4 ms·

Related musing: why is it seemingly easier to make very high resolution small screen (phones) than large screens of the same resolution ? Instinctevly I would t

Related musing: why is it seemingly easier to make very high resolution small screen (phones) than large screens of the same resolution ? Instinctevly I would think smaller leds are harder to make, but it doesn't seem it's the case ?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
easytiger 9y ago
There is a greater failure rate the larger you make apanel. a great many are discarded from production lines. If the screen is smaller then it is less likely to incur error. Also that cost is hidden in a phone, i'm not sure what the value of screen components would be.
- nine_k 9y ago
  A large defective panel can be cut down into smaller panels most of which will have no defects. You can sell most of your faulty large panels as small panels, but there is no extra source of large panels.
  - easytiger 9y ago
    Well the point stands that statistically its much easier to make a smaller panel than a larger panel. A larger panel being n times smaller ones.
amptorn 9y ago
I'm going to guess the square law? This monitor has about 75 times the screen area of a typical phone.
- brianwawok 9y ago
  Right, and a Phone could spend $50 to build that screen on a $700 device (not that they do). Just a raw 75 * $50 is near $4000, which would explain a high price.
  - ricardobeat 9y ago
    The parent's point is that making a larger screen with _the same pixel count_ should be much cheaper, not one with 75x the resolution.
    - amptorn 9y ago
      I could be wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    - brianwawok 9y ago
      That is if it is the pixels per unit that lead to cost, vs the size of the display itself. Obviously it is harder to make a 1 inch x 1 inch display with 1 million pixels vs 1000. But maybe the difference from 600ppi to 200ppi is not enough to matter...
robotresearcher 9y ago
The probability of manufacturing a bad pixel is some constant plus a function of the area of that pixel, and not the number of neighbours it has.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

easytiger 9y ago

There is a greater failure rate the larger you make apanel. a great many are discarded from production lines. If the screen is smaller then it is less likely to incur error. Also that cost is hidden in a phone, i'm not sure what the value of screen components would be.

nine_k 9y ago
A large defective panel can be cut down into smaller panels most of which will have no defects. You can sell most of your faulty large panels as small panels, but there is no extra source of large panels.
- easytiger 9y ago
  Well the point stands that statistically its much easier to make a smaller panel than a larger panel. A larger panel being n times smaller ones.

amptorn 9y ago

I'm going to guess the square law? This monitor has about 75 times the screen area of a typical phone.

brianwawok 9y ago
Right, and a Phone could spend $50 to build that screen on a $700 device (not that they do). Just a raw 75 * $50 is near $4000, which would explain a high price.
- ricardobeat 9y ago
  The parent's point is that making a larger screen with _the same pixel count_ should be much cheaper, not one with 75x the resolution.
  - amptorn 9y ago
    I could be wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - brianwawok 9y ago
    That is if it is the pixels per unit that lead to cost, vs the size of the display itself. Obviously it is harder to make a 1 inch x 1 inch display with 1 million pixels vs 1000. But maybe the difference from 600ppi to 200ppi is not enough to matter...

robotresearcher 9y ago

The probability of manufacturing a bad pixel is some constant plus a function of the area of that pixel, and not the number of neighbours it has.