At least in the traditional sense. Of course things like QLED and LG’s NanoCell are variations on standard LCD tech and those are doing well, especially Samsung’s QLED. What the article doesn’t go in to detail is that standard LCD has become a commodity business and thus becomes for OEMs yet another tech where rock bottom price becomes the primary driver.
And if things like disk drives and processors are a guide, at least in the near term, the quality will suffer, eg. a low end laptop or tablet is going to be in many more ways, an even poorer buy IMHO
If Samsung still use LCDs in their budget device (A,E series smartphone and tablets) and even as parts to cut corner on their “standard” flagship devices, (tab S7, S8 non plus/ultra), then LCD still have long to stay.
Now if all other range of Samsung devices swith to OLED and still keep their price, that would be something to be excited about. But again for now even just a screen upgrade to OLED warrant a price raise, I doubt it ( eg. Nintendo Switch OLED even has it in name)
That’s not what I’m saying. My point is that the devices that use conventional LCDs will be doing so from less vendors and the quality overall may suffer. OTOH I think you will see some like tablets announce that they are using OLED (which continues to drop in price) as a differentiator (like the switch does).
and to use an example of what I’m talking about the 1TB spinner drives you can find in the most budget PCs are just dreadful, slow and a relatively low MTBF compared to mainstream drives from a few years back. And some are starting to use EMMC tech as well
My point is that the HP pavilions of the world are going to get lower quality screens compared to upper tier brands.
And Samsung specifically will always put relatively high quality displays in their tablets regardless. The Amazon fire tablets, not so much
I see. This is pretty concerning though as each tech has its pros and cons. Like HDD while slower is a cheaper place to store data.
Personally I prefer LCD over OLED, because OLED screen burn-in is still a thing, and I mostly use my devices with static image and an UI full of panels. And the saturation of OLED screens is usually somewhat less accurate in color than LCD.
Yeah there is a reason that Apple for instance has stuck with LCD and now minLED in the iPad Pro 12.9 and the 14 and 16 MacBook Pros.
Nice is that perceived contrast with OLED is, the most accurate and brightest displays are still LCD based. OLED still has issues with drift, both over time and with environmental shifts as well as being limited in maximum brightness as well. Phones can get away with it because the display is so relatively speaking, but a 27 inch OLED with that level of brightness would last about 18 months tops.
LG will likely, for multiple reasons be one of the very last to continue to make LCDS, if for no other reason than their huge business in LCDs for non computer or television applications. eg. things like smart displays, watches, refrigerators etc.
Eh, there’s the likes of AU Optronics too who aren’t shady (well any more than most other PRC companies), who I’m sure we debated about on the old forum.
I don’t know the proportion of LCDs Samsung makes, but they are surely nowhere near the only quality manufacturer, and have produced some stinkers themselves too.
AU Optronics is large and there are a handful of other makers that fit more in the “white label” category. And in fact there are multiple displays that are "branded " by LG or Samsung or Innova etc. that are actually these white label displays bought on a batch/contract basis.
One thing I’ll laud AU Optronics for is that they were one of the first that started calibrating their medium and high end displays from the factory (likely due to some Apple contracts)