LG confirms production of 'bendable and unbreakable' smartphone displays | Hacker News Reader

LG confirms production of 'bendable and unbreakable' smartphone displays

engadget.com

47 pointsCrunchyJams25 comments

Open articleView on HN

Ars has a down-to-earth analysis of this: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/the-straight-truth-ab...

A guess at ranked practical benefits of this screen:

1. Reduced risk of phone breaking from a drop.

2. Thinness (More room for a battery and other components)

3. Lightness (More leeway for other heavier components)

4. Bendability? (not sure it even makes the list for a mobile phone), though if bended for side displays or around the entire phone.. could be.. interesting, maybe. Jury is out for mobile phone applications - could be really cool for other applications, maybe.

I wonder about differences in efficiency, reflectivity, brightness, viewing angle, resolution, etc, too.

Depending what the bend radius and elasticity is, it could be hugely valuable. It makes it possible to have a display that is larger than your pocket.

It would also be very valuable for "smartwatches", like Pebble, or other fashion tech like Nike "Fuel Band".

The ars article says the bend radius (400mm) is far to modest to allow that.

If you havent seen this yet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJehexDPEsE&feature=youtu.be

I'd like to know what the statistics are of people replacing their smartphones due to a broken screen. If it is significant, then this could hurt them in the long run.

I've seen more people using a shattered phone for the remainder of their contract than I've ever seen replacing a shattered phone right away.

Of course you have months to notice all the broken screens and possibly days to see the ones that get fixed/replaced immediately. Survivor bias towards the surviving unfixed screens.

I recently busted the screen on my Nexus 4 -- and I was planning on still using it, but I guess I was one of the unlucky ones -- the touch screen wouldn't work at all afterwards.

Same here, and it was a pretty light drop (onto wood). Actually, the back glass broke without any cajoling whatsoever--I put it in my pocket after I took it out of the box, and fifteen minutes later when I took it out the rear glass was cracked.

I now have a non-functional N4. I'll see what the N5 looks like, but I'm not too thrilled with the prospect of another LG phone.

Same here, just recently broke my Nexus 4's display. Doesn't seem to be easy to get it repaired either...

Repair it yourself. All the parts are purchasable on the web, the touch screen plug in with a ribbon cable, and there are youtube instruction videos for any conceivable brand.

Hard to justify spending $120[1] to fix a $199 phone.

[1]http://www.ebay.ca/sch/sis.html?_nkw=LCD%20DISPLAY%20Touch%2...

To be fair, you probably wouldn't know...

If broken screens are indeed a big problem and this is effective in preventing that problem then this would be a huge competitive advantage for them, no doubt far outweighing any small loss from people replacing their phones less frequently. Competition drives far more than attempts to milk the installed base, at least at any sane company.

It depends. Do most customers actually care about how easy it is to break their screen before they have actually broken it? Will it be on their mind when they are standing in the store looking at smartphones?

It strikes me as the sort of thing nobody cares about until that one moment where they need it, and then it's too late.

Apple marketed the Gorilla Glass strength pretty hard. And phone cases seem really popular: (random link I dug up) https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/pr...

But yeah, I'm not sure that people care very much, they'll probably just get a case for whichever phone instead of caring that much about how strong the screen is.

There are a lot of people out there who don't particularly want a case, but feel that they need it in order to protect the phone.

I'd say this depends on the target audience. For myself, I'd certainly choose a shock-resistant, unshatterable, water-resistant smartphone over another one simply because I hate the hassle of repair and replacement. In the same vein, I'd expect the military to be interested in this.

That assumes that people factor in the probability of dropping a phone and breaking it's screen into their buying decisions.

If they were monopolists, then this could be a problem for them. But in a competitive market, being able to differentiate yourself is much more important than repeat sales due to shorter MTBF.

Empirically, I know 3 people who use a cracked-glass phone right now.

Well, that's one way to enhance the persistence of memory.

Could no glass also mean potentially less reflective screens? I sure hope so.

How much will they retail at? Any idea?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com