Embedded Touch Terminology...1
`
`«+ Key defining characteristic
`+ Touch capability is provided by a display manufacturer
`instead of a touch-module manufacturer
`
`e Touch-module manufacturers can’t do in-cell or on-cell
`
`«+ Marketing TerminologyAlert!
`+ Some display manufacturerscall all their embedded touch “in-cell’,
`even though they may be supplying hybrid or on-cell
`+ Somedisplay manufacturers use a brand name to encompassall
`their embedded touch products
`e For example, “Touch On Display” from Innolux
`+ Somedisplay manufacturers direct-bond or air-bond an external
`touchscreen to their display and call it “out-cell”
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`re
`
`intel)
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1011 (Part 2 of 3)
`
`
`
`«+ Key defining characteristic
`+ Touch capability is provided by a display manufacturer
`instead of a touch-module manufacturer
`
`e Touch-module manufacturers can’t do in-cell or on-cell
`
`«+ Marketing TerminologyAlert!
`+ Some display manufacturerscall all their embedded touch “in-cell’,
`even though they may be supplying hybrid or on-cell
`+ Somedisplay manufacturers use a brand name to encompassall
`their embedded touch products
`e For example, “Touch On Display” from Innolux
`+ Somedisplay manufacturers direct-bond or air-bond an external
`touchscreen to their display and call it “out-cell”
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`re
`
`intel)
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1011 (Part 2 of 3)
`
`
`
`Embedded Touch Terminology...2
`
`
`
`Touch sensoris physically inside the LCD cell
`Touch sensor can be:
`e Capacitive electrodes (same as p-cap)
`e Light-sensing elements (rare)
`On-Cell|Touch sensoris on top of the color-filter glass
`(LCD) or the encapsulation glass (OLED)
`e Capacitive electrodes (same as p-cap)
`Hybrid|Touch sensor has senseelectrodes on top of the
`(In-Cell/|color-filter glass and drive electrodes inside
`On-Cell)|the cell
`e IPS LCD: Segmented Vcom electrodes on
`the TFT glass
`e Non-IPS LCD: Segmented Vcom electrodes
`on the underside of the colorfilter glass
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`he
`
`
`
`
`
`Early Embedded Methods All Failed
`
`«* Attempts to develop embeddedtouchin 2003-2011
`wereall trying to invent something new while
`leveraging the LCD design
`+ “Pressed” capacitive, first mass-produced by Samsung in 2009
`+ Light-sensing, first mass-produced by Sharp in 2009
`+ Voltage-sensing (“digital switching’), first mass-produced by
`Samsung
`«+ But none of them wasreally successful
`+ Insufficient signal-to-noise ratio for robust operation
`+ The needto press the display surface, which prevented the
`use of a protective cover-glass
`+ The unreliability of pressing the display very close to the frame,
`wherethe color-filter glass haslittle ability to move
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`First Successful Embedded Touch:
`OLED On-Cell P-Cap
`
`e
`
`“* Samsung S8500 Wave mobile
`————s
`phone with Super AMOLED on-cell
`Meeseo
`p-cap touch (Feb. 2010)
`A
`UO
`+ 3.3-inch 800x480 (283 ppi) AM-OLED
`+ “Super AMOLED”is Samsung’s i
`(odd) branding for on-cell touch
`+ Sunlight readable
`e AR coating & no touchscreen overlay
`
`cover-glass Mobile World Congress 2010
`
`Window =
`direct-bond
`
`On CellTS
`
`(Super AMO
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: Samsung
`
`
`
`
`
`On-Cell P-Cap
`
`Cover Glass("Lens")
`Decoration
`
`Color Filter TFT Array Glass
`
`Top Polarizer
`Metal Bridges
`_ Insulator
`Sense & Drive Electrodes (ITO)
`Color Filter Glass
`
`Source: The author
`
`“* Principle
`+ ITO P-cap electrode array is deposited on top of the colorfilter
`glass (underthe top polarizer)
`e Exactly the samefunction as discrete (standalone) p-cap
`e Shown aboveis one ITO layer with bridges; it could also be
`twolayers with a dielectric instead
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`114
`
`Gee
`
`
`
`
`
`The Display-Makers
`Quickly Got the Idea
`
`«+ Don’t try to invent something new;figure out
`how to apply what already works(p-cap)!
