Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Introduces 24-Inch LCD
floam (who got the info from MacUser UK
)writes: "Samsung, in whom Apple invested $100 million to further expand Samsung?s TFT-LCD flat-panel display production capacity, is now offering a 24" digital LCD monitor. The Syncmaster 204T offers support for resolutions of up to 1920x1200 pixels, a dual monitor support to toggle between input from two different monitors, support for both DVI Compliant and Analog input, and a 16:10 aspect ratio. The $8,000 monitor also supports picture-in-picture, or multi-screen functionality, which can display multiple windows on the screen and offers 'True Color,' 16.7 million color support. Supporting two full-size A4 pages, it delivers more than 170 degrees of conic view and the company says that 'all images regardless of input resolution can be scaled to 1920x1200, 16:10 WUXGA mode with unsurpassed sharpness and vividness.'" Yes, please. Imagine when we'll be able to scoff at the "only" 24" LCD screen being bundled with the cheap system at CompUSA ... reason to dream, anyhow.
samsung's website claims the 240T has a dot pitch of 0.27 mm. that's about the same pitch as a 14.1" XGA (1024x768) screen. so resolution-wise, it's not that great. compare this to sgi's 17.3" 1600sw flat panel (1600x1024 at 0.23 mm dot pitch), or the screen's on those 15" uxga a21p ibm thinkpads (1600x1200 at 0.19 mm dot pitch). for viewing text or graphics up close, smaller dot pitch is better (all else being equal:)
Correct, LCD/TFT are very different.
Duff pixels are indeed "part of the deal".
/However/, various companies set the acceptable quality levels at different ration/pixel-counts.
On a standard 14" laptop display some big name manufacturers will ship up to 10 duff pixels. (Hewlett Packard in my experience not only set the approval level the highest, but also employ people who can't count to judge them, I've returned 2 laptops for screen problems in the last few years - both HP). However, this appears to be big-name complacency on their part. In my experience the _small_ manufacturers of laptops _seem_ to have a higher overall quality when it comes to the TFTs (and super-twists in the past) they use.
One "bargain" that used to be available from SGI was the "reject shop" that they ran. They used to sell _really_ cheaply huge flat panel displays for about a quarter of what they would have been worth if they didn't have about 20 duff pixels.
FatPhil
--
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
*cough* lives under norwegian bridges *cough*
The Slashdot Paradox: "100% Overrated"
What's the biggie - we all know this is possible it's the production yield/cost that's a bitch. That's why big flat TVs cost as much as a used car. That's why half of the cost of a laptop is the screen and the manufacturers have "an acceptable number of bad pixels" policy on returns. 24" woooeeee. I have an executive briefing center with half a dozen 48 inch flat high rez panels and one that's 72 inches with 200lpi.
At IBM PartnerWorld in Atlanta this past week, they showed off the most impressive display I've ever seen. Here are some of the specs from a card I picked up on it:
Image size: 22" diagonal
Aspect ratio: 16x10
Resolution: 204 ppi (!!)
Addressability: QUXGA-Wide (I think they're making this stuff up... [grin])
Number of pixels: 9.2 Million (3840x2400)
Contrast Ratio: 400:1
This thing, as you might expect, is REALLY impressive. It's like having a fully virtual 11x17 (B-size) sheet of paper in front of you, since the pixel density is one that would be respectable for a printer, much less a screen.
Tiny details and hairlines are sharply visible: they showed a street map of all of Manhatan, and every street was clear, if small. This sort of thing in a foldable, portable, low power form factor would finally give us a viable replacement for paper in some cases.
I have no idea what kind of video card it used, or how much compute power is required to run the thing. It was quite snappy in the demos.
Oh and it's not available yet (it will be targeted at CAD/CAM and medical imaging markets), but when it is, expect to pay around 30 kilobucks. Guess I won't be gettig one after all...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Santa,
There's one more thing I forgot to tell you...
