Slashdot Mirror
OLED TVs Arriving Within the Next Three Years
Anonymous Howard writes "Toshiba and Matsushita, in a joint venture, are going to be bringing OLED TV panels to market within 3 years! Granted, the size of the panel is only 20.8 inches, but that is a huge step up from the small OLED screens used in cell phones and other portable devices. It will have a resolution of 1,280 by 768 pixels (WXGA) and handles 16.7 million colors. No specifications on contrast, brightness, or refresh rates have been released, but such specs wouldn't necessarily be indicative of OLED displays to be released in three years' time."
They've been saying "Coming soon!" for some time now.
Great! OLED has a better color gamut than LCD or plasma
--- Often in error; never in doubt!
I wish they would spend time creating Organic Light Absorbing Diodes that will convert light into electricity. When they got that into solar panels then we can tell the pesky little middle eastern nation to go drink their oil.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
OLED vs SED? Toshiba/Matsushita vs Canon (Canon were working with Toshiba on this but had to buy them out...).
:)
Me, I'm waiting for whatever comes after...
Is there any good reasons that laptop / desktop computer monitors should stay with LCD rather than move to OLED? OLED sounds equal to or better than LCD in all measures we care about, afaik.
IN 2007, everyone want 1080p,
In 2010 everyone and his sister will need 1080p.
768 lines, is so stupid !
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
I was hoping for superior LCDs like those used in the OLPC. Jepsen developed an LCD display that, instead of using a crappy high-power fluorescent backlight and filters, uses a bright-white LED and a diffraction grating to deliver a display. This results in a much wider gamut, because of the wider color gamut of the white LED. It also uses 1/7 the power of a normal LCD display, because the light comes from the LED and gets redirected out the proper pixel; the brightness of the LED is adjusted as needed (an LED switches on/off effectively instantly, you can read the network signal on gigabit ethernet by sticking an LED inline). It's also cheap because existing LCD fabrication technology can be easily modified in place to do this (retooling), rather than being completely replaced with OLED fabrication technology.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
a company can live up to. We do see a lot of "coming in 3 years" that slowly becomes vapoware, but in this case the technology is not only proven, but in use. Hopefully this will prove both a price and performance boost over current offerings.
The original generic sig.
What matters is it "better" than it's predecessor?
/lower margins.
Everyone has their own idea of what "better" is but for TV screens it's usually some combination of faster, cheaper, more/smaller pixels, bigger color gamut, wider dynamic range, wider viewing angle, etc. etc.
For a TV salesman, better means high turnover, high margins, and lots of opportunities to sell expensive add-ons. This usually means "good buzz" = better even if it's not technically better, and cheaper is usually = worse
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I have four TVs. The biggest one, 28", is the one I watch the least. Small TVs are sufficient for watching the news in the kitchen (14") or bathroom (9"). Only movies or prime-time drama really demand something bigger (22"). Don't get me wrong, I get the appeal of big screens. But small screens definitely have a place, too. I really don't need to see the morning news life-sized. But I digress.
The lower power demands, greater flexibility, and better daylight visibility compared to LCD, raise the possibility of lightweight, portable, possibly battery-powered TVs. Obviously, good tech for laptops and portable DVD players as well.
My only question is, have they solved the lifespan issue? IIRC, OLEDs deteriorate faster than LCD, don't they?
Contrast is a quality measure for LCD screens. Because of the way LCDs (or DLPs) work, there is always some leakage of light, even when a pixel is completely off. If the amount of light that leaks through is only 1/2000th of what comes through when a pixel is white, that's pretty good.
For LED technology, sending about "0" current through a led, or to put "0" voltage over it, is fairly easy to achieve electronics-wise. This gives about "0" light(*), meaning a contrast ratio of a million or a billion or better is easily achieved.
(*) Sarcasm: there is going to be exactly zero light.
When you've got a $5000 20" OLED set, and your buddy's got a $3000 50" plasma 1080p set, who's going to win the pissing war, or host the cool SuperBowl party??
I remember hearing somewhere that manufacturers and producers usually announce their release date projections for 3 years. The reasoning behind this, was something about 3 years being "not too long" if it is actually released, but "long enough" that if the release is a failure, in 3 years no one will really remember.
All hearsay aside, I'm really excited about the future of OLEDs, especially for their contribution to a healthier environment.
Blerg.
OLED displays degrade very rapidly, from day 1 on... the blue elements have a life-time of about 5000 hours, the red and green about 60000 hours. You can expec to get about 40000 out of a typical display, which of course will look like crap due to loss in color fidelity.
I've very sceptical of this claim of OLED TVs in 3 years. Remember ?
Presumably then they have solved the problem of blue OLEDs burning out after a year.
Dunx
Converting caffeine into code since 1982
they mean Panasonic.
:)
Useless information, I know
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Oh, come on, in three years even the average consumer will have started to pick up on the importance of 1080i if not 1080p. Introducing this technology without at least a choice that includes one of these resolution options will create a perception that it's a second class technology and doom it before it even gets a start.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
If they're only going to get them to that size then their ideal market could be for laptop screens. The lower power consumption and thinner form factor is perfect for that market. Might as well throw some OLED on the keyboard as well, now that would be a sexy laptop.
I personally think tat we'll see commercial Laser TV devices before we see OLED in a big way... That has the potential for even a wider gamut. We should know before too long as they keep saying sometime 2007...
And, with Laser TV you can use it in a front or rear projector.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I've now owned a few OLED based devices and there's one common problem with all of them: Flicker. LED's change intensity by lowering the flicker rate of the bulb itself. One of the biggest things about this OLED based MP3/Video player I have here, while yes, the colour and contrast is beautiful, it also flickers badly. Not in framerate, but actual flicker. Moving the screen makes the flicker much more apparent. I would say it refreshes at around 20Hz.
