Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Announces Largest-Ever OLED Display
kaos.geo writes "Samsung announces a 17" OLED display.
The article specifies that they are using a laser to 'print' the display instead of the previous 'spraying' methods." 400 lumens isn't shabby. Update: 05/18 23:49 GMT by T : jhealy writes "Seiko Epson, on the heels and light years ahead of Samsungs announcement earlier today, have announced a 40" OLED monitor. Eat that Samsung!"
I am still waiting for the prices of LCD monitors to drop to make it worth the switch from my trusted CRT. Based on what I have seen with the progression of LCDs into the mainstream it will take at least 5 years for something like this to become affordable. By then we will have 3D displays slowly hitting the market.
for laptops, if there are power savings.
Everything in moderation, even moderation.
No, especially moderation.
The article says "To date, however, problems with device lifetime, chemistry and production have limited their use to mobile devices and backlights." But it does not say that these problems have been completely eliminated. I'd be wary of buying a $2000 display with a lifetime of seventeen minutes.
I realize that existing LCD technology is expensive to produce but if im lucky the impending obsolescence of the LCD will drive prices down to where I can afford them. The OLED is amazing though. When you think of all of the possibilities, not just for displays. Think glowing wallpaper, hell it could even display images. Of course this is all dependent on an extreme price drop but the term "computer desk" could have quite a different meaning.
Burn Bright or Fade Away
I'm not sure how a 17" display would be relevant to MP3 or PDA devices. Nor, on the other end, how a display small enough to fit on a pen would be of much use.
The whole point of this announcement is BIG. BIG means CRT and LCD replacement. I can see more use for a 17" OLED in, say, one of the much-reviled net-enabled refrigerators or similar devices where a large screen and low duty cycle is required.
The only problem with this is that it potentially opens up a whole new product to the "razor handle" marketing model. If we go down this path, I think the best option would be for standards to be set early, so people can make purchasing decisions based on openness of standards and product quality - if you don't care, buy that < insert developing country that undercuts China in price and quality > replacement insert, but if you want the best, buy the Big Brand or Quality OEM one. If it goes the razor or printer way, I guess I could live with it - but I'd much prefer it if it went the same way as the lightbulb.
Pixels the size of your fist at that size!!
Well, not quite, but it's not 1600x1200. And it's meant to be a TV.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Now that these things can be printed, make the screen area itself modular, and sell the modules for cheap, way less than $100. Sell the rest of the monitor (body, power supply, connectors, DVI electronics, etc) for a normal monitor price.
Then, every 2-3 years, when most people upgrade anyway, they can pop out the now-funky-colored screen module, pop in a replacement, and get back to fragging little OLED-sharpened nazis.
LCD monitors emit polarized light, if you use polarized glasses, it will be black, not dark, at least most of the times.
The Samsung OLED is a working prototype of a 17" computer display running at 1600x1200. Product launch will be next year.
The Seiko Epson is only an anouncment about a 40" TV display that will be productized for 2007 (marketing speak for..."our engineers just laughed at us so we made up some numbers").
1600x1200 15" panel perched on my lap right now.
/.? Shouldn't you be off doing something only rich people do?
Is it an OLED? Didn't think so. And if it is, WTF are you doing reading
Ideally, OLED displays should be significantly less power-hungry than LCD displays by virtue of not requiring a backlight.
Personally, I'm looking forward to bypassing the LCD and plasma "revolution," and going straight from CRT to OLED technology for the displays in my home. Considering the heat put out by plasma televisions, and the fact that I live in the middle of Phoenix, Arizona, my air conditioning system will thank me for the transition. And it'll be nice to have a display with a small desktop footprint for my G5 which is also adequate for gaming (and if the color gamut is good, it'll be adequate for Photoshop work too).
A while back, a Samsung representative explained this in an interview (Anandtech, maybe). Essentially, it all came down to the fact that most consumers were happy with the provided resolutions and it was easier and cheaper to focus on reducing costs and and improving image quality and refresh rates. So that's why we're stuck with such crappy resolutions on desktop LCD monitors.
The contrast can't be infinite unless the off LEDs reflect no light either. Otherwise the contrast of printed paper would be 0 (no light emitted for either black or white).
Response time for a typical OLED pixel is... get this... 10 microseconds. That's right; microseconds. Compare that to 12 milliseconds for my (very expensive) TFT monitor.... yeah, you can play games with it ^_^
WTF? Bulbs on some of the Barco CRT projectors do run you 400 or 500 bucks. At my university surplus sale you can buy a projector with a burnt out bulb for 75 bucks because it isn't worth it to them to pay for a new bulb. I realize that DLP is different, and that 7.5 cents an hour is insanely cheap (who wouldn't pay say 30 cents a week to watch 4 hours of delightful video?) But many people can't see that, and can't justify the large expense. You are a good example of arrogance gone horribly wrong...let me guess you charged that poor bastard 200 bucks to tell them to turn the damn surge protector back on
Except phone screens are off most of the time and only light up for brief periods when you're using them.
http://blog.nexusuk.org