Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Hardware

Teardown of Unreleased LG Rollable Shows Why Rollable Phones Aren't a Thing (arstechnica.com) 44

A teardown video of LG's never-released Rollable phone helps explain why rollable phones never became a real product category: they were likely too expensive, fragile, and complicated to manufacture at scale.

"The complexity of the internals would have made the Rollable extremely expensive to manufacture, and it would have demanded a high price tag," reports Ars Technica. "Durability is also a big concern. There's just a lot going on inside this phone, with multiple motors, springy arms, tracks, and a screen that has to loop around the back. [...] It seems unlikely the LG Rollable could have survived daily use for multiple years." From the report: The LG Rollable is just one of several rollable concept phones that appeared throughout the early 2020s. Flexible OLED screens had finally become affordable, leading to foldable phones like the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold. Although, "affordable" is relative here. Foldables were and still are very expensive devices. Based on what we can see of the complex inner workings of the LG Rollable, these devices may have commanded even higher prices. Noted YouTube phone destroyer JerryRigEverything managed to snag a working prototype LG Rollable. It may even be the unit LG demoed at CES 2021.

The device looks like a regular phone at first glance, but a quick swipe activates the motor, which unfurls additional screen real estate from around the back. This makes the viewable area about 40 percent larger without the added thickness of a foldable. The device expands with the aid of two tiny motors, which are attached via straight teeth to an internal track. The screen assembly has zipper-like teeth that keep it locked into the frame as it moves. The motors make a surprising amount of noise when operating, so LG designed the phone to play a musical chime to hide the sound. While the motor does the heavy lifting, the phone also has a lattice of articulating spring-loaded arms inside that keep the OLED panel even as the frame slides side to side. The battery and motherboard sit in a tray that allows the back of the phone to expand as the OLED rolls into view.

This is a prototype phone, featuring a chunky frame and visible screws. That helped Zack Nelson from JerryRigEverything successfully disassemble and reassemble the phone. So this little bit of mobile history was not destroyed, and the teardown gives us a good look at how LG was hoping to attract new customers before calling it quits.

Teardown of Unreleased LG Rollable Shows Why Rollable Phones Aren't a Thing

Comments Filter:
  • Until we can 3d print metal, glass, and silicon in situ. Then you just print it instead of assembling it, and possible within reach of an ambitious middle schooler when the printer technology is off-the-shelf. (So maybe when I'm 80)

    • Why glass? Plastic would work just as well. And 3d printing is not necessarily required. Chips are printed using photolithography.
      • Why glass? Plastic would work just as well.

        No, it wouldn't, and that's why. We started using glass on phones for a reason, and that reason is that it works better.

        • That's not convincing. Glass is more scratch resistant than plastic, but so what? If you can print rollable plastic phones for cheap, then you can sell disposable phones for cheap. Not everyone wants overpriced premium looking jewelry that they have to treat with care.
          • If you can print rollable plastic phones for cheap, then you can sell disposable phones for cheap. Not everyone wants overpriced premium looking jewelry that they have to treat with care.

            You have to treat the plastic screen with more care than the modern glass screen.

        • by dbialac ( 320955 )
          That was actually a call by Steve Jobs. Plastic didn't hold up as well as glass.
          • Specifically certain types of glass work better in smart phones. Home or automotive glass would not work for phones. If plastic worked better, other smart phone manufacturers would use it. But the vast majority of them use glass. Probably for good reasons.
            • Actually, all phones had plastic displays for unbreakability untill the iPhone, indeed glass because shiny. Glass also conflicted with resistive touch sensing, but Apple/Jobs worked around that by pushing for a finger touch device. We've all accepted it ages ago, but having your hand in front of the screen is not optimal. Typing on an on-screen keyboard, where your key presses are obscured by your finger is really not all that. Sadly, no alternative made it, partially for being too cumbersome, too expensive
              • Actually, all phones had plastic displays for unbreakability untill the iPhone, indeed glass because shiny. Glass also conflicted with resistive touch sensing, but Apple/Jobs worked around that by pushing for a finger touch device.

                Er what? You do know that Apple "worked around" that by employing capacitive multi-touch technology, right? They bought a company specifically for the patents and tech. Also you do know that Apple worked with Corning to make a type of glass that was rugged, thin, and strong enough for phones. Corning had been experimenting with Gorilla Glass for decades for other applications. Now Gorilla Glass is used in phones and laptops.