`«* The result: Sony’s (JDI) “Pixel Eyes” hybrid
`in-cell/on-cell mutual capacitive
`+ First successful high-volume embedded touch in LCD
`
`Segmented anti-static shield
`
`on color-filter glass
`(sense electrodes)
`
`(drive electrodes)
`
`
`
`VCOMelectrodes “\)
`
`on TFT glass
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`EES
`
`Source: Japan Display; annotation by the author
`
`et Soeee
`
`
`
`
`
`First Phones with Hybrid In-Cell/
`On-Cell Mutual-Capacitive (May 2012)
`
`«+ Sony Xperia P and HTC EVO Design 4G (notthe iPhone 5)
`
`one-glass solution! Source: Sony
`
`“* Similar LCDs
`+ 4-inch 960x540
`LTPS (275 ppi) with
`different pixel arrays
`
`«* Same touch solution
`+ Synaptics
`ClearPad 3250
`(four touches)
`
`“* <100 um thinner than
`
`
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14 oT
`
`Tee
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple iPhone5: First Fully In-Cell
`Mutual Capacitive (Sept. 2012)
`
`¢- Structure
`
`+ Both sense and drive electrodes are in the TFT array, created by
`switching existing traces so they become multi-functional
`+ Apple has said they may change
`to Innolux “Touch On Display”
`(TOD,Innolux’s brand namefor ALL
`of their embedded touchstructures)
`in iPhone 6
`
`all three embeddedstructures...
`
`e That doesn’t actually tell us
`anything, since TODincludes
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: CNET
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple’s iPhone-5 Electrode Structure
`
` PUL)
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: BOE Technology Group’s Central Research Institute
`
`
`
`
`
`Other In-Cell Electrode Structures
`(Based On Patents)
`
`«+ Apple & Samsung
`+ Drive electrodes are segmented VCOM
`+ Sense electrodes are metal overlaid on the CF black matrix
`
`«* Apple & Samsung
`+ Drive electrodes are ITO stripes deposited on top of a dielectric
`layer overthe colorfilter material
`+ Sense electrodes as above
`
`«+ Sharp
`+ Both drive & sense electrodes are deposited on the bare CF-glass,
`before the black matrix and color-filter material are applied
`** LG Displays
`+ Self-capacitive method using just segmented VCOM
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Summary of Sensor Locations
`
`Industry standard
`Glass or PET
`Easy to add shield layer
`Display unconstrained
`|None I mprraactical
`Goodfor sensing
`Complex lens (yield)
`Widest sensing area
`Limited durability
`Display unconstrained
`|Topofpolarizer|None—CSCS—Cidimpprrccctticcaal,
`
`Discrete sensor
`(separate glass)
`
`Top of cover-glass
`Bottom of cover-glass
`(OGS = G2)
`
`Thickness & weight
`
`
`
`(1 or 2 layers)
`Both sides of CF glass
`(hybrid for non-IPS)
`
`Limited to display size
`2-sided CF process
`Limited to display size
`i
`isplay
`integration
`2-sided CF process
`Highest performance
`Top of CF glass and
`Limited to display size
`Slightly thinner
`in TFT array
`Requires display integration
`Slightly
`lower cost
`hybrid for IPS
`Limited to display size
`High performance
`In cell (on TFT array
`Requires display integration
`Thinnest
`for IPS; split between
`
`TFT and CF for non-IPS)|Potentially lowest cost Complex design
`
`Lowercost (1 layer)
`Slightly thinner
`Slightly lower cost
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`TPA
`
`
`
`
`
`‘
`
`Synaptics Series 4 Touch / DDI
`
`Integrating the Touch Controller
`and the Display DriverIC...1
`
`Accelerator SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Host Processor
`and Display
`
`MIP! / RGB
`
`
`
`
`
`Integrating the Touch Controller
`and the Display DriverIC...2
`
`«+ Advantages
`+ Full synchronization of touch and DDI
`+ Can work with any sensor(discrete, OGS, on-cell, in-cell, hybrid)
`+ Reduced latency
`e 70 ms to 20 ms
`
`+ Capable of user-input and feedback without CPU involvement
`e Done by programmingthedisplay configuration blocks of flash memory
`e Overlay capability plus image fade-in/out, animation, translation, etc.
`+ Can support wake-on-touch
`e Can display sprites or graphics for log-in screen
`«* Disadvantages
`+ Design is LCD-specific (resolution & pixel layout)
`+ Substantial NRE; appropriate only for high-volume
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Comparisonof Discrete (e.g., OGS)
`Touch with Embedded Touch...1
`
`«+ Cost: Is embedded touchreally “free”? No!