"The pulp and paper industry is one of the largest and most polluting industries in the world; it is the third most polluting industry in North America."
Asikaa
Asikaa
Come in, twenty-seventy-seventy, your time is up.
Damn. You're right, that's not nice at all.
Someone down below (tonywong?) claims that the DVI spec is only up to 1280x1024? Seems a bit short sighted, if true.
Jules
-- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a perl script.
The crisis in California clearly demonstrates that hippie attitudes - such as "conserve in all areas of life" - are totally divorced from reality.
The solution for California is:
1. Let companies build power stations
2. Free the retail price of electricity
Hasn't anyone over there got any idea of basic micro economics?
I hope they made this thing drool-proof...
This is a self-referential sig
One to use... and another to carry around with me to get chicks.
Casual Games/Downloads
At last, now my mock up of the Nebuchanezzer's bridge will be complete! Twelve copies of the Matrix screen saver and I'm good to go!
What's that Neo? Ah yes, "Whoah" indeed.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. - "Big Al" Einstein
I'm wondering where this will end. I realize I have a long, long time yet before the following are affordable and available at CompUSA, but... AFA resolution, once they get it down below 300 ppi on the screen, I'll never be able to see any improvement with these middle-aged peepers. And with screen area, a 48" diagonal monitor sounds really sexy, but really, for anything much above 24", aren't we talking about having to redesign the computer furniture to accomodate the display device? That being said, I'm looking forward to the day I can pick up a 21" CRT display for dirt cheap at Computer Renaissance because everybody's gone to LCD (or whatever flat-panel technology wins out).
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
Garbage. /Ipso facto/ my Eizo weighs 38kg, and the Nokia about the same.
I have a 21" Eizo CRT on my main home machine, and in order to have pinpoint convergence on the whole screen, it's about 24" deep! Likewise on the 21" Nokia monitor at work.
So firstly the monitor is far too close to the end of my nose, as I can't position it far enough back on the desk. (I only want a couple of inches more, I'm really just absurdly close at the moment.)
Also, in order for the CRT to be structurally sound with such large spans of glass, it needs to be quite think (in the same way dinosaur bones are relativelty thinker than crocodile bones which are relatively thicker than newt bones).
I have had to DIY reinforce my crappy desk at home to support the weight! (technology stuff is higher priority than furniture stuff, obviously). A flat pane display would weigh about a third of that. I could put it anywhere. I could even stick it on the wall...
Yes, these are just "convenience", but for some convenience is worth spending money on.
FatPhil
--
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Now scale as needed. After awhile the materials become too unwieldy. Imagine trying to keep two very flat panes of material at extremely precise tolerences apart over large distances in a consumer product... This is exactly what the manufacturers must do. Furthermore the error rate becomes so numerous the product becomes economically impractical. They probably could be made but the manufacturer is better off making more smaller screens for greater profit.
Even if someone does go for making them visualize the flexing in the front panel when the panel is moved around during manufacturing & shipping. You thougt the rainbows on a samaller screen were bad when you touched it consider trying to build a 24"+ pane that doesn't flex.
As manufacturing technologies improve the yields do go up and the defect rates are kept under ontrol but it's still a difficult market. There's also the problem that the market is a moving target: your US$250 million plant that you built last year for 12" screen is a has-been in today's 13" world, gotta recoup that money fast.
It used to be some manufacturers would only replace a screen if one had >2 defects within the radius of a US quarter coin.
Finally we're eventually going to run into things like bandwidth problems. It'll require some impressive technology to control some enormous number of pixels by some enormous number of pixels all with some high number of possible color combinations at the speeds required.
The more adventuresome will now want to jump in with predictions of distributed rendering and local processing etc.)
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
True, I couldn't afford one of these by any stretch of the imagination. OTOH, maybe this is something we should be negotiating when a new job offer comes along.
:)
Mr Manager, I'd love to work for your company, but I would need this monitor in order to do my work effectively. My previous company considered it a very reasonable request, honest!
