuity can actually perceive something as small as roughly 30 microns across when it is only 12 inches away. That is roughly half the size of the pixels on the Retina display. In practice, the eye can discern even smaller variations than this, however... and so a pixel spacing of 15 microns or better is required to surpass the nyquist limit in any case where adjacent pixels can have potentially very high contrast. To cover all cases, including being equal to what even people with superior vision can detect, the Retina display should increase its resolution by a factor of about 5.

Cycles per degree

[tepples]

A "degree" is a unit of angle equal to 1/360 of a circle; an arc one degree long is about 1/57.3 of the distance from the eye. If a display is held 12 inches from the eyes, one degree is about 0.21 inch. This means the angular density of a 326 dpi display is 68 pixels per degree.

A "cycle" is a white pixel next to a black pixel, and thus a run of 50 cycles is 100 pixels. That's a bit more than 68, but then 100 pixels assumes "excellent acuity" at "maximum theoretical" conditions.

Code name 11

[Grayhand]

Apple's response was to announce the new iPhone 5 would include speakers that produce sounds only a dog can hear.