http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20071002/140034/
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20071002/140034/sharpA.jpg
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20071002/140034/sharpB.jpg
This 12" TV is even thinner than Sony 11" OLED. Sharp has apparently solved the viewing angle problem too (but how?).

Also, Sharp's 20-29mm thick 52":
http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news_pics/14909/SHARP_IMG_0266.jpg
http://image.aving.net/img/2007/10/02/200710021810011871.jpg
http://image.aving.net/img/2007/10/03/20071003002301577.jpg
http://image.aving.net/img/2007/10/02/200710021810012001.jpg

It looks like Sharp wants to ride with LCD tech till the end and with what they're planning, it seems apparent that they want to push LCD technology BEYOND YEAR 2020. :eek:

They are really poised to compete head-to-head with OLED technology (in terms of technical/technological supremacy)

This should prove to be some killer competition (between LCD & OLED) :cool:

P.S.
Though I beg to ask.

-Is Sharp still insistent on using CCFL all the way (instead of using LED backlighting) in their advancement/improvements to their LCD TVs???
-If Sharp claims that their current LCD TVs already go beyond the 8 ms response time barrier (that has choked LCD TVs for a long time), how come other manufacturers can't seem to do this? Any explanation as to how & why?
-Will their be any possibility that we may see any improvements in response time within the decade??? Right now, Sharp is at 4-6 ms average for their LCD TVs. Would it be possible for this number to improve and can it be done before year 2010??? Or are improvements/advancements to LCD TV response times considered to be too difficult to be done within the current timeframe???
-If so, can they reach response times that are faster than plasma TV (3-4 ms average), RPTV (2.5 ms) and the latest CRT TVs (1 ms)? Or is this false???

Thanks :)

-Is Sharp still insistent on using CCFL all the way (instead of using LED backlighting) in their advancement/improvements to their LCD TVs???
The article states that this LCD does use LED backlight (and so does their 52" 29mm thick "OLED killer" LCD) which suggests Sharp will abandon CCFLs for LEDs.

The article states that this LCD does use LED backlight (and so does their 52" 29mm thick "OLED killer" LCD) which suggests Sharp will abandon CCFLs for LEDs.

That ultra-thin prototype LCD looked extremely interesting, but was there ever any confirmation on its resolution? The article on sharp-world.com didn't specify.

Um..isn't plasma already at 1-2ms?

Quote from link in orginal post --

The performance indices of the prototype's display are better than former small- and middle-sized LCD panels. Its contrast ratio is 2000:1, response time is 8 ms and color reappearance range is 80% compared with the specification of the NTSC. The number of pixels is 1280 × 800. An LED is used as a backlight.

That ultra-thin prototype LCD looked extremely interesting, but was there ever any confirmation on its resolution? The article on sharp-world.com didn't specify.

response time is 8 ms

For a Sharp display, that seems to be disappointing (as they've been quoting 4-6ms response times for their production LCD TVs for over two years now)....

Unless of course, they could be slacking off with this prototype (they'll just improve response time once it hits production) or in that they may be honest with this figure (using true black-to-black and white-to-white).

We'll never know.

Um..isn't plasma already at 1-2ms?

The running average was around 2-4 ms. Again, we can't verfiy this figure becuase PDP manufacturers never post their response times on their product brochures and specs sheets (unless you ask the manufacturer yourself).:)

I wonder how long before they bring this super-flat, led backlit lcd into their normal size panels (40" and up to 65")?

Nevertheless, this is the perfect TV to suit the interior of your bathroom so you can watch football or anime on the screen while doing your thing in your USD$10,000 "sh*thole"

*For those who do not know what a s**thole is, it refers to a toilet. Most likely the highest-end toilets from TOTO toilet company of Japan which produces the most expensive toilets in the world*

thinness isn't the OLED's only advantage, though- color gamut, contrast, speed...

Nevertheless, this is the perfect TV to suit the interior of your bathroom..I dont know if you're being serious or not, but I don't think it would be very wise to put something like an expensive, electronically delicate LCD in a closed in, very humid place such as a bathroom.

But then it's your money.

I dont know if you're being serious or not, but I don't think it would be very wise to put something like an expensive, electronically delicate LCD in a closed in, very humid place such as a bathroom.

But then it's your money.

it'd have to be a half-bath, not one with a shower.

I don't like the LCDs I've had, but this one is stunning to me, based on those images. Maybe they just stole OLED tech and called it LCD :p

This gives me some hope for the future of displays (something I haven't had for a while).