Apple let loose stream

New iPad Pro looks good. Though it would have been nice if they'd have given it a larger battery instead of making it thinner.
 
They compared the M4 to the M2 in the older iPad Pro. But I want to know how it compares to their M3! If you had a MacBook with the M2 and when the M3 came out it wasn't really much better for the price.
 
Airbrushkid said:
They compared the M4 to the M2 in the older iPad Pro. But I want to know how it compares to their M3! If you had a MacBook with the M2 and when the M3 came out it wasn't really much better for the price.
Click to expand...
They will probably cover that in the MacBook presentation next month, as there was no M3 in any of the iPads that would be a false equivalency.
 
Apple debuted its latest lineup of iPads during a virtual launch event on Tuesday...the new tablets include more powerful versions of the $999 11-inch and $1,299 13-inch iPad Pro outfitted with Apple's M4 chip and more vibrant OLED displays, and an upgraded iPad Air, which gets a 13-inch screen option to go along with the existing 11-inch version

The company also unveiled the latest version of its Apple Pencil stylus complete with a new haptic feedback feature and an updated Magic Keyboard case for the iPad Pro line

The new iPad Pros come equipped with Apple's new Ultra Retina XDR displays, which use OLED technology to improve overall color quality...Apple says the screens, its most advanced yet, use two OLED panels to form what the company calls its Tandem OLED panel...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/...any-looks-to-turn-around-sales-144325652.html
 
Airbrushkid said:
They compared the M4 to the M2 in the older iPad Pro. But I want to know how it compares to their M3! If you had a MacBook with the M2 and when the M3 came out it wasn't really much better for the price.
Click to expand...
They do this all the time to pump numbers. They use vague terms or make comparisons to ancient tech nobody cares about. "Faster than the most popular PC chip" is another stupid one. During their last M3 Mac event, they compared it to how much faster it is to their last Intel computer from 5 years ago. Nobody cares about that. They do this because the improvements are so marginal that it would be far less impressive to talk about.
 
kind of interested in the dual panel OLED tech.

is that coming to TV/PC screens? benefits? downsides?
 
DF-1 said:
kind of interested in the dual panel OLED tech.

is that coming to TV/PC screens? benefits? downsides?
Click to expand...
One of the benefits is a significantly brighter OLED. 1000 nits full screen brightness and 1600 nits for HDR. Also better performance at high refresh rates, which has been an issue for Apple displays, at least on the Mac. No idea what the downsides are yet. This will probably be coming to the upcoming MacBook Pros.
 
Could it fix the burn in issue ? with a dual panel (you just rotate on much each of them show the static element, no static element are ever more than just half bright now and can change a little bit all the time) ?
According to the computers:
  1. Burn-In in OLED Displays:
    • OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) displays are susceptible to burn-in, where static images or elements displayed for extended periods can cause permanent image retention.
    • Burn-in occurs when certain pixels degrade faster than others due to prolonged use, leading to visible ghost images.
  2. Dual-Panel OLED:
    • Dual-panel OLED technology involves using two separate OLED layers in a display.
    • The primary layer displays the content, while the secondary layer acts as a compensation layer.
    • The compensation layer helps mitigate burn-in by dynamically adjusting pixel brightness and distributing wear more evenly across the display.
    • It reduces the impact of static elements (like logos or UI elements) on the primary layer.
  3. Benefits of Dual-Panel OLED:
    • Reduced Burn-In Risk: By distributing wear across two layers, dual-panel OLEDs minimize the risk of permanent burn-in.
    • Extended Lifespan: The compensation layer helps maintain image quality over time, potentially extending the display’s lifespan.
    • Improved Uniformity: Dual panels contribute to more uniform brightness and color consistency.
  4. Limitations:
    • Complexity and Cost: Implementing dual-panel technology requires additional components and manufacturing complexity, which can increase production costs.
    • Not Perfect: While dual-panel OLEDs improve longevity, they may not completely eliminate burn-in. Some static elements can still cause image retention.
 
