OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 90 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 39Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2671 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 03:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

I think if OLED comes out and it looks better than the LCDs and plasmas available at any given time, then there will be demand for OLED even if the difference in picture quality isn't very noticeable. Videophiles will notice (or think the notice). Regular people might not notice a difference, but they'll think they notice. If it gets into the mainstream that OLED is the new, superior technology, then people will want it.

Of course, I've never suggested otherwise.

Quote:


. But if the argument is OLEDs won't sell because they won't look that much better than LCD or plasma, I don't buy it.

And, again, I've never suggested otherwise. People seem to wish to read otherwise, but the text is actually there and that's not in fact what it says at all. It suggests it will be very difficult to sell many millions at premium prices based on some small superiority. And absent selling many millions it will be impossible to drive the price down. And absent driving the price down, it will be impossible to sell many millions. And we are back to square one.

Again, I urge people with their own preconceived notions to just move on. You are right, everyone will be watching a Samsung or LG 55" OLED in just a few years and no other TVs will even be on the market because those OLEDs will not only be the best TVs ever they will be the cheapest TVs ever.

Anyway, back to this "square one" thing. I've followed technology for 35 years or so. All sorts of things have been "givens" or "just around the corner" or "certain to happen" for as long as I can remember. And, remarkably, many of them never happen. And the reason is that a lot of them can't solve some of these "square one loops".

It has been speculated here that Sharp's 70-inch displays have been sold "below cost" because they are not properly amortizing their cost of the Sakai plant on a per-unit basis into each display. I personally find this kind of logic specious because it presumes that the lifetime of the plant is some kind of fixed value and they are required to plug in an amortization value per unit now that is essentially equal to [ total present value cost of plant * (size adjustment value / total units the plant will produce )].

The denominator is basically all the displays the plant will ever might but might plug in 1.2 for a 70" display and 0.8 for a 50" display to get a bigger cost associated with the bigger display. Sample math: $5 billion * (1.2 / 25 million) = 240. Here's the thing though. What if you change that to 30 million displays instead of 25 million? It now only costs $200 per display in amortization. And here's the thing about Sakai, Sharp really doesn't know precisely how long it will operate, but they can rest easy knowing a couple of things:

(1) Demand for LCD TVs will be robust as far as the eye can see.
(2) It's fairly unlikely the plant will become functionally obsolete since it uses 10G substrates when the rest of the industry is still stuck with 8G substrates (and there are logistical reasons why much larger substrates will never exist as they are actually not possible to transport).

Now there are legitimate arguments to be raised about how amortization is typically charged. For example, is it normally billed higher earlier? (I have no idea). For example, did they claim the output would be 25 million over 10 years originally and then decide later that ouptut would be 30 million over 12 years? (Again, I have no idea). This kind of moving the bar is financial shenanigans and would make me question whether I'd want to buy stock in Sharp. But unless the assumptions surrounding the lifetime of the plant or the ultimate output are outside the realm of reasonable, they don't make me think Sharp is using unreasonable amortization expense as an input in their display pricing decisions.

Now, after that long-winded explanation, let's compare that to Samsung and OLED. What if they build a $3 billion 8G OLED line and they claim it's going to produce 25 million 55" OLED TVs. Is anyone worried? I am. Not only do they have to amortize the fab at $120 per display but they also have to cover the variable cost per unit. Oh, and they have to probably do this over 10 years at like 2.5 million per year producing about 40,000 substrates per month.

