>Different Paths to RGB...... Basically uLED Backlight with QD

And the rest. As much as I love and want uLED. None of these are new, and the problem has been roughly the same from day 1 in 2016 when all the media were jumping on uLED. Even if they could solve all of that they still dont have a roadmap of cost reduction that could match OLED.

On the other hand OLED cost has been dropping quicker than expected. It is another one of those thing like Solar panel where all industry analysis and projection were wrong. We also have a solid roadmap to improve colour accuracy, burn rate, efficiency etc. Along with other "potential" OLED adjacent technology like QNEDs where it is 80-90% of uLED but could be used on existing OLED manufacturing.

Again as much as I love to see uLED, objectively speaking I just dont see how it could compete. And it is one of those moment where better is the enemy of the best.

I was extremely excited when I got my hands on a 2 line character single color OLED display many years ago. That a phone would ever have an OLED color display was a far off fantasy.

I am sure we will see uLED at some point, it just takes time and a lot of research.

Now that seems so long ago...

It was like 8 years ago!

1. Blue OLEDS do not last, they degrade much faster than the other colors.

2. Burnout.

This is intrinsic to the technology. LED tech has not those problems. uLEDs technology already works very well, much better than OLEDs, it is just too expensive. There is no need for inventing new technology.

Also, when talking about LEDs we must talk about the inverse technology: Solar panels. Improvements and investment in solar panel technologies transfer to LEDs fast because it is the inverse: Any LED or light emitting diode does generate electricity when light.

OLED promising advantage for the future is the possibility of being printed extremely cheap and superfast on plastic substrates, specially for solar panels, at cents/square meter. But right now showstoppers exist for that tech.

Of those I've only had the iPhone X and now iPhone 12 (and will note that the iPhone X only launched in November 2017, just 3.5 years ago, and I'll never know how it lasts to 5 years anyway because my upgrade cycle remains faster than 5 years for now). But on the iPhone side of things at last, there are a host of mitigation measures both inherent to iOS and new since the LCD. The iPhone X series for example is quite aggressive by default about powering off the display. They do a decent job of it thanks to the Face ID sensors letting them have some form of attention monitoring coupled with fairly transparent quick wakeup/unlock, but it's still noticeable even now. iOS in general also has very, very little fixed chrome. Not nothing, but not much. Most of the display, as with TVs, is constantly shifting content. Even browsing the web on a tiny screen involves lots of scrolling and movement.

None of this stuff makes much if any sense in typical desktop/notebook computing. There are a lot more static UI elements present all the time, and that's a good thing with high precision mouse pointers and large screens. We count on screens to passively display information constantly, even if we're not actively interacting with them right that second. We also tend to use computers for a much longer time. I don't have a 4 year old phone. I do have a 10 year old system still in a final few months of service, and a number of 6-7 year old systems that may last longer. There are LCD displays at work even older than that still doing well.

Maybe OLED will evolve far enough to handle that acceptably as well, but I don't think you can extrapolate from phones. It's not like the industry hasn't been able to make big high resolution OLED displays for a while now. The curious dearth of them in notebooks/AIOs/standalone PC monitors points at something.

It's not particularly noticeable unless you're looking at an all-white web page or email or something, though. I switched to Apple maps navigation for a while because it avoids nearly all the above factors (fewer static elements, dark theme by default, actually turns the screen off during long stretches of "keep going straight for 40 miles") but eventually went back because I'm so used to the Google maps UX (and I stopped driving such long distances regularly).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46KdDH5tSic

When you change the screen on an iPhone without pairing it correctly, the new screen will have the same burn in patterns as the old one.

I have had many oled devices for many years and I have never once seen noticeable burn in like I have never had an ssd die.

I’m not denying it exists. But the scale of the problem and the time it takes to occur make it a non issue for most use cases.

Burn in is a very serious issue with OLED as well as overall lifespan due to the organic nature of the diodes. uLED is probably a better technology for a variety of applications that have to factor those issues in.