LukeTbk said:
Could it fix the burn in issue ? with a dual panel (you just rotate on much each of them show the static element, no static element are ever more than just half bright now and can change a little bit all the time) ?
According to the computers:
  1. Burn-In in OLED Displays:
    • OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) displays are susceptible to burn-in, where static images or elements displayed for extended periods can cause permanent image retention.
    • Burn-in occurs when certain pixels degrade faster than others due to prolonged use, leading to visible ghost images.
  2. Dual-Panel OLED:
    • Dual-panel OLED technology involves using two separate OLED layers in a display.
    • The primary layer displays the content, while the secondary layer acts as a compensation layer.
    • The compensation layer helps mitigate burn-in by dynamically adjusting pixel brightness and distributing wear more evenly across the display.
    • It reduces the impact of static elements (like logos or UI elements) on the primary layer.
  3. Benefits of Dual-Panel OLED:
    • Reduced Burn-In Risk: By distributing wear across two layers, dual-panel OLEDs minimize the risk of permanent burn-in.
    • Extended Lifespan: The compensation layer helps maintain image quality over time, potentially extending the display’s lifespan.
    • Improved Uniformity: Dual panels contribute to more uniform brightness and color consistency.
  4. Limitations:
    • Complexity and Cost: Implementing dual-panel technology requires additional components and manufacturing complexity, which can increase production costs.
    • Not Perfect: While dual-panel OLEDs improve longevity, they may not completely eliminate burn-in. Some static elements can still cause image retention.
Click to expand...
Burnin is never going away though, it's almost a non-issue because it is an unavoidable universal issue.
So OLEDs can have burn-in issues greatly reduced by lowering the brightness so if 2 screens running half as bright gives the same perceived effect it could greatly increase lifespan, but it won't remove the problem.
But it's not like using IPS, or QLED would make it go away, it just shifts the problem to another aspect of the screen.
Regarding the complication, it's not that much different, most display technologies you have two components, a backlight and a front-facing mask that filters that light into the colors that display. Both of those require connectors and data to be fed to them, running 2 OLEDs increases the amount of data but not necessarily the type of data, so it adds complexity to the physical display driver but not a large amount. An extra few pinouts may be all that is needed to deal with power delivery and timing differences, I believe Samsung has already done this work on the hardware side for their TV displays, however, I haven't heard of anybody using it in the mobile space.
It could reduce costs overall by allowing Apple to go with a large bulk order of displays that don't individually need to be as bright, so 2 screens each capable of 1000nits with an optimal output in the 600s very well could be cheaper than 1 capable of 2000 nits with an optimal 1200 nit output.

Apple is exceptionally good at finding ways to cut costs while increasing perceived quality, I do not doubt that they could order screens capable of upwards of 3000 nits that would do all the same things and allow them to use a single screen, but I also do not doubt that its cost would be at least double what Apple just threw together using OLED display pannels from 2022 with an updated physical driver chip.
 
Last edited:
Lakados said:
So OLEDs can have burn-in issues greatly reduced by lowering the brightness so if 2 screens running half as bright gives the same perceived effect it could greatly increase lifespan, but it won't remove the problem.
Click to expand...
What if it actively change from 0% to 50% with the other screen going 50% to 0% all the time under your normal not running blasting at 100% brightness setting, would it not make it almost nill ?
 
Last edited:
LukeTbk said:
What if it actively change from 0% to 50% with the other screen going 50% to 0% all the time under your normal not see at 100% brightness setting, would it not make it almost nill ?
Click to expand...
It might double or triple the lifespan but it won’t remove it completely, Apple only needed to find a way to extend the burn in problem outside of a usable device lifetime and longer than the Apple Care + covers. So if they can use cheaper screens and run them in tandem at 50% and that lets them make a 3-4 year problem a 7-10 year problem it’s effectively solved because at that stage it’s no longer Apple’s problem.

Recent advances in OLED screens allow for single displays with a peak of upwards of 3000 nits, running one of those at 40% as its maximum would still give an effective brightness higher than the Apple tandem solution with a normal operating brightness as low as 20%. That would likely both last longer and have the potential for far better HDR content down the road, but I doubt Apple wanted to pay that much for the screens.

Not riffing on Apple here, it’s a smart solution. It gives them something unique in the mobile space, that works as advertised, looks good while not being expensive to implement, and lets them solve the burnin issues using older technology so it keeps costs down and lets them scale up each year as newer screens become available at the prices they want.

But sadly nothing will solve burn in it will likely push it past the usable lifetime of the device, the question is how much did Apple scrimp on the display driver for this tandem screen and did they just push the failure point there instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top