Apple forgoes a potential iPhone camera revolution, as quantum dots prove too costly

Apple forgoes a potential iPhone camera revolution, as quantum dots prove too costly
The 2019 iPhones are expected to largely stay the same in terms of design but upgrade the camera area and the horse power under the hood significantly. These may sound as good reasons to switch from the iPhone X/8, or whatever 2017 gear you are still rocking, but don't expect any camera revolution.

Apple has reportedly gotten out of $22 million contract with the British from Nanoco that "together with its subsidiaries, engages in the research, development, manufacture, and licensing of cadmium and heavy-metal-free quantum dots (CFQD), and semiconductor nanomaterials for use in various commercial applications."

What has Apple's application hopes been for those eco-friendly dots from Nanoco? Not displays, mind you, but a quantum dots camera sensor, reports The Telegraph. The quantum tech is used in some high-end Samsung TVs, and the dots can also be a building block for the upcoming microLED revolution that Apple is reportedly heavily invested in.

When it comes to camera sensors, the CFQD technology allows for a much better light control compared to the current silicon ones that is supposed to be vastly superior to anything else out there. It's just that Apple concluded it would be too costly to implement on a mass scale. 

Each year, its iPhone franchise sells tens of millions of handsets, and production of that many quantum camera sensors would have been prohibitively expensive, it turns out. Oh well, we'll never now what Apple's camera software would have achieved with these groundbreaking sensors but one can only hope work towards lowering the price of these next-gen camera will continue.

FEATURED VIDEO

12 Comments

1. bucknassty

Posts: 1318; Member since: Mar 24, 2017

wouldnt surprise me if apple came out with some tech that focuses on this without giving a dime to that company

2. Damac71nina

Posts: 20; Member since: Aug 06, 2012

Bs apple it cost you roughly $300 to make the phones and you charge $1000 per device making money hand over fist but it’s to costly to upgrade your cameras gtfoh

6. iloveapps

Posts: 724; Member since: Mar 21, 2019

Yeah, apple’s OSes are free, their app store, iCloud services, after sales services, updates, integration of both software and hardware, design and quality and so much more. No apple products cost more than $300. Apple’s products last longer too and saves environment.

7. TBomb

Posts: 1283; Member since: Dec 28, 2012

Just last week you said that all of those things cost money and that's why it's almost $800 to build an iPhone. Unless you're being sarcastic, at which point I will mention that those services and platforms cost less and less per device as you sell more devices to the point where they're basically generating more revenue than they cost.

10. Vancetastic

Posts: 952; Member since: May 17, 2017

I do think that was an attempt at sarcasm, but he may also be off his meds.

9. oldskool50

Posts: 962; Member since: Mar 29, 2019

Claiming Apple product last longer is completely false. The iPhone 6 family has a 62% failure rate from just 2 models. The 6 and 6S. While all of Samsung phones combined had a 44% failure rate, with the highest single failing model was the S7 at 7%. If 62% of the iPhone 6 failed, that means out of the 220M they sold over 2 years, that means over 1/2 of them were garbage. Good thing they are eco-friendly. That's a lot too dispose of. Apple's OS's are not free. It's included in the price you pay. Windows actually has a price aside from hardware with it pre-installed. You can't buy iOS and only a Mac can download OSX, through normal means. It's been proven Apple products don't last any longer than any other product from any vendor you can name. You simply told a bold faced lie. Apple slowed down the iPhone 6 to keep them from suddenly shutting off, simply because the cheap batteries could not provide enough power the SoC needed to do it tasks. I hardly see that as lasting longer. I bet you were bullied in school, and even now...right? I mean because you can't possibly be this dense.

11. Leo_MC

Posts: 6935; Member since: Dec 02, 2011

If I got Samsung S7 phones in 2017 (when I renew my company phones), this year would have been the last one I could have used them; I got 6s - cheaper and they will still get security updates for another year. I won at least 1 year (I could have won at least 2 for the same cost as the one I would have paid for Samsung phones).

3. JCASS889

Posts: 483; Member since: May 18, 2018

Apple has more cash than any company on earth.... Spend your money Apple instead of focusing on stupid emojis

8. blingblingthing

Posts: 919; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

If the users aren't complaining, why spend extra money? Just ship the same cameras but add a third wide angle and claim it's the most capable iPhone camera ever. Works every time.

12. shonasof

Posts: 17; Member since: Mar 18, 2019

All shipped with the same charge block that came with the iPhone 3.

4. ssallen

Posts: 168; Member since: Oct 06, 2017

Revolution? Ground breaking? This is an idiotic Apple ad at best. How do we know that the sensors weren't just a minor upgrade and certainly not worth the markup for each handset?

5. monkeyb

Posts: 404; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

It is always a surprise how mass production for certain things is actually more expensive than small scale production. Is it because of sourcing raw materials? Or perhaps the yield rate is simply not that great. Unfortunate but unavoidable.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.