
Google offers at least $880M to LG display for OLED investment - jbuzbee
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-lg-display-idUSKBN17C00M?il=0
======
nathan_f77
For the last 10 years or so, whenever I wander around a store and see all the
latest stereos and TVs, I'm never very impressed by anything. TVs got thinner
and flatter, and then they were curved, which I just think is just a gimmick.

But recently I saw a 4K OLED TV from Samsung, and it stopped me in my tracks.
Actually on two different occasions. I've never seen colors or pure black like
that, and the clarity is just stunning. Anyway, this is just the first time
I've ever felt the desire to save up and buy a new TV.

It would be nice if Apple started using OLED displays in iPhones, but I don't
care so much about that. My iPhone 6S screen looks fine to me, and I don't
feel any need to upgrade.

~~~
davnn
> It would be nice if Apple started using OLED displays in iPhones, but I
> don't care so much about that. My iPhone 6S screen looks fine to me, and I
> don't feel any need to upgrade.

It's a shame. My iPhones still feel like a downgrade from my years old Note 3
(display-wise).

~~~
runeks
I've only tried the OLED display on a Samsung Galaxy S3, and while the colors
were nice it was almost unusable in direct sunlight, due to the low brightness
of the display. I was happy to upgrade to an iPhone 6, and regain the ability
to use my phone in the sun.

~~~
andoon
Not only that, but OLED screens have perceptible low response times and burn-
in (my old S3 screen has the Candy Crush UI burned in, and is also yellowish
because blue LEDs burn in faster than green/red ones).

That said I suppose newer OLED screens do not have as many problems, but for a
long time OLED screens were inferior to LCD screens, and were used only
because they were capable of higher contrast ratios which made them much more
appealing to the eye.

~~~
dep_b
Perhaps it's typical for the sell and forget mentality of many Android
manufacturers that phones are made to look as appealing as possible when in a
display next to other phones but once the sale is over the love is usually
gone. So a display that is super colorful in the beginning and yellow after a
few months apparently for some manufacturers is no problem at all.

Lots of expensive looking big midrange phones suffer from this when I see
people using phones in bars or public transport.

------
Sephr
I'm not sure that this is the best move in the long term. Mass produced phone-
sized MicroLED screens should be ready by 2019, and MicroLED can be up to
twice as efficient per lumen compared to OLED.

A large purchase of Samsung OLED displays would be a much more sensible move
than an investment in manufacturing for a display tech which may not be around
for long.

One explanation could be of necessity. Perhaps Google initially wanted to make
a large purchase of Samsung or LG OLEDs, but neither may have the production
capacity to fulfill the order. Samsung is already making 70-92 million OLED
displays for a recent Apple order, and LG probably doesn't have the needed
production capacity that Samsung already has at scale.

~~~
r00fus
If your reasoning (necessity) is on mark, I wonder if this is evidence of the
monopsonistic jiu-jitsu that Apple is famous for.

Supply-chain dominance wielded as a weapon.

------
linuxkerneldev
I can understand why they chose OLED to invest in. But I think longer term,
due to the low power characteristic electrophoretic or interferometric would
be much more exciting for mobile displays. I'm still waiting on the roll-able
E-Ink display we were promised in 2013.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94Ifhuc2bbQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94Ifhuc2bbQ)

------
taf2
We should finally start to see OLED become mass market - the last patent is
set to expire this year .
[https://www.thestreet.com/story/13398746/1/universal-
display...](https://www.thestreet.com/story/13398746/1/universal-display-oled-
stock-declined-on-patent-expiration-warning.html)

------
itchyjunk
$880M is a huge number, isn't it? Can this number suggest how many phones
Google is aiming for? Or is this number too big for just phones and suggest
google has some other product up its sleeve?

~~~
megablast
It looks like Google is really going out with the Pixel line. There has been
so much advertising for this product. And they seem to be selling, with some
people having trouble getting out.

Of course, numbers out suggest they might have sold around 2 million, which
isn't that many, but still a step above Nexus, probably.

~~~
fahadkhan
And the margins on Pixel must be huge.

------
jtl999
I hope future OLED displays don't have PWM flickering. Such a negative
crippling an otherwise great technology.