`+ Barrier to entry
`e There is much moreintellectual property (IP) on embedded touch
`layer-structure & driving; making sure you don’t infringe costs money
`+ Developmentcost
`e Embedded touch is much more complex to develop than OGS
`e High volumeis required (5M) to makeit practical
`+ Cover glass, decoration & bonding
`e Similar to discrete (OGS), but embedded cover-glassis just
`glass & decoration (no ITO), so it’s easier to manufacture
`e Sheet-type OGS may not be asstrong as plain cover-glass
`+ Touch controller
`
`e No integration = samecost (but performanceis poor)
`e Linked to TCONfortiming control = same cost(slightly different chip)
`e Integrated with TCON = saves $1-$2 in material cost
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`(intel)
`
`
`
`
`
`Comparisonof Discrete (e.g., OGS)
`Touch with Embedded Touch...2
`
`«* Cost (continued)
`+ FPC to connect electrodes
`
`e On-cell and hybrid = same
`e In-cell = noneif touch controller is COG; saves another $1-$2
`
`+ Electrode material
`
`e Discrete OGS currently uses ITO; could moveto printed metal-mesh,
`which could save $10+ in tablet size (once sensor competition gets real)
`e On-cell = same as discrete ITO
`
`e Hybrid = only half as much addedITO(little material cost-difference)
`e In-cell = no added ITO
`
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`Page 124of315
`
`ree
`ee
`
`
`
`
`
`Comparisonof Discrete (e.g., OGS)
`Touch with Embedded Touch...3
`
`¢- Performance
`
`+ On-cell = same as discrete or worse
`
`e lf you build the color-filter first (focus on LCD yield) then
`you can’t use high-temperature ITO so touch performanceis worse
`e If you build the touch electrodesfirst for good performance, then
`you can’t thin the color-filter glass
`+ Hybrid = same
`+ |In-cell = worse, but should improve to be same as SNR goes up
`«* Thickness
`
`+ Embeddedis typically 100 um thinner than discrete OGS
`+ But the thickness variation between smartphone models with
`embedded touch is ~1.0 mm dueto other features, so 0.1 mm
`doesn't mean that much to the consumer(it’s mostly marketing!)
`
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Comparisonof Discrete (e.g., OGS)
`Touch with Embedded Touch...4
`
`“* Weight
`+ Embedded = discrete (same numberof sheets of glass)
`“+ Power consumption
`+ On-cell & hybrid = same asdiscrete
`+ In-cell with integrated touch & TCON = probably lower, but touch
`power consumption is much lower than LCD power-consumption,
`so the decreaseisn't very significant
`“* Off-screen icons
`
`+ Discrete = no problem
`+ Embedded = requires additional circuitry
`
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`a)
`
`
`
`
`
`Embedded Touch Conclusions...1
`
`«+ Embedded touchisn’t a clear win in either cost or
`technology;it’s all about who gets the touch revenue!
`
`«* The driving force in embedded touchis the display-
`makers’ need to add valuein orderto increase their
`profitability
`
`** Embedded touch provides/ittle advantage to the
`end-user (consumer)
`
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Embedded Touch Conclusions...2
`
`«* It’s not clear that embedded touchwill offer significant
`cost-savings to the device OEM, since OGS can be
`further cost-reduced with ITO-replacement materials
`
`«* The display-makers will take some market share
`with embedded touchin high-volume products
`(DisplaySearch says 25% in 2018) but embedded
`touch is unlikely to become dominant becausethe
`touch-panel makers won’t let their business be
`destroyed
`
`
`
`SED DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Large-Format P-Cap
`
`¢¢ Introduction
`
`“*¢ ITO Electrodes
`
`“* Wire Electrodes
`
`¢* Metal Mesh Electrodes
`“+ Applications
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Introduction
`
`«* Large-format touch is a much more wide-open space
`than consumer-electronics touch
`
`+ Multi-touch infrared (IR) has replacedtraditional (single-touch) IR
`+ Camera-based optical has dropped substantially with the
`exit of NextWindow (SMART Technologies) from the market
`+ Startup: Sentonsis taking a new approach to bending-wave
`
`+ Startup: RAPTis taking a new approachtoin-glassoptical
`+ P-cap with metal meshis a threatto all other large-format
`touch technologies
`e Commonaility of user experience (UX) with the 3 billion p-cap units
`shipped since 2007 maybethe driving force
`e Cost and complexity (as always) are the impediment
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`130
`
`Toy
`
`
`
`
`
`ITO Electrodes
`
`«* 3M has managed to get ITO electrodes to work
`in a 46-inch display (larger than any other with ITO)
`+ They won't disclose their secret sauce
`—
`
`
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: Photo by Author
`
`
`
`
`
`Wire Electrodes...1
`
`** One more sensorvariation: 10-micron wires
`between two sheets of PET or glass
`+ Commonly usedfor large-format touchscreens
`+ Two main suppliers: Visual Planet & Zytronic, both in the UK
`
`Center
`
`9 floor-to-ceiling
`Visual Planet
`touchscreens in
`the University of
