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!
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.
"Organic Light Absorbing Diodes that will convert light into electricity"
...
1. Illuminate a plant
2. Put plant in biomass-powered generator
3.
4. Profit?
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Have you got some reason to think that such a thing would be more efficient than existing solar cells? Current organic semiconductor solar cells have pretty lousy efficiency (4-5%). Or are you thinking they would be so cheap to manufacture that it would more than compensate for the low efficiency?
Either way, I wouldn't hold my breath.
"Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroplast
-- "A chicken is an egg's way of making another egg."
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??
Why 768 lines? I've seen that on shipping screens too. Why not 720 lines?
BTW, not arguing against 1080 lines here, just wondering where they get 768 number from.
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
768 lines it's the standard, all 1080i and 720p have 768 lines.
Why, it's a greath question !
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
Awesome! I've got lots of grow-lights. I'll get them creating bio-mass as soon as I'm done posting this. Hmm, maybe I should consider using white LEDs though to make it more efficient. I'll do that with the profits from my biomass. It is always good to reinvest, ya know?
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
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.
2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*3=768. For 4:3 screens(thats where the 3 comes from), there is some reason to presume that it increased addressing efficiency(memory wise) to use a power of two and it just got pulled along for legacy reasons. For other ratios, who knows, but probably inertia as much as anything else(and addressing that many lines is straightforward as 3 blocks of 256, which is probably as good a reason as any).
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
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 thought ATSC (of which 720p/1080(i|p) are part) was neither PAL nor NTSC, though. I could very well be mistaken, but I remember reading something about how ATSC had the benefit of doing away with the incompatibilities between PAL and NTSC signals.
Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
http://www.tsanewsblog.com
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
Simple. 1024x768 is a commonly-used 4:3 ratio, whereas 960x720 isn't commonly used. Everybody in the world was already making 768-line LCD panels (and all the controller hardware that goes with it) for use in the earlier-generation computer monitors. Some of the higher priced projection displays (front and rear) do have "true" 720 line panels, but I don't think they're all that common.
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
"We have no details, but if we did, they'd be wrong anyway!"
Hats off. You got it. Next time I will try to be even more obscure and indirect, like the code I write. ;-)
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
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...
These are on their way. As of yet they aren't very efficient but they an analogous to solar cells and LED. I know of at least one grad student who is working on them.
Burn Bright or Fade Away
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"?
That's the resolution on the current prototype. Within 3 years, I'm sure they'll get to higher resolutions. Besides, for a 21" screen, unless it's being used as a computer monitor, 1280x768 is a perfectly acceptable resolution. So settle down.
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.
That doesn't stop other people. Regardless, I did google first. And I found several hits which mentioned '768 x 576' for PAL as a standard. I though it might be related and by posting it, along with 'I wonder if this is why?', a discussion could develop.
WTF has happened here. Bunch of cranky folks on
I am rather happy with my 42" DLP at 1280x720. Since DVD already has to be scaled up, and most broadcast HDTV is in 720p it makes the most sense. At the viewing distance I have, I doubt if I could tell much difference if the resolution was higher. Didn't we all see the article the other day about the resolution of the human eye and all that? So unless everyone is buying HD-DVD or BlueRay players (some are), there isn't much to be gained from 1080p (lack of source material). I guess what I'm saying is that not everyone wants 1080p in 2007 like you say. Agreed that 768 is stupid - no TV source material has that resolution :-)
Now what I would like is a 1920x1080 (or perhaps x1200) monitor - I sit close enough for that resolution to have some real value.
Be careful with using TOO many of those grow lights....the cops scanning houses with IR detection equipment MIGHT try to break down your door....to 'investigate' what plants exactly you are growing indoors for biomass.
They might suspect a different cash crop....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
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.
I thought you were making a referance to a Sci-FI short story (I think by Heinlein) about some inventor who made a crystaline structure that was a high efficiency converter of light to electricity.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.