So what worries me here is:

1) No one has ever produced that many OLED substrates per month.
2) There is no proven demand for OLED TVs.
3) There might not be any demand for premium-priced 55" TVs by the time these ship.
4) The variable cost for producing OLEDs -- at least initially -- will likely far exceed what Samsung's display division can recoup in wholesale pricing unless they price the early units very very high.
5) High pricing will dampen demand.
6) Low demand will not lead to higher utilization.
7) Large-area OLED displays have never been produced period, so I don't even know what yields will look like and that might lead to even higher variable costs per unit (it will for the first several years, guaranteed)
8) My masking/patterning method might not work
9) By fostering the developing of IGZO I might make for even better/cheaper LCD TVs and create stronger competition for OLED
10) IGZO might not be better / cheaper and OLEDs might remain more expensive indefinitely
11) LGs patterning / masking might be cheaper or better than mine and I might not be able to compete or switch to their method
12) Apple or Google might buy a ton of OLED displays from someone else given them a leg up on developing OLED technology and they might do something differently than me and might be to market with a better/faster/cheaper development and I might not be able to compete having invested in an inferior method
13) Global economics might cause consumers to only seek cheaper alternatives and I might find next to zero market acceptance of premium products
14) Insert another 5000 possible issues here

So you see, it's very challenging to basically invent an entirely new technology and bring it to market. It was another thing entirely to dip the toes in slowly and make the Galaxy phones real and even there, Samsung still sells LCD phones despite having the production wherewithal to drop them from their product portfolio.

One significant way to cut the risk of building an 8G OLED fab would be to have a supply contract with a tablet maker (specifically Apple) to purchase a large quantity of 10" OLED screens for tablet use in 2013 and beyond. That would ensure the investment would be successful even if the TV thing didn't pan out. Unfortunately, those two companies are not getting along very well right now. Perhaps the winds will shift in that regard.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2672 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 04:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
I'll leave most of your rant alone because at this point we are just talking past each other. However, I do want to address this quote.

Quote:
If and when Samsung is producing millions of OLED TVs -- and I'm sorry Spec, but millions of OLED TVs in 2013?!?!? that very much strains the imagination -- they will begin to work down the learning curve and gain manufacturing efficiencies. Until then, they are not getting any better at making OLED TVs. It's all hypothetical.

Yes, it is all hypotheticals. That is the nature of ALL predictions about the future.

I'm not a AV geek, I'm an investor. If you want to boil it down, forecasting the future of technology adoption is pretty much what I do for a living. So back in 2006/7, even though every single attempt to bring AMOLED's to market had failed and there were doubts about the ability of shadowmasks to scale to Gen 4 fabs, I believed that Samsung was on the right track to bringing the technology to the cellphone market. There were quite a few roadblocks but the preponderance of evidence pointed towards progress and most off all Samsung's financial commitment to OLED's convinced me that at least they believed that they could bring the technology to market.

It turns out that they could and did....and it was all based on hypotheticals.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2673 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 04:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Unfortunately, if you live in the UK, you can no longer be first on your block with a professional Sony OLED TV ;-).

http://twitter.com/#!/mainframeuk/st...90878272446464

Quote:
in geek news we've just had a sony OLED broadcast monitor delivered, first in the country apparently. It's mighty fine.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2674 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,479
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post



And, again, I've never suggested otherwise. People seem to wish to read otherwise, but the text is actually there and that's not in fact what it says at all. It suggests it will be very difficult to sell many millions at premium prices based on some small superiority. And absent selling many millions it will be impossible to drive the price down. And absent driving the price down, it will be impossible to sell many millions. And we are back to square one.

You've made a very strong case, even if I may quibble in relatively small areas. OLED has a very challenging road ahead, at least in larger panel sizes.

Reading this thread, it's becoming clear that there are a few in here who are vying to be this decades OLED version of Auditor55.

Mourning the disappearance of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is offline  
post #2675 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 06:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Xrox, I personally fail to see how anything OLED could even theoretically do would rise to the level of what plasma and LCD did to CRT. TVs used to be:

1) Effectively limited to 27"-31" unless you went with projection, which was really room dominating and gigantic.
2) Standard definition and interlaced
3) Almost 2 feet thick and often 150 lbs.