`Oregon Alumni
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`132
`
`(oy,
`
`Source: The University of Oregon
`
`
`
`
`
`Wire Electrodes...2
`
`«+ Zytronic’s new multi-touch large-format p-cap
`+ Previous Zytronic products were self-capacitive (2-touch max)
`e Binstead’s frequency-variation patent was the basis of sensing
`+ New product is mutual-capacitive with very dense electrode pattern
`e Traditional measurement of capacitance reduction causedbyfinger
`e ~1.5 mm electrode spacing in 6 mm x 6 mm cell
`» Density reducesvisibility because the human visual system sees
`a more uniform contrast
`
`e 10-micron insulated copper wires allow crossover(“single layer’)
`>» 100’s O/m at 10 um
`e Can be applied to glass orfilm (including curved surfaces)
`e Initial controller handles all sizes up to 72”; 100”+ possible
`e Minimum 10 touches with palm rejection
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`133
`
`Gee
`
`
`
`
`
`Wire Electrodes...3
`
`«<* Jeff Han from Perceptive Pixel (acquired by Microsoft
`in mid-2012) showed an 82” at CES 2012 (with active
`stylus) and a 72” at Digital Signage Expo (DSE) 2012
`+ Metal electrodes (not ITO) — although Jeff wouldn't talk about the
`electrode material or who is manufacturing the touchscreens
`a ee GF on 5
`
`
`
`Source: Photos by Author
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Wire Electrodes...4
`
`** Both the 72” & 82” look muchbetter than the
`traditional Zytronic zig-zag 10-micron wire pattern
`
`72” at DSE 2012
`
`Source: Photos by Author
`
`72”atDSE2012
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`TRG
`
`
`
`
`
`Metal-Mesh Electrodes
`
`«* “Invisible” metal-mesh electrodesare the biggest
`threat & opportunity in large-format p-cap
`+ Many suppliers are working on this
`+ Few (if any) have made formal product announcements
`+ Display sizes of 42” to 55” are frequently mentioned
`+ There aresignificant challenges
`e Total numberof connectionsis large (~250 + ~150 = 400 for 55”)
`e Multiple ganged controllers are required
`e Longer electrodes means slower sensing (larger RC time-constant)
`e Muchlarger numberof electrodes takes longer to sense
`e Numberof suppliers able to print on 1,200 mm webislimited
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Applications...1
`
`** Large-format multi-touch applications
`
`at
`
`pa} Source:
`
`Industrial Control
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Zytronic
`
`Vending
`
`
`
`
`
`Applications...2
`
`«* Applications for curved large-format touchscreens
`
`Kiosks
`Public Information
`wey
`f
`
`g
`
`g a
`
`XS
`3
`SUNN
`
`BY)
`
`.
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`Source:
`
`Zytronic
`
`
`
`
`
`Applications...3
`
`«+ BUT, stepping back from a technology focus,is the
`large-format touch marketlikely to start shrinking?
`+ Interactive media walls — touch is very necessary
`e MultiTaction makesthe best vision-based touch today
`(author’s opinion)
`+ Point-of-information — touch still seems necessary
`+ Digital signage — interaction via smartphone
`+ Education — interaction via tablets (including multi-user!)
`+ TV — interaction via mobile & motion-based devices
`
`+ Horizontal home-gamingtables — will they ever exist?
`+ Other large-format applications??
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Stylus Technologies
`
`“+ History
`“+ Use Cases
`«+ Passive Stylus
`“+ Electromagnetic Resonance (EMR) Stylus
`“+ Active P-Cap Stylus
`“+ Prediction
`** Other Active Stylus Technologies
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Stylus History...1
`
`«+ Microsoft Tablet PCs, PDAs, and early smartphones
`(e.g., Trio) always hadstyli (1989 to 2007), so why are
`weso finger-focused now?
`@ Steve Jobs and the iPhone in 2007 — “Who needsa stylus?”
`© Microsoft’s failure to make the stylus-based Tablet PC a success
`with consumers caused them to de-emphasize the stylus and
`focus on finger-touch in Windows7; that has continued and
`become evenstronger in Windows8
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Stylus History...2
`
`«* Is the stylus coming back into the consumer space?
`YES!
`+ All the major p-cap controller suppliers support active & passive
`+ PC OEMswantto differentiate their products from Apple’s
`+ Legacy Windowssoftware on a Win8 tablet needs a stylus
`+ Android (in Ice Cream Sandwich) supports stylus messages
`+ Samsung has shipped >15M Galaxy Notesin two sizes
`+ Consumption isn’t enough; a stylus is great for creation
`
`
`
`Source: Atmel
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Stylus Use-Cases...1
`
`«+ Taking notes (in both Windows and Android)
`+ Notes are automatically converted into text in background; being
`able to search your “ink” notes is very powerful
`«+ Annotating documents
`+ Typically Office or PDF
`** Quick sketches
`+ Typical whiteboard-type sketches
`«* Precision pointing device, e.g. with Windows 8 Desktop
`+ When you'retrying to select tiny UI elements
`“+ Artistic drawings
`+ It's unbelievable what a real artist can do...