~~~
microcolonel
How slow do these oscillators run? It seems like that would be masked by
persistence of vision prettymuch anywhere above 90Hz.

~~~
kuschku
After testing with (larger, but still OLED) LEDs I've got here, it seems to be
far higher.

In my projects, for any frequency above 800Hz flickering wasn't observable,
but still created nausea and headaches. Above 8000Hz nausea and headaches were
gone.

~~~
bsder
Please specify what you are measuring, because the frequencies you are quoting
are _far_ outside human perception limits. These also don't match the numbers
being quoted by the VR guys.

I'm _extremely_ sensitive to refresh rates. I used to have two gigantic
ViewSonic CRT monitors on my desk along with special Matrox video cards so
that I could have high refresh rates.

60Hz gave me whacking migraines. 72Hz was fatiguing but didn't give me
migraines. 80Hz+ and I was just fine.

I haven't had a migraine due to refresh rates on digital displays ever. Not
even for incredibly slow displays.

~~~
jfim
Keep in mind that LEDs and CRTs are two completely different things. CRTs have
"phosphor decay," where a pixel hit by the electron beam will gradually turn
on and fade out over time until being refreshed again. For LEDs, they're
normally operated using a PWM; turn them off (0% brightness) and back on (100%
brightness) fast enough and people don't really notice that instead of 50%
constant brightness, they're getting 0%, 100%, 0%, 100% ... with a duty cycle
of 50%.

You can see that even with LCD monitors. LCD monitors with a LED backlight
will have a display refresh (ie. how often the pixels can change color) of,
say, 60 Hz but the LED backlight might be run at 4 to 8 KHz (ie. how often the
whole backlight turns on and off to give different brightness levels).

------
zitterbewegung
How long until Apple buys a panel maker so that they can vertically integrate
every part ? This investment by google seems poised to if it goes well for
google to work closer so that they might acquire a piece .

~~~
tedd4u
Great question. You may already know that Apple has a long history of locking
up LCD production capacity.

'After Apple's Q1 earnings call in January, Apple COO Tim Cook told the press
and analysts that the company had entered a $3.9 billion component supply deal
in a key area that was "an absolutely fantastic use of Apple’s cash". Many
speculated that, after flash storage supply deals and agreements, Apple
identified high-resolution LCD displays as a key factor to iOS' devices
manufacturing process. Back then, speculation and Tim Cook's own words
suggested that Apple had entered a deal with three manufacturers, including
Toshiba and Sharp. A month before the the Q1 financial results, Apple was
indeed rumored to be discussing with Toshiba an investment in a new $1.19
billion factory -- the same that Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun is mentioning today. But
at the same time, several reports suggested that Apple was also considering a
second investment in a $1.2 billion facility from Sharp -- with over $60
billion in cash, a double investment in LCD manufacturing wouldn't have
surprised anyone. But today's report seems to confirm that the deal with Sharp
hasn't gone through, implying that Toshiba has been chosen as the only
Japanese manufacturer of iPhone LCD screens.'

From: [https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-investing-in-
toshibas-...](https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-investing-in-toshibas-new-
plant-for-iphone-displays/)

~~~
npunt
Yep, and its not just LCDs, these deals happen with many of their suppliers.
Business-wise its often much better to do so than buy them outright, because
you avoid the risk of owning the wrong tech in a fast-changing technology
environment. Just finance or invest in some facilities that make the parts you
need now, and leave the long term business risk to the suppliers.

Unless there's some groundbreaking tech that is a key differentiator for Apple
(e.g. CPU/GPU), its better to NOT vertically integrate.

~~~
tedd4u
Best-in-class or near best displays are supporting and necessary but not
sufficient for Apple. So acquisition doesn't make sense. The money is to
guarantee supply for their huge product volumes and also sometimes a
competitive measure to lock up supply so competitors can't get at it.

On the other hand, I would not expect Apple to farm out their software, OS,
marketing, industrial design any time soon. Unlike the supporting value of
LCDs these are all differentiators.

------
thought_alarm
Curvy OLED displays are neat, but it ultimately doesn't mean anything,

It's crazy that Google isn't investing that money in software. Unless it's a
hedge.

