|Raymond Soneira, DisplayMate CEO|
This makes it all the more intriguing to know that Apple had to settle for an older, inferior compromise over the screen it had originally wanted for the new iPad. The rather small group of people that was critical of the new iPad frequently brought up the increased weight and thickness of the new iPad over its predecessor, the iPad 2. As it turns out, Apple had initially sought display technology that would let it put in a screen that would be lighter and thinner than anything before it. This essentially meant that the new iPad’s dimensions were meant to be identical to the iPad 2 in every possible way.
DisplayMate’s CEO, Raymond Soneira, had kicked up a bit of a storm shortly after the new iPad’s launch, claiming that the Apple slate had a faulty battery indicator. While some continue to cite that as a major fault with the iPad, and others dismiss it regularly, Soneira’s moved on to the new iPad’s display tech. He claims:
“The plan was to use this new technology called IGZO from Sharp — a lot higher electron mobility that allows them to make the transistors a lot smaller and the circuit elements a lot smaller. There’s no question that the iPad 3 is Plan B. They pushed amorphous silicon to a higher [pixels per inch] than anybody else. But the light throughput is not good. So it has roughly twice as many LEDs, and they had to get a 70 percent larger battery”
IGZO stands for Indium Gallium Oxide, and is considered to be the future of high definition screen technology. Amorphous Silicon tech has been around for a while, and Apple has seemingly stretched its capabilities to hitherto unseen heights.