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Stylus Use Cases...2
`
`
`
`
`
`+), Tools. View|Help |- (19% +File Edit Lox
`
`
`
`
`
`software
`
`Created with
`an N-Trig active
`stylus on a
`Fujitsu Lifebook
`using ArtRage
`
`
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14 144
`
`Gee
`
`
`
`
`
`Passive Stylus...1
`
`** A passive stylus can be any conductive object
`+ Metal rod
`
`+ Conductive plastic
`+ Ballpoint pen
`+ #2 pencil (shown at CES 2014)
`+ Longfingernail
`+ And those horrible 7 mm conductive-rubber-tipped styli
`e Needed for backwards compatibility with early tablets with low SNR
`«* Tip diameter
`+ State of the art is 1.5 to 2.0 mm
`
`e Next generation is 1.0 mm
`+ Essentially every controller supplier supports this now
`but not many have madeit out into shipping products yet
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Passive Stylus...2
`
`«+ Advantages
`+ Extremely low cost
`+ Easily replaceable
`+ Can be made any size and comfort level by low-tech methods
`+ Improves as SNR increases
`
`«+ Disadvantages
`+ No hover that meets Microsoft's specification
`+ There’s no OS support (yet) for differentiating between
`finger & stylus
`+ No pressure-sensing, so art and handwriting aren't as good
`+ Resolution can't be better than a finger
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Electromagnetic Resonance
`(EMR) Stylus...1
`
`«* Key characteristics
`+ Second sensor under the LCD
`
`+ Batteryless electronic stylus
`
`LCD
`
`Acer TM100
`
`(Thefirst
`Microsoft
`
`Tablet PC
`
`convertible)
`
`
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14 V4
`
`Source: Wacom
`
`
`
`
`
`EMR Stylus...2
`
`(%
`
`WodACOM
`
`Cordless pen
`without battery
`
`Pen equivalentcircuit
`
`Pressure-sensitive
`capacitor (Crip)
`
`Coil (L)
`
`
`Sensorgrid schematic
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
` Transmitted RFi *, Received RF
`
`
`Many wires
`
` 5-8 wires
`
`Serial/USB
`interface
`to host
`
`
`
`
`
`EMR Stylus...3
`
`“* Variations
`+ Sensor substrate (rigid FR4 vs. flexible 0.3 - 0.6 mm PET)
`+ Pen diameter (3.5 mm “PDA pen’to 14 mm “executive” pen)
`“* Size range
`+ 2” to 14”
`
`** Controllers
`+ Proprietary
`** Advantages
`Controller for 10.4”
`Sesese Ren
`—
`+ Very high resolution (1,000 dpi)
`+ Pen “hover” (mouseover = move cursor withoutclicking)
`+ Sensoris behind LCD = high durability & no optical degradation
`+ Batteryless, pressure-sensitive pen
`
`
`
`
`
`| Single controller can
`
`_ run both pendigitizer
`7
`TouchPanel - sss, & p-Cap finger touch
`
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`EMR Stylus...4
`
`«+ Disadvantages
`+ Electronic pen = disables productif lost; relatively expensive
`+ Difficult integration requires lots of shielding in mobile computer
`+ Sensor can't be integrated with some LCDs
`+ Single-source for mobile CE devices (Wacom)= relatively high cost
`«+ Applications
`+ Phablets and tablets
`+ E-book readers
`+ Opaque desktop graphics tablets
`+ Integrated tablet (pen) monitors
`“* Suppliers
`+ Wacom, Hanvon, Waltop,
`UC-Logic/Sunrex, KYE
`
`
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`EMR Stylus...5
`
`«+ Samsung Galaxy Note sketching demo at CES 2012
`
`(2 sensors!)
`
`Pp-cap
`touchscreen
`AND a
`Wacom
`EMR
`stylus
`
`The Galaxy
`Notes use
`both a
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: Photos by Author
`
`
`
`
`
`Active P-Cap Stylus...1
`
`Stylus
`
`
`
`
`16lines
`
`3) Stylus LF transmission
`containing:
`* TIP Pressure level
`* Buttons status
`=
`ID
`
`Projectedcapacitancesensor esl30-70 KHz
`
`
`2) Every cycle:
`* Atrigs drive/receive analog signal
`to/from the ITO grid lines
`Finger touching the sensoraffect
`signallevel, allowing for touch
`detection
`Atrigs also pick-up Stylus signal
`and determine its location based
`on signallevel distribution across
`the ITO lines
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: N-Trig
`
`
`
`
`
`Active P-Cap Stylus...2
`
`** Variations
`+ One-waydigital RF transmission from stylus to p-cap sensor,
`with both sense & drive electrodes acting as antennas
`e N-Trig has by far the most-developed user experience
`
`+ Two-way transmission between stylus and p-cap sensor
`e Stylus receives p-cap sensordrive-signal, amplifies it, adds digitally
`encodedstylus information, and transmits it back to sensor
`e Atmel wasthefirst to put this into production, but their user
`experienceis still very immature
`
`+ Stylus generates intense e-field at tip
`e E-field adds capacitance to p-cap sensor operating as usual
`(finger subtracts capacitance)
`e Unclearif anyoneis actually doing this...