Burn-In, It is an issue. But specific to certain usage. The above was written mostly in the view of Smartphone. Apart from gaming, Top quality OLED panel burn in issues on Smartphone is rare due to your usage on smartphone, you dont use the same App for prolong period of time. ( So dont expect OLED on your computer soon, it makes no sense. )

OLED is also a spectrum of technology, WOLED are less susceptible to burn in, along with Quantum Dot OLED. Again with a roadmap to further improves these situation.

And I did mention QNED [1] , Nanorod SolidState OLED that drastically improve everything from brightness, efficiency, burn in and even cost. Although that is somewhat 5 years in the future.

The difference between comparing to LCD to OLED and OLED to uLED mostly comes down to cost / benefits. OLED was thinner, lighter, more efficient, profitable than LCD. There is nothing on LCD roadmap that could compete with OLED for Smartphone display. Nothing. There is a reason why even low end Smartphone are switching or planning to switch to OLED display. Entry Level OLED and LCD price are already level except LCD are virtually operating at a zero margin, while OLED are profitable and with a roadmap in this decade to further dipping below $10 per panel for average sub 6" Smartphone Display. ( Ask BOE ) And a whole positive feedback loop to further evolve the spectrum of technology.

Again this is mostly looking at Smartphone. We could see uLED take on TV and large size display where OLED dont make sense. But then uLED is also a spectrum of technology and those used in the current Samsung and Sony Wall Size TV aren't the same as those that wants to fit in to tablet and phone.

[1] https://www.displaysupplychain.com/blog/are-quantum-nano-emi...

Nanorod LEDs are not OLEDs but fairly standard blue leds.

Samsung got a 15 years headstart. I think they are going straight for skipping the mass transfer stage altogether, and growing LEDs on the glass. Their first working blue GaN led on glass was in 2011. 4 or 5 years since they launched the effort.

> There is a reason why even low end Smartphone are switching or planning to switch to OLED display.

Low end smartphone sized OLED screens are actually cheaper in China than decent LCDs from time to time.

Not even 2016. Samsung had uLED type display RnD going in their Samsung Research Institute since 2006.

Just as with OLED, despite all of the crazy tech investor money, it's very clear who will reach the finish line first.

Samsung probably already has a commercialisable solution, but is just keeping it in the sleeve, waiting for an appropriate moment, like OLED profits shrinking, or somebody else getting close to microled commercialisation.

The possible leap in responsiveness cannot be overstated, such displays will probably solve latency issues plaguing alternative display technologies for good.

I cannot wait to have 1000+ Hz ultra responsive screens in any imaginable format.

I am all for 1000fps games but by that time I won't be able to play them due to old age.

For me, personally, the benefit of an HDR panel would be much higher than faster frame rates.

You also need quite high framerates to make rendered motion come out reasonably smooth. Especially for something you're trying to follow across the screen with your eye. Fake motion blur only partially helps and has its own problems.

I agree that following things across the screen is a use case for higher rendering rates.

But it's still significantly better if you put that 120+Hz output onto a 120+Hz screen, and it's not super hard to make them.

I've got arcade machines that want 25" 4:3 monitors, and maybe MicroLED could fill the void. A suitable CRT would be best, but those are hard to find. Modern displays don't come in 4:3 at that size, and specialty 1:1 displays are too expensive for me to even measure to see if they'd fit.

Maaaaaaaaybe, this machine could get by with an ultra-wide screen, because it's got two player stations next to each other with a partition in the middle, but that's a big maybe. Plus I'd need something to link the two independently clocked video feeds into a single wide display.

That would be a major improvement for mobile.

Consider that raising the PWM frequency doesn't automatically solve the problems you raise. 20khz PWM can still have audible harmonics, for example. In the mini-LED industry there are actually spread spectrum/randomized PWM approaches to address this, and to help with EMI.

!! Great.. now I have to consider Tempest shielding for all the displays; I had thought once CRTs went away, we'd be safe...

I read somewhere that that makes it difficult to accurately control the brightness. With HDR content already requiring 10 bits, anything that interferes with that is a problem. Future panels might require 12 bits or more.