Forum > General discussions > Rumours > Sony Xperia Rumours 2012

On 2012-04-11 01:41:35, djin wrote:
[This is going way off topic, I am not following these much as of now, but oled and amoled are similar but not same, sony was the first to have oled tvs commercially avialable, and they heavily invested in oled but then stopped to focus on lcd(due to losses and high prices), the next focus for sony is crystal lcd and whitemagic. Crystal lcd seems to be the route sony will take with bravia line instead of amoled, until oled further evolves/gets cheaper to produce. Atleast thats the picture i get from when i was following.

....oled and amoled are similar but not same.

Also, if you check out samsung's 55inch oled tv announced at ces 2012, they mention super oled and not super amoled hd + etc for it.

On 2012-04-11 08:12:25, Ricky D wrote:
I think that's enough about the actual tech of the screens in upcoming Sonys...

On 2012-04-11 09:10:57, rss_ndrsn wrote:


I actually do not get what you are trying to say but my only concern is to make worf1000 understand that it is quite impossible (all things considered) to have an OLED screen without active-matrix addressing scheme. I could not care less what OLED technology that the next Sony smartphone will have.

On 2012-04-11 04:04:53, rss_ndrsn wrote:
OMG! Can someone put some sense into worf1000's mind! If an OLED screen is not using active matrix as addressing scheme, then it is using a passive matrix one! The structure that you are talking about is the simplest OLED screen which is from a PMOLED model. The purpose of that structure is just to show OLED technology works. Do you even understand how OLED works? Why is it hard for you to grasp this idea?

Let's define what an addressing scheme is and how important it is to a display screen. It is to set (or maintain) the state of a pixel to either black/white or, more commonly, a gray-scale level. So without the addressing scheme, a display screen will not be able to show pixels properly. That's why any display screen have addressing scheme. The most common and practical is the Matrix addressing (active and passive matrix). The other two types which are direct and raster addressing are not being used in OLED. So how can an OLED screen display pixel properly without an addressing scheme as you keep on insisting about pure OLED technique?



You just said it yourself but still can't grasp the idea behind OLED. AMOLED uses TFT to eliminate higher voltage which is required for PMOLED operation. So this solidify my point that OLED screens can either use passive matrix or active matrix to operate and that AMOLED or PMOLED use 100% OLED technique (according to your own understanding). OLED is just a general term like LCD. OLED can come in different variation but it is still OLED. There is no such thing as pure technique or whatsoever because every OLED screen use the common structures to make up one, or else it cannot not be an OLED. OLED whether a passive matrix or active matrix are all 100% OLED screen.

Whichever OLED screen that uses TFT backplane is considered an AMOLED screen. Ergo, ipso facto, case closed. Q.E.D. In the Oxide-TFT case, the silicon is replaced with amorphous indium-gallium-zinc-oxide (a-IGZO) as semiconducting layer of the TFT backplane. Since it uses backplane, it is an AMOLED screen. OK!

Please read this:
SID, the display industry’s leading annual academic conference, is always a great source of information on R&D into future display technologies. Crystallization of a-Si to p-Si and its application to AMOLED fabrication have been a favorite topic of the symposium for several years now. However, looking over the proceedings of this year’s recently held conference, there anecdotally seems to be shift in focus; I could only find one paper on LTPS crystallization for AMOLED backplanes. Instead, a variety of papers promote using oxide semiconductors as a panacea to technical and cost issues that continue to restrict the growth of the AMOLED industry.

Samsung SDI’s development of a 12.1″ WXGA AMOLED (see Figure 1) highlighted the potential of this technology. The company used amorphous indium-gallium-zinc-oxide (a-IGZO) to replace silicon as the semiconducting layer of the TFT backplane

Proof that SONY OLED is AMOLED:

AMOLED screen with OXIDE_TFT backplane from SONY:

On 2012-04-11 09:10:57, rss_ndrsn wrote:


I actually do not get what you are trying to say but my only concern is to make worf1000 understand that it is almost impossible (all things considered) to have a high resolution OLED screen without using active-matrix addressing scheme, and to correct his wrong beliefs about the AMOLED like not using "pure OLED technique", PS Vita screen is 100% OLED (lol..can't help but to laugh everytime I hear it), etc. I could not care less what OLED technology that the next Sony smartphone will have.

On 2012-04-11 14:25:33, djin wrote:
i guess people coming here in search for yellow tint screens are in for a treat ..

@rss_ndrsn,

I didnt really know sony was going to get oled tvs out!

Anyways, I think its important to have oled/amoled/whitemagic/anything thats more power saving, atleast on smartphone with larger display size as they take heavy toll on battery life. If not then atleast increase the capacity of battery!

Sony will use its own type of Oled technique in 2013 and it's not AMoled but another type of AM i think no active Matrix inside but different that's what i hear yesterday from Sony engineer.

On 2012-04-11 00:10:45, worf1000 wrote:
Let me give you some Oled structure.

1 Cathode
2 Emissive ( Organic Molecules or Polymers)
3 Conductive layer (Organic Molecules or Polymers)
4 Anode
5 Substrate

I see no single Active Matrix mention (Active Matrix) means (Active matrix is a type of addressing scheme used in flat panel displays) it can also use in Oled related screens that call AMoled or SAMoled. But still not 100% Oled displays.

And as i said before, Sony is still develop Oled technique for a long time long before Samsung or LG did.
I rest my case

On 2012-04-11 19:58:26, rss_ndrsn wrote:
Once and for all, there is no such thing as 100% OLED technique in the same context you believe in. If an OLED screen uses Active-matrix addressing scheme, then it is AMOLED. OLED is just a general term for a type of screen to differentiate it from other display screens such as LCD, CRT, etc. For example, I bought a 55" LCD TV. What kind of LCD is that? For sure it is a variant of active-matrix LCD, but specifically I am not sure. It's probably uses an IPS Technology. You see where I am getting at?

Active-matrix is an addressing scheme. That means each pixel has electronic switch allowing an image or video information to reach the pixel. So basically, without it you will not see a thing on the display other than lights. It is impossible to have a big OLED screen with high resolution or a smaller one without using an active-matrix addressing scheme. OLED can only use active-matrix or passive-matrix addressing scheme. But only active-matrix addressing mechanism supports high resolution and big display. That's why every OLED screen that one can find on a smartphone or pmp are all using active-matrix and these screens are called AMOLED (or ACTIVE-MATRIX ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE) screen.

On 2012-04-11 20:37:47, rss_ndrsn wrote:
The reason why you cannot find the active-matrix is the list you wrote up there is what makes up a PMOLED screen. In an AMOLED screen, the thin-film transistor is placed in between the Anode and the substrate.

Here's a photo to as proof:


Therefore, AMOLED and PMOLED are either 100% OLED, and they use 100% OLED technique (LOL).



Did i ever mention PMOled boy?, you trow your words in my mouth boy is that everything you have?

You are so pity, there is no Active Matrix in OLED BOY!!!!!!!!!!! that's my whole point you getting desperate about that. I already explain that but you see only what you want to see, so keep selective en be happy I'm done with it.

Don't put your words in my mouth to proof your point buddy, i already give my point.
And motvikt, don't be a fool boy, he put his words in my mouth. I rest my case i made my point you all ignore my point and even getting so desperate to use your words put in my mouth to proof your point so i rest my case.