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`153
`
`Te
`
`
`
`
`
`Active P-Cap Stylus...3
`
`«+ Advantages
`+ Uses existing (single) p-cap sensor
`+ Pen “hover” (mouseover = move cursorwithout clicking)
`+ Stylus tip can be very small (< 1mm)
`+ High resolution and accuracy
`
`«+ Disadvantages
`+ Stylus requires power source (battery or super-capacitor),
`which requires charging contacts in stylus-garage and
`charging circuit in host computer
`+ Stylus technology is unique to each p-cap controller supplier
`e Total lack of interoperability will probably prevent active stylus
`from ever becoming mainstream
`e OEMs'desire to obtain high margin on accessories makes the
`problem even worse
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Active vs. Passive Stylus Summary
`
`«+ This battle’s been going on since the 1990s...
`
`+ Very low-cost
`+ “Good enough”
`+ Improves as SNR increases
`+ #2 pencil is the gold standard
`+ “Artificial finger” in Windows
`+ Moreflexibility in Android
`
`+ More expensive
`+ Pressure-sensing
`+ Hover(required for Windows)
`+ Higher resolution
`+ Customizable features
`
`EMR (batteryless)
`
`P-cap (powered)
`
`+ N-Trig leads
`+ Others following
`+ NO interoperability
`
`+ Wacom leads
`+ Others insignificant
`+ 2" sensor
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Costin high-volumeis surprisingly close
`
`
`
`
`
`Prediction
`
`** Passive stylus is going to win (become mainstream)
`+ Being “good enough’is very important in the touch industry!
`+ It's the lowest-costsolution
`
`+ However...
`
`e Thereis still some chicken-and-egg regarding good support
`for stylus in application software
`e Some OEMshaven't boughtinto the needfor a stylus yet
`(more chicken-and-egg)
`
`** Active stylus will remain a niche
`+ Active stylus’ total lack of interoperability and very high
`price as a replacement accessory will prevent it from ever
`becoming mainstream
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Other Active-Stylus Technologies
`
`** Combination ultrasonic & infrared
`+ Used in manyclip-on and clipboard-style digital note-taking
`accessories; also available for iPad
`«+ Embedded CMOS-camera stylus by Anoto
`+ Widely licensed for digital-pen note-taking accessories and
`form-filling applications
`+ Used by LG Displaysin large-format touch
`+ Used in Panasonic 4K 20”professional tablet shown at CES 2013
`«* Infrared LED light-pen
`+ Used by iDTIin their light-sensing in-cell touch monitor
`«* Visible laser-pointer
`+ Used byisiQiri in large-format touch
`+ Also works with iDTI light-sensing in-cell touch
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`¢¢ Multi-Touch
`** OS Application-Development Support
`“+ Middleware
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Multi-Touch
`
`¢* Multi-touch is defined as the ability to recognize
`two or more simultaneous touch points
`
`«* Multi-touch was invented in 1982 at the
`University of Toronto (not by Apple in 2007!)
`
`«* “Pinching” gestures werefirst defined in 1983
`(not by Apple in 2007!)
`
`** Windows7 (2009) & Windows8 (2012) both support
`multi-touch throughout the OS andare architected to
`support an “unlimited” number (~100) of simultaneous
`touch points
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Multi-Touch Architecture
`
`,
`|
`Application
`|
`
`] Capable of decoding multiple
`streams of moving points and
`taking actions in response
`
`|
`
`simultaneous points
`
`Capable of delivering multiple
`streams of moving points (and
`acting on a defined subset of them)
`
`Capable of delivering sets of
`simultaneous points to the OS
`
`Capable of sensing multiple
`
`Source: The author
`
` SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Why Multi-Touch Has
`BecomeSo Important...1
`
`«+ Apple
`+ Apple established multi-touch as a “must-have”for coolness.
`The result is that people of all ages expect every display they
`see to be touchable with multiple fingers
`“+ Gaming
`+ Gamingis a natural for multi-touch. Try playing air hockey
`without multi-touch...