                Typing on an on-screen keyboard, where your key presses are obscured by your finger is really not all that. Sadly, no alternative made it, partially for being too cumbersome, too expensive or just not from Apple

                There have been alternatives as Blackberry existed after the iPhone was introduced

                • Exactly, Apple didn't want to use resistive touch which was very precise, so they developed multi touch capacitive glass screens. The first iterations were not all that, but somehow the world suddenly accepted a dropped phone to be broken. Nokia couldn't have made the iPhone a success, because their customers would never have accepted a phone that breaks when dropped. Not until way after the iPhone made that acceptable. Same for one day battery use before needing to recharge, another thing that the iPhone g
                  • Apple didn't want to use resistive touch which was very precise

                    I've owned a lot of resistive touch devices. Zero of them were "very precise". Most of them had a lot of depth so you'd struggle to pick pixels even when they were big enough to easily count. Palm Pilots and Visors, Zoomer/GRiDPad 2390, an HTC phone, blah blah blah. Phones had plastic screens because gorilla glass hadn't been invented yet. Jobs was irritated by his scratched plastic screen at exactly the right time and yes, made the right call. Yes, a plastic stylus on a resistive screen is more precise tha

                    • Hindsight is 20 20. I was in the mobile industry, and Apple made a bold move and carried it out properly. Unlike Nokia they tapped new users, which is one reason it didn't fail, contrary to Nokia, had they produced phones that break when they fall, in the opinion of about anyone I spoke with about the topic. And I spoke with many, I've even manned an exhibition at MWC at some point.

                      Regarding precision, on my Nokia internet tablet I got near pixel precision, yes, not at the level of using a mouse on a pc b

      • ideally you'd want to print aluminum oxide but I'd take some tough glass instead.
        and if you make your chips outside of the crazy design, you are then stuck having to assemble a possibly impossible jigsaw puzzle.

        No, I think in the far future there would be no point in doing traditional photolithography for a low performance consume device that's sub-100 TOPS could be a lower density chip-on-glass or flexi-chip design and much thinner than your typical substrate and packaging.

        This is all supposition and armch

    • Re:never? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by dbialac ( 320955 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2026 @10:49AM (#66081374)
      Foldables are fine. I've owned 4 Z-Flips. Their thickness isn't an issue. Your jeans might be the problem, but even then they fit fine and don't warp like an iPhone does. The fact is properly designed versions fit into my pockets a lot better than flat phones in part because they don't need a case. The Z-Flip 5+ are terrible phones because the outside display completely destroys the whole concept behind a flip phone: when you drop it, the screen doesn't break. But hey, lets let a reviewer who holds on to a phone for 2 weeks determine the design instead of somebody who's owned them for years.
      • Earlier foldable (flip) phones were only preferable because the "candy bar" alternatives weren't as pocketable until a few generations had gone by and designs like the BlackBerry came along and added sliding keyboards that brought a lot of advantages over flip phones. Modern smartphones are slim enough to be kept in a front pocket for most men's pants even if they are wider than most devices before the advent of the smartphone. Women carry their phones in purses for the most part so they're even less concer
  • by Locke2005 ( 849178 ) on Monday April 06, 2026 @06:22PM (#66080498)
    My ex didn't ask me for advice first and bought the Samsung folding phone to impress her friends. Yep, it's got a big line of non-functional pixels down the middle now, exactly as I would have expected.
    • by Hentes ( 2461350 )

      That's exactly the problem a rolling screen solves.

    • And? Early adopters have bugs. The question is was your ex happy with the phone, not whether it lasted as long as someone other than her expected it to.

      • Surely she's overjoyed by a line of nonfunctional pixels and your objection is logical.

        No, wait, scratch that. That's all 100% wrong, and you're going nutso.

        • Surely she's overjoyed by a line of nonfunctional pixels and your objection is logical.

          No, wait, scratch that. That's all 100% wrong, and you're going nutso.

          Except you're making assumptions. Early adopters, and adopters of new shiny tech very frequently are overjoyed and accept that their toy may not have the same longevity as something else. It's literally why we call these people early adopters. It's literally the purpose for using a term to separate them from people like you.