And while I'm at it, I'd like a pony too
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. - "Big Al" Einstein
DVI is just a digital signal path from computer to display. My 18" IBM TFT display has DVI (which works great with my Mac cube), but it's not doing the bonehead encrypt-all-the-way-to-the pixels trick.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Ever look at the el-cheapo LCD monitors sold at CompUSA and wonder why they don't have the sharpness of a laptop display? It's the analog signal path.
To my eyes, analog (VGA D-Sub-15) LCD monitors look pretty bad. Some of the least expensive models exhibit noticeable 'jitter', which makes them WORSE than a regular CRT display.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
I don't want to sound arrogant or anything, but I saw this monitor for sale here in Geneva, Switzerland... about 3 months ago. Big flat plama screens (for TV) have been around for a few years, but the prices will make you wish they didn't exist.
While the size and luminosity of the Samsung were nice, it wasn't nearly as sharp as Apple's Cinema Display. And for the Samsung's price you can buy a G4 Cube with the 24" panel!
If only flat panels were cheap enough, I could save lots of room in my tiny apartment and my electricity bill would nicely drop...
.m
-- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
I hate to wreck your fascist little dream, but CRTs are likely to be with us for quite some time.
One of the things that CRTs do very very well compared to LCDs is to present consistent colour balance across normal (and abnormal) viewing angles. Even though the stated viewing angle of this (and other) LCD panels is reasonably good, I've never seen an LCD panel that could/did maintain consistent colour across that viewing angle. My limited knowledge of the physics involved suggest that it might not be possible to match (or even approach) the performance of CRTs in this area. For a graphics artist or photographer, or anyone involved in visual arts where colour accuracy is important, LCDs suck.
The prices for LCD panels are high, not because of some conspiracy by the manufacturers, but because the things remain difficult to manufacture. The failure rate of individual pixels is so high that entire displays have to be trashed. I don't have numbers handy @ the moment, but I seem to recall something like 30%-40% of manufactured displays don't meet acceptable standards. Apple, for instance, has been known to issue RMAs for Powerbooks that had 10 or more dead pixels (on a 1024x768 display). Considering the amount of waste, they've got to make up the costs somewhere. They'd be selling at an extreme loss trying to compete with CRT pricing right now. In other words, LCDs, from a QA perspective, suck. Oh, yes and the amount of resources that went into manufacturing and then recycling the defective displays, means that LCDs are not exactly guilt-free anyway.
Aside from the obvious "US != the world" comments, given the amount of power that the modern corporation has wielded in policy/lawmaking, do you honestly believe that such a measure would ever see the light of day? Especially with Dubya in office? I don't think so. And rightly so. I think the pure economics involved in LCD manufacture justify their prices. If I were the CEO of Samsung, and was ordered to lower the price of LCDs, I would either increase the pricing on CRTs to make up the losses (and take a loss on CRTs) or refuse to sell LCDs in the US market (and encourage the grey-market import of them instead).
Where the value of X-Mailer: is the true measure of a man...
Tube based monitors have several problems that come with age. The phosphors can burn in, they can lose vacumn, the electron gun can lose accuracy and coherence (fuzz out), and all phosphor based monitors lose brightness over time.
Generally, if an LCD doesn't go bad in the first six months, it will last until you break it, or until the backlighting burns out, which part can often be replaced seperately.
LCD projectors tend to fail due to heat. LCD in laptops tend to fail due to the flexible connection in the hinged lid. LCD in handhelds tend to fail due to impact, flexing, and bad electrical connections. An LCD monitor should not be subject to any of these problems.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
"Samsung, with digital technology, re-created the world. It was no accident but the result of great effort and technology."
I sure as hell hope that's not true. I *KNEW* I shoulda eaten the blue pill...
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
However, they do support interlace on NTSC and PAL sources.
In this case, it was a real app designed for the studio and adjusted accordingly.
