Samsung's 'Unbreakable' OLED Display Gets Certified (theverge.com) 68
Samsung Display, a subsidiary of Samsung Electronics, just introduced a flexible OLED panel that has a transparent plastic cover already attached, emulating the properties of glass but retaining the screen's innate flexibility. The screen is so durability that it's been certified by UL (formerly known as Underwriters Laboratories). The Verge reports: Samsung, describing the new panel as unbreakable, reports that it has withstood UL's military-standards tests of 26 successive drops from a height of 1.2 meters (close to 4 feet) as well as extreme temperatures as high as 71 degrees Celsius (159.8 degrees Fahrenheit) and as low as -32 degrees Celsius (-25.6 degrees Fahrenheit). The OLED display "continued to function normally with no damage to its front, sides, or edges," we're told, and Samsung even went further by performing a successful drop test from 1.8 meters (6 feet).
The screen is so durability (Score:2, Informative)
The Queen called. She wants her language back.
Re: (Score:1)
"Well, the Jerk Store called, and they're running out of you." - George
Re: (Score:2)
A circle is a sequence of straight lines. At least for my CNC it is.
Re: (Score:1)
The Queen called. She wants her language back.
China called. They shot that translator.
Is this considered... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung screens are great. They make the best screens.
But gawd no their phones.... stupid exploding phones....
Get a Nexus...
Funnily, the only Nexus phones that I love is the Galaxy Nexus, by Samsung
Anyway, perhaps you mean "Get a Pixel"?
Have they also invented an OLED screen... (Score:5, Interesting)
.... whose display quality doesn't become lousy after 6-12 months of usage? [allaboutwindowsphone.com] (Check out the pictures between the phone that had been used regularly and the one that had almost never been used)
I've seen this over and over and over again. I'm never buying any sort of OLED phone until either they can get degradation under control, or they've literally driven LCD phones off the market.
Re: (Score:2)
If you use your phone 16/7 then OLED is probably a bad choice, not because the screen become very degraded but due to the uneven degradation mentioned in that article. Most people don't use their screens at maximum brightness and have the screen off most of the day and then OLED is a reasonable choice.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I recently bought an Amazon Fire HD 10, and was immediately disappointed by the image quality. It looks like crap compared to the OLED screen, especially when displaying dark scenes. I w
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe, if I could see the image on the screen past all of the burnt in TV station logos, the sunlight, the (unevenly) faded colours and the screen constantly fidgeting around to try to prevent burn in.
I think I'll stick with my LCDs as they last practically forever and if the backlight ever does wear out, I can easily replace it.
Re: (Score:1)
Yet it's still hard to go back to LCD once you're used to OLED. My Galaxy S2 had some noticable burn-in after 2 years, all other phones after that fared much better though. Current S8 of 1.5yrs looks like new and watching netflix/plex on it is nothing short of amazing.
Re: (Score:1)
.... whose display quality doesn't become lousy after 6-12 months of usage?
Yes, basically all of them other than the pieces of shit listed in the article and that crappy Pixel thing Google released.
Though my Galaxy S4 is showing very minor signs of burn-in after 5 years.
Scratch resistance? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they didn't put any cover at all on it, it should also have the same unbreakable properties. Or if the screen cover were just cellophane or plexiglass. Glass is used in large part because it is scratch resistant, chemical resistant, and it can be thin for less optical distortion. I've heard nothing about it's other relevant properties.
Re: (Score:3)
Real world tests (Score:3)
Let's see how well it survives such drops once it's attached to a non-flexible and heavier phone.
Real world tests+ (Score:2)
Let's see how well it survives such drops once it's attached to a non-flexible and heavier phone
Let's see how well it survives a battery explosion.
Re: (Score:2)
You beat me to it. A beetle (the insect) thrown from a tall building survives, a beetle glued to a rock will not.
Re:Real world tests (Score:4, Funny)
What do you mean? African or European beetle?
Re: (Score:2)
If only I had a mod point for you sir! Well done, well done.
Re: (Score:1)
Let's see if it survives a month in my daughter's hands. (Or, actually, slipping out of them.)
Re: (Score:2)
Youtube sales (Score:3)
Market experts expect that 60% of sales will come from video makers on youtube, responding to claims of unbreakability.
Ryan Fenton
You have never heard of a nail? (Score:2)
For someone with such a hammer fetish, I'm surprised you've never heard of a nail. Hammers only break nails when they are thumbnails.
Take a hammer and a hacksaw to my wedding ring and you'll just ruin your hacksaw and put a dent in the table.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't even need the bullet from a firearm or gun, you can use those things as hammers too!
Why such a short drop test if unbreakable? (Score:2)
Drop it so it reaches terminal velocity onto a diamond surface (it's hard). Hit it with a sledgehammer. Run over it with a really big thing. I love how they use the term unbreakable in quotes. It's like using the phrase "almost definitely"...
Re: (Score:2)
"All you can eat".
"Unlimited" bandwidth.
"Unbreakable" displays.
Freakin' sharks with "lasers".
Hopefully (Score:3)
Hopefully this “unbreakable” thing will turn out better for them than it did for Oracle.
military spec is only down to -32C? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's very rare when it's -32C or below in Montreal. Last winter, the coldest temperature was on January 14 with -27C.
Since 1941, there was a total of 8 days with -32C or below (Dorval airport) :
Jan 15, 1957 with -37.8
Jan 4, 1981 with -35.2
Feb 15, 1943 with -33.9
Jan 3, 1981 with -33.5
Feb 16, 1943 with -33.3
Dec 25, 1980 with -32.4
Dec 20, 1942 with -32.2
Feb 10, 1951 with -32.2
Re: (Score:2)
Another poster mentioned mil-spec as -55 which makes more s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't expect to be fighting a war in Montreal any time soon. I think the military is OK.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.theglobeandmail.co... [theglobeandmail.com]
https://www.theglobeandmail.co... [theglobeandmail.com]
http://thehill.com/opinion/nat... [thehill.com]
Weight (Score:1)
About as unbreakable (Score:2)
... as my internet is unlimited.
Scratchable (Score:2)
>"The screen is so durability [sic] that it's been certified by UL"
"Durability" means many things. A plastic screen can give and bend. So yes, it might be generally, "unbreakable". But plastic is much, much, much softer than glass. So instead of a broken screen, you end up with a scratched-up-to-hell screen. So that doesn't mean it is more "durable" than high-tech glass.
"Which is better?" (AKA "Pick your poison") Might be the appropriate question.
Survived 26 drops, huh? (Score:3)
That's expensive (Score:2)
Best way to test it (Score:1)