You must log in or register to comment.

chrisdh79 OP t1_j7ggeo4 wrote

From the article: Apple plans to introduce new 13-inch MacBook Air, 11.1-inch iPad Pro, and 13-inch iPad Pro models with OLED displays in 2024, according to display industry analyst Ross Young, who has a proven track record with Apple rumors. Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo also expects the first MacBook with an OLED display to launch next year.

Young previously said the new MacBook Air and iPad Pro models would use "two-stack" OLED displays with two red, green, and blue emission layers for increased brightness. He also said all of the devices would support ProMotion for up to a 120Hz refresh rate.

All existing iPads and MacBooks are equipped with backlit LCD displays, whereas OLED displays have self-emitting pixels and do not require backlighting, allowing for higher contrast ratio, greater color accuracy, and lower power consumption. Apple already uses OLED displays for the latest Apple Watch and iPhone models, excluding the iPhone SE.

Meanwhile, the Apple Watch Ultra is expected to switch to a microLED display in 2024, and other Apple products will likely follow over the course of several years. microLED will be the next display technology that Apple adopts after OLED, paving the way for even higher contrast ratio, increased brightness, and lower power consumption.


cjblackbird t1_j7hbw1r wrote

I wish this thing would actually deserve the pro name.


robertjan88 t1_j7hcx6s wrote

Does this mean we finally get 10bit displays to include the device in 10bit workflows?


AadamAtomic t1_j7hkqrx wrote

>All existing iPads and MacBooks are equipped with backlit LCD displays, whereas OLED displays have self-emitting pixels and do not require backlighting, allowing for higher contrast ratio.

Welcome to 2015 Apple.

Edit: here's a cheap Samsung tablet with an AMOLED screen.

AMOLED and OLED have been the standard for a while, and about to move on to QLed...

APPLE only serves you the old crap. It's NEW to YOU.


kjlo5 t1_j7imz2n wrote

“QLED” is a backlit LCD technology. Not an improvement over OLED because it’s not using emissive pixels. “QD-OLED” and “Micro-LED” would be an upgrade to OLED and more of a direct comparison.

Apple holds several Micro-LED patents. I suspect they will have a competitive advantage in Micro-LED display tech once the world inevitably shifts to that technology as a replacement of OLED.


VincentNacon t1_j7jfjxz wrote

Cool... but now I want the microLED screens. 🤣


656666_ t1_j7jhq0e wrote

Apple used mini led as well, also the old amoled Samsungs where trash, burn in and shit. Also the iPhones have Oled. They are always a bit behind, that’s true. The Color of the first Samsung amoleds was HORRIBLE


AadamAtomic t1_j7ji9ec wrote

>QLED” is a backlit LCD technology

No it's not OLED is self lit, like pixel led lights.... LCD is "liquid crystal display" and needs back light shined onto it.

You are correct that Samsung has something even higher quality than that though, but it won't become standard for 10 years or so. It's not even on the main market yet.

Edit: backlit Screens can't fold and roll up like the new Phones, tablets and TV'S...... THEY ARE NOT BACKLIT BECAUSE THEY CAN DO ALL THESE THINGS.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jj19g wrote

>Apple used mini led as well

No they don't. All apple tablets use LCD displays manufactured by Samsung. (Hence the post.)

it even says this in the article, and why Apple is moving away from the LCD.


AvengedFADE t1_j7jlfkm wrote

This article makes some very heavy wrong implications.

LED TV’s only refer to the backlight, in fact, all TV’s marketed as LED’s are simply just LCD screen’s with LED backlights, instead of fluorescent backlights. This includes QLED display’s. LED and QLED TV’s are not “self emissive” where each pixel is it’s own light source, and these types of panels still require a separate light source. There are many different kinds of backlights found on these types of screens these days, including Edge Lit, FALD (Full-Array Local Dimming), and Mini-LED, are all different forms of backlighting technology, found in LED TV’s which use a Liquid Crystal Display.

OLED screens, on the other hand, are entirely “self emissive” where each individual pixel is it’s own light source, and can produce enough nits on its own to not require a backlight.

In practical terms an LED TV would mean each pixel is its own LED, but the industry at this point as I explained is only referring to the backlight technology of those LCD panels. The industry has coined an entirely different term for this kind of television, where each individual pixel is in fact, an LED, and capable of producing its own light.

This technology or panel type is known as “Micro-LED”, which is a very promising technology, however is still in the early “prototyping phase”. Displays can cost upwards of $100,000 USD currently, and are currently very large (over 100” for a 4K variant). They are currently now starting to produce sizes as small as 75”, but they are not 4K and close to HD/QHD. It will still be a while before you can purchase a 4K 60hz panel in a 65” at affordable prices.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jmmkt wrote

You are still wrong my Dude.

