Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

Apple reportedly cancels contract for quantum dot iPhone camera

Last week, shares of Nanoco, a British firm specializing in quantum dot technology, sank nearly 80% on news that a major U.S. customer canceled a project tied to a lucrative supply contract. Reports now claim the unnamed client was Apple.

Without citing sources, The Telegraph reports Apple contracted Nanoco to develop quantum dot (QD) technology for a next-generation iPhone image sensor.

The Manchester-based Nanoco is a specialist in the field of cadmium-free QDs, which are typically used to enhance the picture quality of large-format screens like high-definition televisions. Applied to an iPhone's camera, QDs could theoretically enhance image quality and assist in the rollout of advanced augmented reality features.

QDs are technically nanocrystals made from various semiconductor materials that exhibit special quantum mechanical characteristics. Of interest to display makers, as well as other industries in the optics field, are QDs' light-emitting properties. Specifically, the material can be "tuned," or manufactured, to emit very narrow spectrums of light.

Currently, commercial QD applications are limited to top-level filters. Used in conventional hardware like LED-backlit LCD panels, the dots enable more accurate and efficient representation of certain base colors.

Apple has been actively investigating quantum dot applications since at least 2013, with a recent patent filing outlining a "hybrid" OLED and QD LED display, though the technology has yet to make its way into a shipping device.

Nanoco in 2018 announced a partnership with a "large, undisclosed U.S. listed corporation" and in January said it extended the contract to cover stress testing and refinements. According to the report, the agreement was worth 17.1 million pounds ($21.7 million) — more than half of Nanoco's revenue — to be paid out over two years, a sum that would allow the firm to expand production facilities in Cheshire.

Last Friday, Nanoco said the U.S. client had canceled the project, triggering a market exodus that saw the company's value plummet from 93 million pounds to 24 million pounds.

Lending credence to the report, market research firm BlueFin Research last week claimed Apple discontinued development of QD image sensors, saying the company found the technology too expensive to mass produce. Instead of QD technology, the iPhone maker is believed to be working on a rear-facing 3D laser mapping system similar to TrueDepth, though the solution is unlikely to debut until 2020 at the earliest.



18 Comments

stuke 15 Years · 123 comments

Quantum dots, carbon nanotubes, graphene...fascinating materials science with nearly impossible materials engineering (at scale and cost for consumer goods).  I hope Nanoco pulls through and finds another market/customer.

mikethemartian 18 Years · 1493 comments

The density of states of an ideal quantum dot is a Dirac delta function so the energy/frequency of its states are exact.

iOS_Guy80 5 Years · 905 comments

Brings make memories of the GT ADVANCED (GTAT) Sapphire turmoil.

wizard69 21 Years · 13358 comments

iOS_Guy80 said:
Brings make memories of the GT ADVANCED (GTAT) Sapphire turmoil.

Maybe not!   This could be a mistake on Apples part.  If successful a QD based sensor could have higher sensitivity so there is good reason to pursue this tech.   Any number of companies could step in here.  

mark fearing 16 Years · 441 comments

wizard69 said:
iOS_Guy80 said:
Brings make memories of the GT ADVANCED (GTAT) Sapphire turmoil.
Maybe not!   This could be a mistake on Apples part.  If successful a QD based sensor could have higher sensitivity so there is good reason to pursue this tech.   Any number of companies could step in here.  

True, but I take it that Apple did their due diligence and realized that either the tech is not working, or the cost to commercialize is too great. Or perhaps they discovered something with the tech that makes it problematic. There is a reason to pursue many technologies but - the whole 'need to ship' steps in.