Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Jan 2013 22:28 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless This is so cool, and defeninitely the future of mobile phone displays. Samsung demonstrated a prototype phone with a flexible display. Flexible displays will be more resilient than the stuff we use today, and if we ever get around to developing flexible PCBs and batteries, we'll be golden. I long for sturdy, shatterproof devices.
Thread beginning with comment 548045
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: I'm with the verge
by satsujinka on Thu 10th Jan 2013 00:07 UTC in reply to "I'm with the verge"
satsujinka
Member since:
2010-03-11

Of course flexible materials are more sturdy than non. It's much harder to break a flexible material then a rigid one.

Personally, I think, the biggest use for flex is when we get to fold-able devices (roll-able naturally comes first though.) Basically, folding would allow you to have larger screens on mobile devices. So a phone with a tablet sized screen that still fits in your pocket.

Of course, magnetically (or some other detachable mechanism) attached displays would also be an option and would probably be simpler to implement. It also allows for better expandability...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: I'm with the verge
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 10th Jan 2013 00:42 in reply to "RE: I'm with the verge"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Of course flexible materials are more sturdy than non. It's much harder to break a flexible material then a rigid one.


I don't know about that. A diamond is much more sturdy than a rubber band. My femur is much more sturdy than my acl. There are counter examples, of course, but I'm just pointing out that its not any where close to an absolute truth. Its just too difficult to say without knowing the specifics when trying to compare materials.

Edited 2013-01-10 00:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: I'm with the verge
by Bishi on Thu 10th Jan 2013 01:21 in reply to "RE[2]: I'm with the verge"
Bishi Member since:
2009-08-27

Diamonds are ridiculously easy to crush.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: I'm with the verge
by kwan_e on Thu 10th Jan 2013 01:43 in reply to "RE[2]: I'm with the verge"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

My femur is much more sturdy than my acl.


That's because bones are actually flexible. If your bones were completely stiff, they would shatter quite easily. Your femur would then break more than your acl. In fact, there could be a greater chance of breaking bones, because a stiff bone, being pulled on by tendons and ligaments, would not be able to give.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: I'm with the verge
by Soulbender on Thu 10th Jan 2013 07:47 in reply to "RE: I'm with the verge"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Of course flexible materials are more sturdy than non.

It's much harder to break a flexible material then a rigid one.


Depends on what you do to it. It's much easier to cut rubber than steel but rubber doesn't bend out of shape. Both materials have properties that, when used in the right context, makes them better than the other.

Personally, I think, the biggest use for flex is when we get to fold-able devices


Guess what will happen to the display at the line where you fold it all the time.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: I'm with the verge
by zima on Wed 16th Jan 2013 23:13 in reply to "RE: I'm with the verge"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Personally, I think, the biggest use for flex is when we get to fold-able devices (roll-able naturally comes first though.)

Rollable might be more eye-catching on trade shows, but historically we already moved away from it: we moved from scrolls to flat books - generally with at most one fold (and I also doubt folding displays will catch on; they will be probably more about various new shapes possible during manufacturing)

Of course, magnetically (or some other detachable mechanism) attached displays would also be an option and would probably be simpler to implement. It also allows for better expandability...

But we generally move away from expandability. Reminds me about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_computer#The_Home_Computer_.22Rev... - it didn't come to pass because we overestimated the costs of every gadget including its own CPU, and underestimated costs and complexity of interlinks.

Reply Parent Score: 2