If they can figure out how to minimise the flicker on OLED's, based on what I've seen in smaller devices, then yes, I can see it taking off... but until then, it's going to be headache inducing to watch.
Why don't they tile these smallish panels with surface mounted bezels that flare the image out a little, so the bezel face covers up the frames of the underlying tile? Then they could make high-yield runs of small tiles into any size combinations. With the extra benefit of parallel delivery to the subunits, for faster refresh, async updates (sigma-delta regions), etc.
This has been a strategy that could have saved $billions in lost yields and years for other large displays like LCD. Why isn't it the industry standard already? I want my 2x3m desktop back from the 1970s!
--
make install -not war
OK. But, I'd really like to see SED technology hit the shelves. Seemed like quite a bit of news last quarter of 2006. But, since then, still nothing solid.
g y-explained/
Here's an older overview of that technology,
http://www.engadgethd.com/2005/08/16/sed-technolo
"We have no details, but if we did, they'd be wrong anyway!"
Its interesting to note that Matsushita and Toshiba compete in many areas (eg: BluRay vs HD-DVD), but can still collaborate on some other products...
You know, that technology that was supposed to revolutionize the display and TV industry.
I'm still waiting!
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
It's not a monitor, it's a TV, presumably HD, so why not do actual 720p (1280 x 720) or 1080p (1920 x 1080)?
Why do HDTV display manufacturers do this?! My Panny Plasma has no PC input, but is XGA (1024 x 768), though it's advertised as "native" 720p. *sigh*
My folks Sony LCD is WXGA too, but no PC port. Also advertised as native 720p...
Can anyone explain why they stick with monitor resolution standards instead of doing actual TV resolutions? Please educate me.
Yeah, yeah... "OMFGBBQ ITS SONY THEY WILL INSTALL ROOTKITS ON IT!!1 IT WILL TELL SONY WHEN YOU WATCH PORN!!11"
Anyone can "stand up for what they believe", but it takes a very brave individual to change what they believe. - Loundry
Plasma screens suffer from burn, LCD screens rely on backlighting which will eventually fail.
How long will an OLED display last? That may be the deciding factor for a lot of potential buyers.
Can anyone enlighten us?
I was under the impression larger, more expensive OLEDs were not yet viable due to the plastic not being impermeable enough against moisture. It causes the dots(particularly the blue ones)to 'rot' and gives the display a very short lifespan compared to CRT and even LCD(which has a comparatively short lifespan as is) technologies.
Did they get the watertightness down proper? Also, the worse with this is you probably wouldn't notice the flaw with the panel until sufficient moisture has permeated the seal So make damn sure you get an extended warranty on the sucker.
Sony showed a 27" AMOLED TV display at the CES in January with a 1,000,000/1 contrast ratio. http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/08/sonys-1-000-000 -1-contrast-ratio-27-inch-oled-hdtv/
http://uk.gizmodo.com/2007/01/09/ces_2007_sony_ole d_tvs_make_lc.html/
http://news.com.com/2300-1041-6148309.html/
Un-substantiated rumors are that they will be on the market within 9 months...
http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/01/08/sonys-1-000-0 00-1-contrast-ratio-27-inch-oled-hdtv/
I think samsung even showed a 40" model previously.
If they want to start small how about 24" 1920x1200 computer monitor. I can't stand the viewing angle problems with LCD and I would pay more for OLED monitor in a heartbeat.
Stop talking and deliver.
3 or 4 years ago, we started with 19" LCD TV costly $700 a set. Finally, consumer level 52" LCD finally appears now. Is OLED that appealing over LCD that they can still start from 20"?
Not more than two years ago we had announcements every week about new breakthrough technology. It seemed then as if the LCD and Plasma were history. Then suddenly it got all quiet. Marketing of LCD and Plasma screens ramped up, peaked and now even end up in the bargain bin.
It makes sense that manufacturers want to recover cost before they go out and kill their own market but I am convinced that cheap technologies to do wall sized screens at 1080p resolutions and more have been lying on the shelf for quite a while now.
Just like in this article they say that a 17" screen was available in 2002. So hum ho they printed a 20.5" screen. Whoopee, screen size is not the issue like it is with LCD. With OLED screens but stability of the screens organic matter is an issue over time. So this tells me that they can print screens much larger but they are still holding on the brake. Watch my words, at regular intervals those screens get bigger.
If you want to buy a large display today, especially a 1080p one then I suggest you be brave, take the ridicule of your neighbour about your small one a little longer and buy in a year or two. LCD will be dirt cheap while great OLED screens with movie screen contrast ratios will be available too.
Screens with a high dynamic range can produce pitch black blacks and very bright whites. The effect of these screens needs to be seen to be believed but with LCD screens we have not even started to scratch the surface of what is possible with display technology.
When the blue OLEDs stop working just tell your customers they've gone color blind. Problem solved!
Yes
...!
In three years, everyone will have a PS3 (with blueray) or a Xbox 360 Ultimate or a Xbox720 or a WII-II with 1080p HDMI output.
Three years is what it take to go from vhs to DVD and from PSOne to PS2.
I three years, eveyone will have buy a hdtv!
Any way, everyone in the USA will need one by 2009.
SO one year, later, nobody will need another 720p screen, everyone will need to upgrade to 1080p or better to the new 2048p standard with 3200x2048 or better !
And the moderator are
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
I never get more than one significant digit out of mine.
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
I wonder what would be nominal price of oled monitors, it seems that the circuitry is quite a bit simpler for them.
Jesus...I know you just had to find a way to get in your incredibly interesting self-righteous opinion about television, but perhaps you should learn when to let go. The only way you could make it work was by criticizing how the guy poops...
Or, maybe you care about others entirely too much...