Slashdot Mirror
Chi Mei Announces 20" Active Matrix OLED Display
deglr6328 writes "The final barriers to OLED commercialization have been falling fast lately with Kodak's first product shipping soon, Samsung demoing a 256 color OLED wristwatch phone and now Chi Mei Optoelectronics announcing a 20 inch full color active matrix OLED display. The new display was made possible by a breakthrough using amorphous silicon for the TFT. The new technique is said to allow conventional TFT LCD manufacturers to convert their facilities over to OLED with relative ease."
>>That is pretty pathetic!
The new Dell laptops can do 1600x1200!
what's the point of 1600x1200 on a 15 inch screen? Your only going to run it at 800x600 unless you want to be straining your eyes all the time. at most someone might run it at 1024x768.
I ran my 17 inch monitor at 1024 like most people. Now I have a 21 and run it at 1600x1200, i'm thinking of lowering it because it's almost to small.
Well, it is only the first generation, I'm pretty sure the first generation of LCDs wasn't exactly stunning in comparison to CRTs of the time. There were problems with clor depth, refresh, brightness, etc, not to mention sky high prices.
Wait a few generations, I'm sure they'll become competetive.
He tried to kill me with a forklift!
Well, you say that because you don't understand (like most people) that greater resolution _improves_ readability, if you know how to configure things correctly.
Also, running an LCD on a it's non-native resolution (800x600) is a great way to turn a $2000 monitor into something that looks worse than a $100 vga crt they sold about 10 years ago.
This is thanks to that blurry scaling they use these days. Kind of like buying a corvette and never taking it out of first gear.
If you're proud of that, you go guy!
#6495ED - cornflower blue
The point is that scalable fonts finally end up looking halfway decent. Displaying scalable fonts on a 75dpi or 100dpi screen, with hinting and everything else, is at best a mediocre compromise.
You realise that you can change the dpi setting of your display, don't you?
My Windows box runs at 1280x960 with 120 dpi fonts. This makes the fonts much easier on the eyes (I'm a bit anal about typography) and lets you fit many more icons and toolbars onto the screen.
It does cause problem with a few poorly tested programs who don't lay out their controls in a resolution independent way, but I've found most such programs lacking in other ways as well.
Will ye look at the bezels on that!!!
Seriously, I guess it's because it's a prototype and they need somewhere to house the control circuits that they won't have optimised / minaturised yet.
I'd imagine that on a production model, the control circuitry could be at the back, and a minimal bezel used to allow you to construct your desired wall of 20" monitors.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
Um, because you're paying for much more than the raw manufacturing? A lot of the money goes to the movie studio and the production house which did the mastering, extras, DVD menus, etc. Some goes to the distribution chain.
Prices to purchase movies have come down a LOT over the past decade, and the quality has gone up. LCD panel prices have also dropped, as have plasma panels and other display technologies formerly considered "exotic". I expect that OLED, should it pan out, will help give us better product at lower prices - eventually.
A lot of the discussion is a rehash of whether OLED's have advantages in power consumption, response time, viewing angle, and color compared to LCD's (the answer is yes). What no one seems to have noticed is that the point of the announcement is that this display was built using amorphous silicon TFT's. This is the same technology used for active matrix LCDS. This means that display companies that want to convert some of their LCD production capacity to OLEDs can do so without necessarily the $500,000,000-$1,000,000,000 it takes to put up a polysilicon fab (like Kodak/Sanyo are doing). So, this means more OLEDs, sooner, for the masses.