|
This reminds me of the race between LG and Samsung to produce the first OLED screen. (Which coincidentally was the first curved display rather than the existing flat LCD displays - it didn't quite fold though )
Samsung won that race with the the KN55S9C, a product that was hugely expensive at around £7,000 for a 55". Apparently there were some significant issues with the Samsung OLED (for example uncertainty over the blue pixel lifespan) and the product was soon quietly dropped by Samsung. It seems likely that Samsung knew about the issues before launch but were determined to win the technology race. Samsung probably expected very few people to buy such a hugely expensive product anyway so any potential issues with the TV were not going to affect many customers. The important aspect for Samsung appeared to be the halo effect of being the first to produce a new premium category of product. All of this sounds very similar to the Galaxy Fold to me.
LG lost the original OLED sprint to be first to market but but they certainly won the longer term OLED competition. LGs white OLED solution appears to be a better solution (or at least simpler and cheaper to manufacture) than Samsung's RGB OLED panels.
It may be a similar case with the race to produce the first folding phone - between the Galaxy Fold and the Huawei Mate X.
Again Samsung seem to be out of the gate first - depending on when they actually release the Fold. However, Samsung took the decision to have the folding screen on the inside of the phone. This is arguably a better concept but is more difficult to deliver. Having the main screen on the inside protects the screen better but requires a second screen on the outside and a much tighter curvature to the fold itself. This tighter fold must increase the stress on the screen at the point of the fold and the resulting difficulty in making the fold robust.
Huawei's approach of having the screen on the outside makes the display more exposed to damage but results in a simpler hinge and a far more more rounded fold that probably significantly reduces the stress on the screen. So I wonder if Samsung have again won the sprint but a simpler solution that had more time for development, may be the final winner. |
|