Intel To Produce Cheap LCoS Chips

SeattleGameboy writes "NY Times has an article about Intel's plan to produce low-cost liquid crystal on silicon (LCoS) chips. This could result in high-resolution 7"-thick rear-projection TV costing around $1000 by next Christmas (not to mention cheap projectors). I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ..."

Comments

"TrustedTV(tm)

[grub]

Such a powerful marketing and technology combination could blend easily with Microsoft's media center software, which is aimed at using personal computing technology as the heart of home entertainment centers.

That concerns me. Microsoft makes no bones about their "Trusted-this" and "DRM-that" direction. Considering their relationship with Intel I don't doubt that we'll see some sort of DRM crud built right into the TV to "protect consumers from themselves".

Re:"TrustedTV(tm)

[gl4ss]

at this point that hardly matters as the device has to accept analog signals to be of any use, and for anyone to buy it(so that they can use it with their dvd players, pc's and consoles, not to mention regular tv).

-

Re:"TrustedTV(tm)

[leifm]

You know, this whining about MS and DRM is getting old. MS sees an opportunity with DRM, and they are taking it, and I don't blame them as it could be quite lucrative. But in order for DRM to work, at least as far as DRM for music/movies, comsumers have to accept it. So if the terms of the DRM MS uses for whatever aren't acceptable to the general public it will fail, doesn't matter what MS does. I think Apple's DRM is fair, so I buy from iTMS, and others must feel the same way. MS DRM will work the same way, if people feel it's fair they'll buy into it, if not it'll die.

If IntelTV has some kind of hardware DRM that won't let you TiVo or whatever, then don't buy one, and if enough people feel the same way and avoid the technology MS/Intel/whoever will have to adjust. You don't see DivX players or media in Circuit City anymore do you?

Re:"TrustedTV(tm)

[fiftyfly]

I don't think it's that important to MS. They're catering to something the content industry wants, providing the rope for a fee if you will. I don't think they're going to go out of their way to make sure the content industry hangs itself. MS has enough issues trying to get people to keep upgrading.

Which is exactly why it makes so much sense - by dominating the DRM/distribution model they control the supply of _all_ media and the hardware used to access it. Given their history this is something I find both fascinating & frightening. Clearly the american government isn't interested in seeing MS taken to task for monopolistic practices and, in a growth dominated market, there's imense pressure for MS to keep getting larger. DRM seems to me a perfect opportunity to let the legal sector give them the key to a whole slew of other industries.

From the perspective of the Microsoft shareholder the abondonment of the American constitution looks to be a highly lucrative enterprise.

You can always put it off ...

[El Cubano]

I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ...

You can always put it off for another year. Eventually you just have to take the plunge and buy it, realizing that you will kick yourself in 6 months when the same product is available for 25 - 50% less. But if you keep putting it off, you'll never buy anything.

Re:You can always put it off ...

[GMFTatsujin]

if you keep putting it off, you'll never buy anything.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

What about the Light Bulb?

[keep_it_simple_stupi]

With current DLP projection (front and rear) systems, there is a relatively expensive light bulb to be replaced every 3-5 years at around $200 a pop. If this is the case with the LCOS technology as well, I don't think it will fare as well as predicted. Time will tell.

Re:What about the Light Bulb?

[trailerparkcassanova]

Yeah, and those damn cars will never take off either if you have to replace the tires every 3-5 years at $300 a pop.

Re:What about the Light Bulb?

[djbentle]

From the article: "The true market test only started this summer," he said. "Rear-projection D.L.P. systems are flying off the shelf."

If it hasn't slowed down DLP, it probably won't slow this down either. Besides when you pay the $200 to replace the bulb in 5 years, your DLP will look brand new, exactly as it did the day you bought it. Try that with a five year old CRT rear projection set.

David

Re:What about the Light Bulb?

[mengel]

Okay, so how many of you have inkjet printers out there?

$199 printer
$ 40 cartridge
sounds to me like %20 of the purchase price...

That of course leads to (by analogy) cheaper third party light bulbs that turn out not to last as long, and home filament repair kits...

Re:What about the Light Bulb?

[zyridium]

Consider what will happen when there are more sets in operation that need these bulbs.

Just like some small cars with strange tires cost more..

Re:What about the Light Bulb?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone know why these bulbs are so expensive? Is it just that they are very special purpose, low volume, and only appear in expensive products. Unless there is a real technical reason why these bulbs are expensive to produce, it would seem that dropping the price of the TV (from ~$4000 to ~$1500) and hence increasing volume would also bring down bulb prices. Also, how does bulb life and cost for the smaller rear projection TVs compare to the front projection systems.

Re:waiting, yay.

[keep_it_simple_stupi]

Yes but there's a difference. Broadband over power lines is technically unfeasible because of the ridiculous amount of radio interference generated. LCOS screens are already available. You are correct in another way, we have to wait and see if the price really drops or if they just enjoy a higher profit margin.

Re:Forecasting.

[Anonymous Coward]

and a lot of wasted money. I have said it before and I will continue to say it. Mandated standards are good for NO ONE.

HDTV was a waste of time, money, and effort. They spent years and years drafting legislation to force manufactorers to create this "fantastic" TV experience for nothing.

I would have rathered that money be spend on something worthwhile... TV isn't important enough to warrant me being passed down a huge bill that was mandated by the government. I pay them enough.

Re:Rear Projection vs Flat Panel

[AnyNoMouse]

I'm really a non-fan of rear-projection TVs, with their odd image quality and limited viewing angles. I wonder how long it will take this technology to be adapted to large-format, flat panel displays? I for one would be a big fan of a $1,000 42" flat panel display.

Have you seen a DLP Rear Projection TV recently? They are *nothing* like the old clunky CRT types from yesteryear. Color is very good, resolution is excellent and the viewing angle is actually quite good.

As far as your $1,000 42" flat panel display goes, the LCOS technology we're talking about here is not direct view. It uses reflected light just as a DLP does. The current techlogy for direct view screens like what you're speaking about are LCD and Plasma and both have their own problems.

replacing a light bulb vs tires

[RowdyReptile]

Yeah, and those damn cars will never take off either if you have to replace the tires every 3-5 years at $300 a pop

The light bulb (at $200) is a much more significant fraction of the cost of the TV than tires are compared to the cost of a car. Like 5-10% vs 1.5%.

Re:Forecasting.

[garcia]

oh but they are. Sooner or later you will have to buy a television and it will HAVE to have the HDTV tuner included. Thus the cost is passed on to me for something I don't really want.