To me, it's ridiculous to compare a somewhat better flat panel's impact to the impact that plasma and LCD had. And what OLED is -- on its best possible day -- is a somewhat better flat panel. It's not just a matter of perceived technological leaps here. I mean it really won't be "flatter" and the importance of moving from 1.5" thick sets to 0.5" thick sets is pretty meaningless. It won't be ushering in the HD era either.

And, quite frankly, as I've outlined in excruciating detail, today's LCDs and plasmas are not those of 2005. So between you and me -- and really I urge most of the rest of the people posting in this thread to just move on, you've won, I promise -- I find the most optimistic pronouncements or assumptions around OLED absurd. In fact, it's actually more complex than that because the very customers who would ostensibly be most intrigued by something better are on their 2nd or 3rd HDTVs already.

What you really have to consider is a thought experiment, I think, of taking the worst 40" flat panel on the market and comparing it to the last 32" standard definition CRT. It'd be the equivalent of introducing a horse-drawn carriage owner to an automobile. Sure, both can get you from point A to point B, but they don't otherwise share much in common. The car would be mind bogglingly awesome. Pretty much everyone would want to trade in their carriage for a car. And once the car came down in price to Model T levels, pretty much everyone did.

Now, compare that to a situation where a Toyota Camry owner is introduced to a Maybach. Sure, it's nicer. It's spiffier. It's faster. But, you know, it's a lot more expensive. And on a day-to-day basis, it doesn't do much that the Camry doesn't do in terms of getting you to and from the office, or the market, or your kid's soccer practice. While a lot of people would cover the Maybach, not everyone would commit to owning one (in fact, few people actually seem to want them). Now, we're talking Camry owners here, so they know from Lexus. Maybe that Maybach is Lexus priced (and performing) and everyone wants to trade up. But a lot of people don't value the difference enough to make the trade. Such, in fact, is the Lexus/Toyota relationship today. Toyota vastly outsells Lexus yet there is certainly a market for Lexus vehicles.

Well, what if Lexus cut all their prices down to -- or even below -- Toyota levels? Every comparable Toyota would probably disappear and Lexus models would replace them. I can't imagine why on earth Toyota would do this, but if they did, then yes, it would work. OLED, initially, is the Maybach here. It will quite literally cost a ratio to the cheapest 50-55" LCD or plasma that is Maybach:Camry. And honestly, I believe the performance feature-set differences will be more like Lexus:Totoya. (Again, if you are otherwise pre-disposed to this ridiculous pro-OLED construct espoused in this thread, please pass by this post and understand you are right. OLED will rule the universe, everyone will agree its 10x better than LCD, etc. etc. No doubt about it.)

It is my opinion that flat panel:standard def CRT is more like Maybach:horse than Maybach:Camry. And further, you'd have to set up an entirely fake comparison to get OLED to even by Maybach:Camry. And than even if you set up that fake comparison (it's fake because you have to disregard every dimension of picture quality where the LCD is really very good and only focus on the ones where the OLED is demonstrably better so it looks like the score is OLED 5, LCD 0, when the real score is more like 10 ties, 3 very small wins, 2 larger wins), the reality is Maybach:Camry is what I suggested above -- not the rout it first appears to be.

If we are to believe that it's plausible for production of these sets to begin ramping in the 2nd half of 2012 -- assuming some fab gets greenlighted in the beginning of 2012 -- then you'll forgive me for not believing that real volume production will be established until sometime in 2013. Between now and then, competing products will again get better and again get cheaper. I think that further shrinks the perception of how good the new kid in town is when he finally shows up.

LOL - My question was purposefully restrained and conservative relative to my view but I agree completely. Unlike handheld devices which are replaced constantly it is going to be extremely difficult to convince the average consumer to replace thier current LCD/PDP.

Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind
xrox is offline  
post #2676 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 07:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion; View Post

I think if OLED comes out and it looks better than the LCDs and plasmas available at any given time, then there will be demand for OLED even if the difference in picture quality isn't very noticeable. Videophiles will notice (or think the notice). Regular people might not notice a difference, but they'll think they notice. If it gets into the mainstream that OLED is the new, superior technology, then people will want it.