OLED TV's exist, they are just Super expensive, And why we aren't talking about TVs. Most people don't have an OLED TV.

OLED literally stands for "Organic Light Emitting Diodes."

That's how OLED TVs like this exist.

Where is the Back light at? lol

OLED TV's are literally just self lit screens with a silicone matrix board behind them encased in plastic.


moxTR t1_j7jpirk wrote

Micro LED is not OLED, it’s more comparable to mini LED but with individual pixel “zones”. Micro LED does not exist in the consumer space at this time. This level can be confusing, but you’re conflating a lot of the terms here. QD OLED is also distinct from QLED, the latter is not comparable to mini/micro LED or OLED technologies.


AvengedFADE t1_j7jqffp wrote

I have an OLED TV, I own an LG G2.

An organic LED, and a traditional LED (non-organic) are two very different things.

A QLED screen is just an LCD screen, with an LED backlight, as well as Quantum dots within the LCD panel. LED TV’s are not “self lit” as you so claim, and all LED TV’s still use a backlight, while the panel is either a VA or IPS LCD screen.

The only two TV technologies that are self emissive are OLED (including Samsung’s QD-OLED, RGB OLED with quantum dot layer, and LG’s WRGB OLED, OLED with extra white subpixel), and Micro-LED (uses regular LED’s and Gallium Nitirde, rather than traditional organic compounds which are carbon based that deteriorate with use).

Mini-LED, LED, QLED etc all still use LCD panels, and backlights, and because of that are obviously NOT self emissive.

OLED (QD-OLED & WRGB OLED) as well as Micro-LED, are the only two self emissive technologies.

OLED & LED are two very different technologies and light sources. The OP you were replying too has been correct this whole time, you were the only ones who has the wrong info.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jqgv0 wrote

"MINI LED^^backlite** DISPLAY! "

They use clever marketing to trick you. The LEDs that light up the LCD screen are mini... The LCD screen itself is not a mini LED screen..

The iPad Pro 12.9 uses bullshit words like " liquid retina XDR display" which is just fancy for saying, "Liquid Crystal half-assed Hdr Display. (LCD/LCxD)

Ipads and iphones still stuffer from Burn in like old ass TV's.

This is another reason Apple is changing their screens finally.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jr16d wrote

>Micro LED is not OLED

AMOLED IS NOT MICRO LED... What is your point and why bring up future tech completely unrelated?

>Micro LED does not exist in the consumer space at this time.

They exist in the Business space.

mLED is very new, and completely unrelated to this discussion. Apple and probably won't have mLED for the next 20 years that their current rate of adoption. Lol


moxTR t1_j7jr1nm wrote

I have no clue what you’re talking about. The page you’ve linked correctly states the 12.9 inch iPad Pro uses a mini LED display. Yes, it is backlit, that is a tenet of mini LED technology. All mini LED displays are backlit, that’s how it works.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jrlfj wrote

>LED TV’s are not “self lit” as you so claim

That's what I said...

Im well aware that Apple still uses LED in their tablets. That's what this entire post is about.

OLED and AMOLED are self lit, as I have been saying.

I understand that some TVs have a backlight assist for watching in direct sunlight, But completely transparent screens are only possible because of OLEDs.


AvengedFADE t1_j7js32s wrote

QLED” is a backlit LCD technology

“No it's not LED is self lit, like pixel led lights.... LCD is "liquid crystal display" and needs back light shined onto it.

You are correct that Samsung has something even higher quality than that though, but it won't become standard for 10 years or so. It's not even on the main market yet.”

That is your quote sir.

You literally tried to argue that LED TV are self lit (they are not, the LED is in the backlight only) and that QLED wasn’t backlit LCD technology. Samsung makes a load of QLED TV’s, which all have backlights (either Mini-LED, or FALD). Only QD-OLED, does not have a backlight (again QLED and QD-OLED are two very different technologies)

True TV’s that use self lit LED’s at the pixel level (self emissive) would be mLED or Micro LED (hence why it’s called micro LED), which doesn’t exist yet in consumer form. Organic LED’s are not the same as regular LED’s and are two very different kinds of lighting technologies.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jsfxp wrote

I meant to type OLED... You know, the thing that's being discussed? Like the last 2 comments you replied too?

You're basing your entire argument on a typo that's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

AMOLED is better than LED and LCD. THATS what is being discussed here.


AvengedFADE t1_j7jsz2x wrote

Man your the one who argued it, it’s not even a typo. You even presented a whole argument to the person you replied too.

Your confusing QLED and QD-OLED, that’s not a typo, your convoluting two different technologies as one..