What's the big deal, anyway? There are better ideas for screensavers out there - why copy the Matrix?
Do you *really* wanna be Keanu Reaves?
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
I haven't priced it out, but i imagine you could purchase four 15" lcd displays along with a four head video card you could have a display of 30"x30" for probably a fraction of 8,000$.
Nitrozac says size DEFINITELY matters.
The problem was caused by the government-imposed rate-cap which prevented private electric companies from raising rates to keep supply and demand at equilibrium
The "funny thing" is that was supported by the power companies, who thought it would be a great way to gouge their customers. I hate to burst your conspiratorial little bubble, but the power outages were caused by one simple thing: nobody had expected electricity usage to go that high. That's it. Plants and infrastructure take so long to build you have to plan years in advance. They planned incorrectly.
--
One classic QA problem with TFTs (which, as far as I know, really aren't LCDs technically) is that there is one transistor per pixel. This means that if manufacturing fails for one of these transistors, you end up with a screen with a dead pixel. Obviously, this problem becomes greater as the screen size, and the number of pixels, increases. I've heard that laptop computers, which also use TFTs for their screens, are sometimes sold with a couple of broken pixels, and that is understood as being a normal and expected part of the deal.
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
well ACTUALLY...
/. ers to enjoy, naturally :)
the official windows screensaver at Whatisthematrix runs in 800x600, if memory serves. On a larger, higher resolution monitor, it will be a little box of matrix goodness surrounded by black bars. Add that to the fact that flat panel monitors generally look like crap if not set to the resolution they are designed for, and you've got one basic choice... xmatrix on UN*X, which, while great fun and the screensaver I use, is a basic hacked version which is not at all like the actual matrix code from the movie. (for instance, notice the lack of the "explosion-like" bursts of bright expanding squares as seen in the movie.).
Looks like its time for you to start coding up a newer better version of xmatrix, to be released for all us
Aren't DVD and HDTV 16:9? I was pretty sure that they were, because I found it interesting (but meaningless) that they went from 4:3 to 16:9, squaring both of the numbers. So why are computer monitors going 16:10 and not 16:9? Won't this cause black top and bottom borders still when viewing DVDs and HDTV?
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
insiders at Samsung have reported one problem relating to the quality of the screen image, pet cats have been found trying to pounce on and kill the microsoft office paper clip. Sadly now cat has yet to succeed
________
Does anyone actually have a Java program designed to control air traffic, or for the operation of a nuclear facility?
Yes. If you read the link, it says 85 degrees viewing left, right, top, and bottom.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
IBM's T210, supposedly shipping in May, is 20.8 inches and 2058 x 1536, for about $6000. It's mentioned in this article: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-4963181-0.htm l?tag=mn_hd
--
Vidi, Vici, Veni
I just realized. You're going to need at least 10MB on your vid card to run this at full-res full color! And if Carmack gets his way (64bit floating point color) then I couldn't even run this monitor on my computer!
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
> /Ipso facto/ my Eizo weighs 38kg, and the Nokia about the same.
:-). It's 50Kg, and almost killed us (the delivery guy plus myself) getting it up 3 flights of steps.
Get this: I have a Sony W900 (24" widescreen) but old style CRT
Anyway, like you say, these monitors are *deep*, when we get it to my front door I find that there was less than 1cm space spare to get the enormous box through the door - I almost had to unpack the damn thing outside!
Mike
Tales from behind the Lagom Curtain
> Oh - what's this "delivery guy" nonsense?
:-)
Yeah I'm such a wimp - I couldn't manage to carry the monitor 300km from the distributers to my flat, so I got a guy with a car to do it for me
Mike.
Tales from behind the Lagom Curtain
If those stinking CRT cops come for my monitor I'll fight them to the death. If I throw my old monitors at them then I can say that they are actually weapons and therefore protected under the second ammendment.
