Slashdot Mirror


Motorola Debuts Nano-Emissive Flat Screen

brain1 writes "PhysOrg is reporting that Motorola has developed a 5" flat-screen prototype display that uses carbon nanotubes. The display appears to promise lower costs for a full 40" HDTV screen bringing the price down to $400. The technology uses standard color TV phosphors, has a response time equaling CRTs', all in a package 1/8" thick. The display characteristics meet or exceed CRTs', such as fast response time, wide viewing angle, and wide operation temperature. All these are areas that LCDs are weak in. Is this the breakthrough we needed to finally make HDTV and flat-panel computer displays *really* affordable?"

5 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Very NICE press release! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try this

  2. Re:plasma? by grendelkhan · · Score: 4, Informative
    considering that plasma is considered the high-end of displays
    Plasma is for suckers - the color fades and burn in is a serious problem. For the money they are a total rip off. LCD's are fantastic but really expensive.
    --
    Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
  3. Comparison of Each Type by vectorian798 · · Score: 4, Informative

    CRT:
    Very Fast Response Time
    Perfect Viewing Angles
    Massive and Heavy

    LCD:
    Lower Resolutions
    Bad Viewing Angles
    Bad Response Times (though recent 8ms panels reduce this immensely)
    Expensive
    Very Nice Colors
    Thin and Light
    Doesn't hurt the eye

    Plasma:
    Dies in 5 years due to gas leakage

    Rear-projector:
    Yea these suck from the sides or close-up so let's not even mention these

    Carbon-nanotube (CNT) based Motorola Display:
    Because it uses phosphors like in CRTs, good brightness
    Fast response time
    Good viewing angle
    Thin and light
    Cheap
    DOESNT NEED BACKLIGHT (no more washed-out colors in sunlight)
    Longevity compared to plasmas
    Though this is a 5" prototype, it is a 5" section of a larger 42" CNT grid for a large HD display, so stop bitching about this being 5 inches

    Other notes: Since CNTs are small and the phosphor technology is the same as in CRTs (excite phosphor atoms to give off photons by making appropriate electrical connections using switches...in this case, CNT's) I am assuming that we can actually get large high-resolution monitors (this one is 1280 x 720) perhaps just like the crazy CRTs with 2XXX by 1XXX resolution.

  4. LCD Gamut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    LCD gamut is not poor because it is digitally driven. It's poor because LCD is a backlit technology.

    When an LCD screen tries to show "black" a large portion of the backlight is still showing through. Moreover, this varies across the screen.

    This is an emissive technology using the same phosphors as a CRT. Banding might be a problem, but it's insignificant compared to the color range problems on LCDs. Banding is tolerable in many applications. Shimmering and lack of contrast is not. Most LCD manufacturers don't push to avoid banding because the contrast problem makes the LCD unsuitable for color sensitive work anyway.

    In fact, this should get *better* range than a CRT, because any cell can turn completely off. Any but the highest quality CRT has a problem with rise time and such. The brightness level of parts of the image affect other parts.

  5. Samsung has one too... Call it a FED by val1s · · Score: 4, Informative

    A Field emission display. Technology Review Had an article on it back in november with some explination of the technology and the hurdles involved. The big one as it sounds that Moto can not get over is how you support the glass in the middle so it does not touch (front to back) as the display requires a vacuum to operate, fairly easy with a 5" diagonal very difficult with a 40" screen. This is surely not the first, but first for Moto.
    -Me