QLED is backlit LCD technology, and your the one who wrote up a whole statement to the OP saying he was wrong. Currently there are no consumer self emissive LED TV’s, mLED is trying to change that (again an organic LED is not the same as traditional LED’s which use non-organic compounds). How is that not relevant to the conversation?

Edit: You can edit your comment and it’s still wrong, as the OP said QLED is just LCD with backlight, which it is.

Again QD-OLED, and QLED (which is what OP said), are two different things. QD-OLED doesn’t need a backlight (as OLED are self-emissive), but QLED’s do require a backlight, and are simply just LCD panels, with a QD layer and either FALD or Mini-LED backlighting.

He even said in the OP that QD-OLED is self emissive, you need to re-read the comment you responded too.


AadamAtomic t1_j7jt5uo wrote

>All mini LED displays are backlit, that’s how it works.

That's not how OLED or AMOLED screens work... You know? The things that are currently being discussed in this conversation.

Apple has shitty old Mini-LED tech for $1,

Why not get a brand new, top of the line AMOLED tablet with larger screen and more power for only $800?


AadamAtomic t1_j7jtu45 wrote

It's the Galaxy S8..... Not the A8...

I Just deleted a little bit of code at the end of the link which I think rerouted the link, it should show the correct tablet now.

Newest ipad= $1,200 for old ass Mini-LED.

SM Tablet from last year= $599 for an even bigger, better AMOLED display, expandable memory, and more powerful.


AvengedFADE t1_j7jtumt wrote

Dude you literally tried to dirty edit the comment, and make it seem like you weren’t wrong, but it still makes you wrong.

The OP you responded too was talking about Quantum Dots.

“QLED is a backlit LCD technology” is correct, no matter how much you try to edit or sugar coat it. You literally said “no it’s not.” The very person you responded too was talking about Quantum Dots, so I guess your wrong again.


AadamAtomic t1_j7ju79w wrote

PPI is literally the quality of the display.

Apple displays are not True definition and use software upscaling to make it look good on screen.

This is why iPhone photos look great on other iPhones but look kind of shitty when posted online or viewed on a computer. (Comparatively to other cameras)

This is also why images received from Android users look like shit on iPhone screens, and the iPhone users simply think Android phones send bad photos ironically. Lol


AadamAtomic t1_j7jvb5t wrote

>PPI is the relationship between resolution and screen size.

CORRECT! Together they both make "quality".

This circles back to my previous comment about Apple having weird ass displays and having them downscale their images with the iOS software!

This has been common knowledge for a Long time.


Mattcheco t1_j7jzmj6 wrote

Fidelity is what you’re looking for. Not a fan of Apple but their “weird ass displays” is a feature not a bug. It means you get very acceptable PPI without the bullshit advertising around resolution. See 4k phones etc etc.


AadamAtomic t1_j7k11h8 wrote


>QLED’s are Quantum dot displays.

You can't even keep up with your own comments, I don't expect you to keep up with what I'm telling you.

No one is talking about QD other than you. I don't even know why you brought it into the conversation unless you just want to make an example of more technology Apple won't have.


AvengedFADE t1_j7k1m44 wrote

QD OLED’s are also quantum dot displays, QLED’s are also quantum dot display.

QLED’s are LCD panels with a quantum dot substrate, and an LED backlights (either FALD or mini-LED).

To quote PC mag definition “QLED (Quantum dot LED): A display technology that uses phosphorescent crystals to improve the LED backlight on an LCD TV.

QD OLED, are OLED panels, with a quantum dot substrate applied. The OLED transistors are capable of their own light (blue light), and hence do not require a backlight, and the QD are what create the red and green light.

Pc mag definition “QD-OLED (Quantum Dot OLED): An OLED display technology that uses quantum dots as the color creators. When the blue backlight hits the red and green quantum dot subpixels, red and green are generated. Because blue is the backlight, it serves as the blue subpixel. See quantum dot.

QD OLED, and QLED are two different display technologies entirely. However Quantum Dots themselves can be applied to more than one screen technology, both LED/LCD TV’s and OLED’s can benefit from this technology, and does not refer to the panel type itself. It is simply a coating.

If your thinking of TV’s which use the quantum dots themselves as a light source (no need for OLED’s, LED’s, LCD’s or a backlight entirely), these are known as NanoLED, or EL-QDLED (Electroluminescent Quantum Dot LED) named after the creator of the company who makes Quantum Dots, Nanosys.

It’s truly hard to keep up with your lack of knowledge on this subject to be completely frank.


AadamAtomic t1_j7k1qq4 wrote

I know what Quantum dot displays are.