I'd be reluctant to spend $600 on a lower end one to find it fuzzing out after two years. This would make them rather more like "renting" than like "buying"... :-(
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
On close examination, you could see that the vertical in the letter 'I' in Microsoft Word was blurred across two pixels. So clearly it was an analog connection.
Digital interfaces are the solution. The Apple widescreen monitor, which uses a digital interface, was the most common monitor at the show.
The SI unit for "solid angle" is the steradian.
What is "170 degrees of conic view"? Do they mean that the screen can be seen (distorted as fuck) from 85 degrees away from the normal in every direction? (That's about 1.8pi steradians - 4pi is the whole sphere, 2pi is a hemisphere.)
FP.
--
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Getting all the wires in, I think.
Each pixel on the screen needs to have its own wires (3, presumably), and as your screens get bigger, their circumference to area ratio gets worse, so it becomes more of a problem to squeeze all the wires in along the back...
After all, 2000 x 1000 x 3 is about 6 million little conducting channels.
I think this is one of the reasons people are so excited about transparent conductors..
Jules
-- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a perl script.
An environmentally-aware computer user faces a difficult conflict since the computer manufacturing industry has traditionally been insensitive to environmental concerns.
LCD display panels are an excellent way to sharply decrease the power requirements of a computing system. It is unfortunate, though, that given this manufacturers and retailers artificially inflate prices far beyond their natural market equilibrium.
As the crises in California plainly demonstrates, we can no longer hold irresponsible power consumption habits, but must try to conserve in all areas of life. Recognizing the critical role that computers fill in today's economy, Congress should immediately move to reduce the cost of LCDs and other energy efficient display systems. Manufacturers cannot be allowed to enjoy the luxury of high prices when archaic cathode ray tubes are wasting incredible amounts of energy.
Although drastic, perhaps the only real option the government has is an outright ban on CRTs, accompanied with a system to confiscate existing units. Only then will superior display technologies such as Samsung's unit be able to gain wide usage.
"The night is long that never finds the day." -- William Shakespeare
Congress should immediately move to reduce the cost of LCDs and other energy efficient display systems.
Gee, you seem to be aware of California's electricity problems, and yet you don't know enough about the situation to avoid doing the same thing with monitors!
The problem was that California government told the California companies how much they could charge for power, but de-regulated their suppliers, meaning their costs could go up, but their profits would go down because they couldn't charge consumers more when the prices went up. End result? The two biggest power companies in California filed for bankruptcy.
And now you want to do the same thing with monitor manufacturers. When will you liberals learn? Keep the frigging government OUT of commerce! Let the market decide.
Manufacturers cannot be allowed to enjoy the luxury of high prices when archaic cathode ray tubes are wasting incredible amounts of energy.
Ummm... so your solution is put these companies out of business?
Although drastic, perhaps the only real option the government has is an outright ban on CRTs, accompanied with a system to confiscate existing units. Only then will superior display technologies such as Samsung's unit be able to gain wide usage.
Oh Christ I wasted all this time on a TROLL!!
"And like that
A colleague of mine drives his SGI 1600SW at 1600x1024 using DVI from his Nvidia and Matrox g400 cards (using XFree 4.0.2 and drivers downloaded from the manufacturers). The flat panel itself uses a proprietary SGI digital interface, however, the panel he bought (circa $1400) came with a multilink adapter allowing DVI or analog input. The analog didn't look all that great, but the DVI was excellent.
So, in short, 1600x1024 works perfectly, meaning that while there may be a 1024 limit on the vertical resolution DVI can drive, there is not a 1280 limitation on the horizontal resolution.
Still, the standard is already showing its age now that even higher res monitors are shipping.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Remember folks, that's a 16:10 aspect ratio, not 8:5. That's twice as big!
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
But my girlfriend said size doesn't matter!
Are you saying she lied to me?
Finally a monitor that's more expensive than the Apple Cinema Display!
You can have all my base, but touch my monitor and you'll really be on the path to destruction!
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. - "Big Al" Einstein