Of course, I've never suggested otherwise.Of course, I've never suggested otherwise.

I thought that was the point of your earlier post, which took you some time you said, where you point by point minimized the potential advantages of OLED. I won't quote all of it, but here's a snippet:

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

So, yes, back to Sun's question, I am quite positive the general public won't notice or care about the difference. Some people will see the OLED TV as superior the same way some people see the Elite as superior.

Reread my post. I think they won't be able to truly notice, but they will perceive a difference and care. The whole point of your detailed post there was that OLED doesn't provide a significant improvement. Early LCD provided a negative improvement, and yet people bought it believing it was the superior technology with advanced picture quality, despite a actual significant backtrack in contrast, viewing angle, etc. LCD moved on to sell millions of units and drive the price down, despite not beating HD CRTs in picture quality. Plasma too bloomed, despite being less HD than LCD, on the public perception that they provided a better picture. If HD and picture quality was all that mattered, HD CRT would have won. If HD was all that mattered and contrast didn't, we wouldn't have plasma. If form factor was all that mattered, we never would have had RPTVs or perhaps 50" plus flat panels. It's all muddied by marketing and public perception, and it always has been.

I appreciate your objective look at the limited benefits of OLED and I think you're right. (In fact, I wouldn't take a 50" OLED for free because I've already got a superior image right now. Size matters and my Mitsubushi HC3800 on a 90" high gain screen cannot be beaten by a 50" anything for me.) The point is, most of the public won't read your post. They'll buy the hype as they have before.
Airion is offline  
post #2677 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 12:17 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
htwaits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 24,677
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post

Reading this thread, it's becoming clear that there are a few in here who are vying to be this decades OLED version of Auditor55.

Auditor55! What memories!
htwaits is offline  
post #2678 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mr. wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land of the pumas
Posts: 3,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 47
well i don't know about others, but audi and me are both enjoying the outstanding pq of our sed displays

neflixis our nemesis
mr. wally is online now  
post #2679 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 01:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

I'll leave most of your rant alone because at this point we are just talking past each other.

Let's just be honest, OK. You leave it alone and call it a rant because most of it can't really be refuted. So you go and attack me in an attempt to pretend it's not actually a well constructed argument. I mean, let's be honest, OK.
Quote:


It turns out that they could and did....and it was all based on hypotheticals.

Stop pretending you are breaking down my argument when you aren't reading it. It's really offensive. There's actually a point when I note that there is no manufacturing efficiency absent production and no current production nor any evidence of production nor any evidence of demand to drive that production. You can state that the chicken-and-egg problem will be solved if you wish because you believe Samsung will simply start producing milions of TV and sell them below cost or because you are quite certain demand for high-end-but-not-very-large-TVs will exist.

What you can't do is conclude that the problem doesn't exist because it's hypothetical. It's real. If you are some sort of wizard investor, you ought to know how blue-sky manufacturing works and how the cost of production won't even begin to fall for quite some time -- probably years. You should be rejecting the Korean report out of hand because of its naivete.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2680 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 01:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

Reread my post. I think they won't be able to truly notice, but they will perceive a difference and care. The whole point of your detailed post there was that OLED doesn't provide a significant improvement. Early LCD provided a negative improvement, and yet people bought it believing it was the superior technology with advanced picture quality, despite a actual significant backtrack in contrast, viewing angle, etc. LCD moved on to sell millions of units and drive the price down, despite not beating HD CRTs in picture quality. Plasma too bloomed, despite being less HD than LCD, on the public perception that they provided a better picture. If HD and picture quality was all that mattered, HD CRT would have won. If HD was all that mattered and contrast didn't, we wouldn't have plasma. If form factor was all that mattered, we never would have had RPTVs or perhaps 50" plus flat panels. It's all muddied by marketing and public perception, and it always has been.