I'm saying they're completely irrelevant to this conversation and your entire argument based on irrelevant information.

You want to talk about quantum physics while we're here too?

Nothing you have said has anything to do with AMOLED or mini-LED BEING USED IN TABLETS.


AvengedFADE t1_j7k23vf wrote

It’s not irrelevant to the conversation, when your the one who tried arguing it in the first place. Like I’m not an expert in quantum physics, but we’re talking about TV’s here man, hardly a complex subject, but you tried to come out like an expert, and then argued this

OP - “QLED” is a backlit LCD technology (True)

AadamAtonic - “No it's not LED is self lit, like pixel led lights.... (False when talking about TV’s/display technologies). LCD is "liquid crystal display" and needs back light shined onto it.

You are correct that Samsung has something even higher quality than that though, but it won't become standard for 10 years or so. It's not even on the main market yet.”

That was wrong bro, just admit it. Even changing your sentence to OLED from LED still makes it wrong.


BKachur t1_j7l8v57 wrote

Power has never been the issue. Even the old ipad air is plenty fast to act as a laptop replacement. Its the limitations imposed by ios, which, no matter how hard they try to advertise otherwise, just cannot replace a desktop experience.

I'm a lawyer, so my workflow is pretty simple... lots of emails, research in browser light office use, and adobe acrobat for PDFs. I made the mistake of going out of town for a few days and leaving my laptop at home, and ios was just a nightmare. I was able to scrape by, but it was unbelievable how much shittier the mobile version of everything was. I can't even put a simple jpeg in a signature block. Mobile MS Word couldn't properly load my letterhead without completely fucking up the margins, making it unreadable. Even the "Pro" version acrobat couldn't reorder pages. Just insanity.


BKachur t1_j7lac9m wrote

No... A laptop with a touchpad (like my dell xps) lacks a lot of utility from the tablet form factor, particularly when it comes to media consumption or (for my workflow) when I use the ipad and pencil as a notepad. I don't want laptop with a touch pad, I want an Ipad I can use like a real computer when I need to do work.

I don't see why we can't just dual boot into ios or mac OS... They sell a super nice keyboard and if you pair that with a BT mouse, its a laptop. But Ios keeps it from being actually useful.

I get it... they want to make money on my twice, but its just ending up with a shitter total product, because now I need to carry around two devices.


SOSpammy t1_j7ldb69 wrote

The iPad really does feel like it could replace your computer 95% of the time. It's that 5% where you run into one of its arbitrary limitations that reminds you of all it's lacking.


BKachur t1_j7lodn6 wrote

Totally... but its worse than that for. It not just that 5% that ends up killing the experience (although it totally does), its that simple shit takes way longer and is way more cumbersome on ios, which really drags down the whole experience to the point I don't want to use it.

For example, I often have to attach pages from documents I reference to the end of a letter. It is a goddamn nightmare to print pages 8-12 of a twenty-page document and then merge that with another or two other pdfs. I tried to do this on my iPad and it took like 20 min of research, 10 min of messing with the os until I finally pulled it off.

In Windows or mac OS, this is a drag-and-drop operation that takes 15 seconds, but with iOS it takes like 10 times longer, even when I know what to do.

IDK... I'm just mad because it could be perfect. A simple dual-boot option would solve all of these problems, and the only reason we don't have it is that apple thinks they can churn 1~2.5k out of you for a MacBook air or pro. I don't even need touch control in Mac OS because the only reason I'm end up booting into mac OS is when I need to get work done, so I'll have a mouse and keyboard handy. Not that I even need a mouse because apple has a touchpad in their overpriced keyboard.

I'm being a broken record here, but the work's already been done... Apple sells a macos laptop that a keyboard, screen, and touch pad. The iPad has a screen, touchpad and keyboard, what the problem here?


SOSpammy t1_j7mjz1e wrote

That's what I'm saying. It'll do 95% of what a vast majority of people need a computer to do most of the time. But most people will need their computer do something the iPad won't let them do on that rare occasion, shattering that illusion that it's a full replacement for a computer.


SOSpammy t1_j7mnti5 wrote

Apple has kept the iPad limited because they want people to buy both a Mac and an iPad, but with iPad sales declining and Mac sales going up it seems to me they miscalculated. A lot of people were buying iPads despite their limitations because of their speed, battery life, light weight, and great thermals compared to a traditional laptop. But M1 Macbooks basically negated those advantages.


BKachur t1_j7n4dcv wrote

Yea, that's obvious, it's just frustrating because if it was available I'd buy a 13 inch iPad with Mac os in a second... I wouldn't even care how expensive it is. It would instantly become my primary laptop. I tablet mode for consumption and note taking... Mac is for real work it would be prefect.