`
`“* Unintended touches
`+ One of the major values of multi-touch is to allow the system
`to ignore unintended touches(“palm rejection”, “grip suppression”,
`etc.). As desktop screens become morehorizontal(recline)
`this will become even more important.
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Why Multi-Touch Has
`BecomeSo Important...2
`
`¢¢ Multi-user collaboration
`
`+ Whentwo people wantto collaborate on a large screen(e.g.,
`a student and teacheron an interactive “whiteboard” LCD),
`multi-touch is essential
`
`e Identifying which touch belongsto which useris still unsolved
`e It IS currently possible to uniquely identify multiple simultaneousstyli
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`How Many Touches Are Enough’?...1
`
`«* The industry has multiple answers
`+ Microsoft settled for 5 touches in Win8 (they wanted 10)
`e But now underpressure from OEMsthey have buckled and
`reducedit to TWO touchesfor All-in-One desktops (BIG mistake!)
`+ The p-cap touchscreen suppliers under 30” either say “10” or
`“as many as possible” (e.g., 3M’s p-cap supports 60+ touches)
`+ The large-format touchscreen suppliers say that 40 is enough
`«* In practice it depends on the hardware and
`controller firmware implementation
`+ Ideally the touchscreen should /gnoreall other touches beyond
`however manythe product is guaranteeing
`+ This is usually called “pa/m rejection’ and its implementationis
`absolutely critical to the user experience
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`How Many Touches Are Enough?...2
`
`«* The answer actually depends onthe application
`+ For a small mobile device, 2-5 (one hand) are enough
`+ For a single-user app on any device (even an 82”screen),
`it's hard to see why more than 10 (two hands) are needed
`+ For a multi-user app, it depends...
`e For a 55-inch gaming table, 40 (8 hands) is not unreasonable
`» The key touchscreen specification is probably response time (latency)
`e For a 65-inchinteractive “whiteboard” LCD, 20 (4 hands)is
`probably enough, although an argument can be madefor 40
`» BUT,the key touchscreen specifications are entirely different:
`
`minimum stylus tip size, pre-touch, jitter, ink-lag, etc., can all be critical
`
`From a video of a very
`coo! multi-player game
`on the FlatFrog website
`
`Source: FlatFrog
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`#1 Reference On Multi-Touch
`
`«* “Multi-Touch Systems that
`| Have Known and Loved”
`
`+ www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“If you can only manipulate one
`point ... you are restricted to the
`gestural vocabulary ofa fruitfly.
`We were given multiple limbs
`for a reason. It is nice to be
`
`
`able to take advantage of them.”
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`7
`
`Bill Buxton, 2008
`Principal Researcher,
`Microsoft Research
`
`
`
`
`
`For Windows, the “Logo”
`Is the Starting Point
`
`
`
`«+ A set of touch performance standards designed
`to ensure a high-quality user experience
`+ 5 touch-point minimum
`+ Extra input behavior i
`+ Touchscreenjitter
`+ High-resolution timestamp
`a@
`+ Input separation
`|Windows8
`+ Noise suppression
`'
`_Compatible |
`+ Physical input position
`+ Reporting rate
`+ Response latency
`+ Cold boot latency
`+ Touch resolution
`+ User experience
`+ Pre-touch
`+ Pen tests
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Windows8 Touch
`
`amWindows8
`
`«+ The Win8 Touch Logo specification is based on p-cap
`+ Win7 spec wasbasedon optical, which hadlittle relevance
`+ Win8 spec creates a commontouch capability for mobile phones,
`tablets, notebooks, and desktops
`e This may be very significant for multi-platform applications!
`** Basic spec requirements
`+ Minimum of 5 simultaneous touches; must ignore an additional 5
`+ Tablets must be zero-bezel: otherwise 20 mm border minimum
`+ Respondto first touch in < 25 ms
`+ Subsequent touches must be < 15 ms at 100 Hz forall touches
`+ Better than 0.5 mm accuracy with < 2 mm offset from actual location
`+ Nojitter when stationary; < 1mm when moving 10 mm
`+ Pre-touch < 0.5 mm
`+ Finger separation >= 12 mm horizontal/vertical, 15 mm diagonal
`e But on-screen keyboards and normal human behaviorviolatesthis!
`
`intel)
`SID DISPLAY WEEK‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Windows8 Touch
`Application Development amWindows 8
`
`«+ There are multiple development environments
`commonly used in Windows8, each of
`which handlestouch differently
`+ Native C++ (Win32/COM)
`+ Managed environment (.NET Framework)
`+ Silverlight & WPF (WindowsPresentation Foundation)
`+ Adobe Flash
`
`+ Modern (Win-8) using C# and XAML or HTML5 and JavaScript
`e Modern appstoday only represent one aspect of business computing:
`reporting/dashboards, with moderate-to-light data updating
`«* From my perspective...