I appreciate your objective look at the limited benefits of OLED and I think you're right. The point is, most of the public won't read your post. They'll buy the hype as they have before.

Sorry, Airion, let me clarify. When I say the general public won't care, I mean "most people". When I say "some people" will care/notice, I mean some people. And the comparisons to LCD/plasma fail. Those were the first flat panels. People desperately wanted to have them in their homes. They got over all the weaknesses you correctly identify to just "OMG gotta have" one.

Do I think some people will believe the hype? Of course. But the potential market is not "greenfield" anymore. It's people who already own plasmas and LCDs or projectors like you. When people were talking themselves out of getting an HD CRT in 2002, that was one thing. When they were talking themselves into replacing an SD CRT, it was easy. When they are talking themselves into getting a new OLED that's not especially large to replace an already existing 2009 LCD or plasma (or projector)? Please. It's just now the same decision, as people like you more than prove. Thanks for your insight.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2681 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 02:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by xrox View Post

LOL - My question was purposefully restrained and conservative relative to my view but I agree completely. Unlike handheld devices which are replaced constantly it is going to be extremely difficult to convince the average consumer to replace thier current LCD/PDP.

I tried to create a layperson's analogy to both answer your question and provide another angle for someone perhaps visiting this thread for the first time. I imagine you sense my frustration at this point not that people don't agree with me (quite frankly I don't actually care about that), but rather that some people refuse to construct an argument -- or deconstruct one. Thus I keep littering my posts with disclaimers. Which reminds me: OLED believers, if you have gotten here, please understand, OLED will win and remove every trace of competing technologies from existence. It will be like the dinosaurs, plasma and LCD will be basically left to nothing more than a fossil record.

Anyway, back to the larger point. It's so freaking obvious to me that the decision to replace a 27" SD CRT with a flat panel or even a 42" plasma with a 60" LCD is radically different from replacing a 70" LCD with a 55" OLED, I don't feel like I need any of my education or knowledge to draw on to understand those differences (including a business degree from a small California school with a decent program). I don't feel like I need any of my decades of following markets and companies to understand that. It's obvious.

"Honey, check this out. Our 200 lb. TV is gone, the new one is going to hang on the wall." The amount of WAF of TVs sold in the 2000s is basically off the charts. WAF killed projection TVs completely, despite the availability of highly affordable, good quality microdisplay sets that were bigger and cheaper than plasmas/LCDs.

Ironically, there is some WAF in replacing the new Sharp 70" you just bought with a 55" TV, but let's be real, who is doing that? And given that 60" sets are already routinely sold for $1500 and will almost certainly be $1000 by Christmas 2013 -- a fact I was skeptical about I think less than a year ago and then certain of by early summer -- how many more people who want big will wind up with big?

I'm not really sure what the distribution of sales is by price, but if we group, say all the TVs from 50 to 60 inches, we'd probably get a bell curve type distribution. If we look at the distribution of sales by sizes, it's noteworthy that in the best data I could find:

1) Half of the sales last year were 40-42 inch LCD (for LCD alone, far and away the largest category, "40- to 42-inch models accounted for 50 percent of the Q2 LCD TV category" -- Twice, 8/30/2010)
2) The average retail price in July for an LCD TV in the United States was $1,136 -- Twice, 8/30/2010

So it's hard to guess what this all means, but let's just say that it leaves at most 1/3 of the market for 50-60". (Everything below 40" still exists. Everything in the mid 40s still exists and while the gravitational pull of size from the 40-42 range will be real, that 50% share will likely move to the mid 40s over the next year or two, no higher. Everything over 60" still exists). So now if we distribute all the sales in the 50-60 range across our bell and we consider that the average selling price in that category was $1500 last year, but will likely be $1000 next year, what do you figure is the portion of sales that belongs to the $3000-5000 slice of that market?