          You never asked the person, you're making an assumption. OP said she got the phone to impress her friends. Did it work? Maybe it did exctly what she hoped it would do and and was an inve

          • by kellin ( 28417 )

            You're asking someone on slashdot to "be better."

            I'll call that out as a nutso statement. We know people on this site can't "be better." They do, or do not.

          • You never asked the person, you're making an assumption

            Why don't you go read his response, Dildo Draggins?

      • She bitches about it every time I bring it up. I have to bite my tongue to keep from laughing at her.
    • No such problems after two years with the Honor Magic V2. It's prone to develop bright spots on the big display though, if something pointy touches it too forcibly anywhere, which does not need that much force at all. More recent Honor folders may be somewhat improved there.

    • What is even better than being able to brag to your friends is to be able to complain to your friends and family. So this is the gift that keeps on giving.

    • My ex didn't ask me for advice first and bought the Samsung folding phone to impress her friends. Yep, it's got a big line of non-functional pixels down the middle now, exactly as I would have expected.

      Even when they are functioning for a bit, that fold is a real distraction. I looked at one once, and it was a big nope. You can't unsee the fold. I can't be the only person who wants to look at a nice, flat screen.

      Conjecture - as the Millennials are reaching the age of presbyopia, I wonder if that is driving some of this foldable technology?

      • The only advantage of that phone was you could use a photo of an open toilet for a screensaver, so every time you closed the phone it looked like you were closing a toilet lid. I tried to set that screensaver up for her, but she wouldn't let me.
        • The only advantage of that phone was you could use a photo of an open toilet for a screensaver, so every time you closed the phone it looked like you were closing a toilet lid. I tried to set that screensaver up for her, but she wouldn't let me.

          That's because only men are supposed to put the toilet seat down....

    • by dbialac ( 320955 )
      I've never had that problem. I still have the original Z-Flip and use it as a secondary line. I was in the hospital for 5 weeks. It was dropped over and over by hospital staff when the moved my tray. Still works fine. The exterior of the phone protected the screen.
  • by upuv ( 1201447 ) on Monday April 06, 2026 @09:43PM (#66080722) Journal

    Moving parts is the curse on durability.

    Todays phones have 0 moving parts. If you exclude the external buttons for volume and power etc.

    Moving parts are point of failure. Moving parts almost always point to a point of dust/liguid intrusion. Moving parts are extensive to build assemble and maintain.

    Rollables as designed currently are a mess of moving parts. And in this LG phone case. Motorised moving parts. Which is even worse.

    I don't really think you will see a rollable until almost all moving parts are gone. The only way I see them working is if you get a screen that literally rolls up all by itself. No extra casing, mechanisms etc. Just the screen that rolls up into tube around a solid core body. To do this the durability of the screen needs to improve vastly. The structural regidity needs to be a core attribute of the screen not the thing holding the screen.

    And to top it all off it has to be cheap. Lets face if a rollable is going to wear out much faster than a modern gorilla glass phone. So replacement cycles are going to be much quicker. People will not shell out $3000 every 6-12 months for a phone. ( I acknowledge the apple cult does have a subset of people that do this. )

    • I'd trust the durability of every other part more than the durability of the screen itself.

    • by Pieroxy ( 222434 )

      There are moving parts in all the cameras, you know, for being abot to focus.

    • What vibrates the phone? Is that not a moving part? I thought it was a tiny motor with an off-balance weight attached to the central shaft.

      Also, speakers are a moving back and forth to generate sound.

  • by rossdee ( 243626 )

    Why would you want to roll a phone anyway?

  • ...and stupid.

    After all, we gave up scrolls for books, because rolling the things is dumb.

  • by zmollusc ( 763634 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2026 @05:20AM (#66080998)

    ...if your browser was on one screen and all the popup ad windows were on the other.

  • by jpellino ( 202698 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2026 @09:58AM (#66081274)

    Letâ(TM)s just call them what they are, dopamine delivery devices.
    In which case no idea is too far out in order to monetize what goes through them.

He: Let's end it all, bequeathin' our brains to science. She: What?!? Science got enough trouble with their OWN brains. -- Walt Kelly

Working...