`+ As a hardware person, | find the level of detail required
`to do anything significant in touch software to be excruciating
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Android Touch
`Application Development
`
`
`iam
`i
`
`«+ Android has an extensive and growing API
`for touch & stylus
`+ | hear complaints about the degree of bugginess
`+ From what| can tell, the level of tediousnessis a
`little better than Windows
`
`+ The Android API supports up to 256 touches, but the actual number
`dependson the hardware & firmware implementation
`in the device — 2 to 5 isn’t unusual
`
`+ Fragmentation of Android (different versions from each OEM)
`appears to make developing a robust run-on-anything Android
`touch application very difficult
`«+ The language decision is easy -— it’s Java or nothing
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`iOS Touch
`Application Development
`
`|
`OS /
`
`** IOS seems to have the most constrained touch
`application development environment
`+ Butit's not any easier than Android -- in the chapter on touch in
`“Programming iOS 5” (an O'Reilly book), the words “messy” and
`“tricky” seem to occur a lot
`** The language decision is easy -— it’s Objective-C
`or nothing
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Middleware...1
`(ConsumerElectronics)
`
`«+ The best example of middleware in CE devicesis
`from MyScript (formerly “Vision Objects”)
`+ This is what makes the Samsung Galaxy Notes possible
`+ Extremely powerful, configurable capabilities
`e Note-taking, handwriting recognition, mathematics (including
`equations), music notation, even “ink as a data-type” (same
`concept as in Windows,stores both ink and ASCII text)
`
`UI: A thin layer of Samsung look & feel
`MyScript Middleware
`
`(Contains most of the Notes’ functionality) Android
`
`Samsung Galaxy Notes’ software stack
`
`Source: The author
`
`
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Middleware...2
`(Large-Format / Commercial)
`
`«+ The best middleware for large-format applications
`(in the author’s opinion) is Snowflake
`+ Goodstarting point for commercial applications
`+ Includes 30+ multi-touch apps (entertainment, presentation,
`creativity, media-browsing, etc.)
`+ Includes an SDK
`
`+ Runs on Win 8/7/Vista/XP, Mac OS X Lion & Snow Leopard,
`and Linux Ubuntu
`
`«+ Snowflake simplifies handling...
`+ Touch & gesture events, audio, video, images
`+ PDFs, 3D, on-screen keyboards, web browsing
`+ Multiple languages, QuickTimeintegration, etc.
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Middleware...3
`
`
`
`“* Snowflake home screen
`==
`7
`
`3D Viewer
`
`lla ele
`
`fcle p45]
`
`(elcoen
`
`teenygs
`
`bugs Saige Collect Conniledge
`
`Leis fele|Orny:cliactsof mo Video
`
`4. 3 oy ae
`
`Orunb
`
`aerate
`
`came Maps
`
`t Machine
`
`Spowdoku.
`
`Spacetube Special Effects
`
`StgtkKs
`
`—
`
`Tracer One|
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`Source: NuiTeq
`
`
`
`
`
`Middleware...4
`
`«+ Other alternative “middleware”for large-format
`+ Omnitapps
`e Less complete, Windowsonly, no SDK, more for product marketing
`+ Intuilab
`
`e Commercial multi-touch application platform with Kinect, RFID, etc.
`+ GestureWorks (Ideum)
`e Robust Flash multi-touch development environment
`+ 22 Miles
`
`e Sales productivity application for iOS, Android, Windows & Mac
`+ Sotouch
`
`e Application platform for wayfinding and presentations
`+ Fingertapps (Unlimited Realities)
`e Multi-touch demo software
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Conclusions
`
`¢¢ Future Trends & Directions
`*“* Suggested Reading on Touch
`“* Recommended Conferences & Trade Shows on Touch
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK ‘14
`
`
`
`
`
`Future Trends & Directions...1
`
`«+ P-cap is here to stay
`+ It is totally dominating consumerelectronics
`+ Consumerp-cap is getting much closer to meeting commercial
`application requirements
`e For example, glove-touch and water-resistance
`+ P-cap’s capabilities are becoming increasingly attractive in
`commercial applications
`e Curved touch-panels,particularly in automotive
`e Light touch expected by ALL touch-panel users
`e Flat-bezel in customer-facing applications
`e Multi-touch wherever images are viewed (e.g., photo-printing kiosk)
`+ The forecasts for commercial penetration of p-cap are
`MUCH too conservative
`
`SID DISPLAY WEEK‘14
`
`WAS
`
`intel)
`
`
`
`
`
`Future Trends & Directions...2
`
`«* [TO-
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