I admit this is crude, but it's safe to say that looking out at 2013, we are seeing something like this: 50-60" = maximum of 40% of the market in the U.S. (high, but whatever, I'll allow it). $3000 and up category = maximum of 5% of that. So the entire category in which these TVs could sell represents 2% of the business. And every other plasma and LCD that's premium priced and 50-60" is in it.

Worldwide, this slice of the market is actually <5 million units total. Why because honestly, worldwide sales are ~240 million with a huge rebound. Worldwide, the total in 50-60 is going to max at like 75 million or slightly north of 30% (it's probably even lower). Realistically, 5% of that is sub 4 million units, but again, let's be generous.

It's worth adding that there's a sales distribution within the distribution. If the OLED is $5000, it's selling less than 10% of the total of the TVs at $3000 (it's more like 1% of the total if you look at a normal distribution most probably). We're at a niche within a niche within a niche. And this is not a business that supports this kind of niche manufacturing. Again, there is more wiggle room if the plant is otherwise occupied making screens for some other purpose. But it should be clear, there is no path to 4 million TVs unless they are quite literally priced at the bottom of the premium curve. And 60,000 substrates per month is 4 million TVs per year (with some left over for spoilage/yield issues).

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2682 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 02:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Let's just be honest, OK. You leave it alone and call it a rant because most of it can't really be refuted. So you go and attack me in an attempt to pretend it's not actually a well constructed argument. I mean, let's be honest, OK.

No need to pretend, it isnt a well constructed argument. It is an argument based on your notions of the ultimate price of OLED's. Yes, I absolutely agree that if OLED's are order of magnitude more expensive than LCD's that they wont sell. There arent enough advantages for OLED's to overcome that kind of price premium.

Happy?

Of course, we have very different ideas on where the ultimate price of OLED's will be.

Quote:


It's really offensive. There's actually a point when I note that there is no manufacturing efficiency absent production and no current production nor any evidence of production nor any evidence of demand to drive that production. You can state that the chicken-and-egg problem will be solved if you wish because you believe Samsung will simply start producing milions of TV and sell them below cost or because you are quite certain demand for high-end-but-not-very-large-TVs will exist.

I particularly love this part of the argument. As if this isnt the problem faced by nearly every new technology when it comes to market. It is amazing that we ever see new technologies ever manage to overcome it. Samsung must have waved a magic wand to solve this gordion knot and become profitable in cellphone sized OLED's.

Here's the thing. There's no secret to being right the majority of the time in arguments about new technologies. Simply take the side against it ever coming to market. You will be right the majority of the time. The real trick is figuring out when a technology can overcome the myriad obstacles that are an inevitable part of commercialization. I think there is increasing evidence that OLED televisions are doing exactly that.

By the way, I'm not married to this position. If Samsung doesnt announce a significant OLED capex budget in 2012, I'll reevaluate where the market is going. I do wonder what you will do though. Will you simply double down on your vociferous opposition or will you take the new data and start to soften a bit?

I guess we'll find out soon.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2683 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 02:42 PM
Member
 
Sunidrem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So, the reason people won't buy 55" OLED TVs for $5k in 2014 (or whenever) is because no one was buying 55" TVs for $5k last year?

If you believe OLED is a minor/non-existent upgrade, then yeah, what you're saying makes sense - OLED will never reach production efficiencies that lower the price. As for the rest of us that believe OLED will be a substantial upgrade, the chicken/egg cycle will be broken by early adopters and/or aggressive production schedules.
Sunidrem is offline  
post #2684 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 02:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunidrem View Post

So, the reason people won't buy 55" OLED TVs for $5k in 2014 (or whenever) is because no one was buying 55" TVs for $5k last year?

I actually agree with him. There is no mass market for a $5000 55" OLED TV either now or in 2014.

and Samsung wont build a Gen 8 fab if that is the price that is necessary to be profitable either.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2685 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 03:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunidrem View Post

So, the reason people won't buy 55" OLED TVs for $5k in 2014 (or whenever) is because no one was buying 55" TVs for $5k last year?

I actually used entirely different price bands. And I actually never said no one would buy them. But thanks for again boiling an hour's worth of work into 30 seconds of either not reading or an intentionally misleading "sound bite".

Quote:
If you believe OLED is a minor/non-existent upgrade, then yeah, what you're saying makes sense - OLED will never reach production efficiencies that lower the price.

Again, not what I said. I said, more or less, "too small for most people to notice" and "not remotely equivalent to the upgrade from SD CRT to flat panel HDTV". The former is almost irrefutable: people rarely pay for quality. The latter is inarguable, except by morons. And I'm not saying you're a moron. Far from it.

Quote:
As for the rest of us that believe OLED will be a substantial upgrade, the chicken/egg cycle will be broken by early adopters and/or aggressive production schedules.

Early adopters cannot break the chicken/egg problem. It requires chasm crossing at some point to do this. The bet that Samsung has to place involves betting billions that the chasm can be crossed. They have to take the losses up front either way, but then they still need to find a price where the ongoing losses are tolerable. And quite frankly, it's a huge company, but not an infinitely wealthy one.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2686 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 03:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gmarceau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Rogo, 5 years from now, if you could choose between buying an lcd, plasma, or oled and they were all the same price, which one would you go with?

"If you weren't such an ignorant troll, you'd be adorable" -rogo
gmarceau is offline  
post #2687 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 03:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 711
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 124
"On/off or sequential contrast
How black can black be in dark scenes? Very on current plasmas and exceptionally on current locally dimmed LCDs. Could this be improved? Infinitesimally, perhaps. Local dimming needs some work to eliminate halos / blooming. Plasma still needs to get back to Kuro levels. More zones will come to LCD. Maybe Panasonic will finally bring out its own Kuro killer plasma. Again, though, we are splitting hairs. There is room here, but there is not much room. The Sony/Elite are ridiculously good in this metric.
Possible improvement: Minimal but it does exist

ANSI or simultaneous contrast
The ability to show bright and dark at once. With local dimming, LCD is now an order of magnitude better than it once was. Plasma was always decent here, never amazing. For what it's worth, CRT was never amazing here, yet it was "reference" for years. OLED will be better. Will this improve picture quality? Marginally at most. Are LCD and plasma standing still here? No. In fact, plasma's biggest weakness -- light output -- goes away on mixed content and allows for small areas of very bright output.
Possible improvement: Minimal and the importance is minimal"

Rogo, everybody who looks at OLED other than you seems to think the differences are much larger, subjectively. I look at LCDs at the shop once in a while and don't see major improvements off-angle to justify buying a new TV. I have a 2008 panasonic plasma that's just fine, and when OLED comes along I'll upgrade. I'm never buying another LCD in my life.

If you hate OLED so much and think LCD will own the universe for the foreseeable future, well good luck with that. You will be exceedingly wrong, IMO. What does my opinion count for? Well, for one, when people's jaws drop to the floor each time they see an OLED, they will pay the money to upgrade. Also, Apple will push it down the line anyway so there is no chance LCD will maintain its dominance forever. OLED is the superior tech, and the differences are not minimal. People held onto their CRTs for years because LCDs had sucky contrast and motion. What makes you think the inverse is so implausible? I would gladly pay 5k for a 55 inch OLED next year. In fact, I probably will. I've waited 4 years to upgrade, and make a good salary. Nothing has been worthwhile to upgrade to, except a Pio, and I had just bought a plasma.


Anyway, this is the internetz, who cares if your predictions are right or wrong, I certainly don't. You sound so confident of yourself but don't realize that others see through it. Our eyes are no less golden than yours. I'm a 3D programmer for a major video game company.

Guess what display tech we use to show our games on ? Plasma. NOT LCD. Yes, even now, in 2011. Contrast, black levels and motion are the most important things to us when selecting displays.

You really think an LCD with terrible off-angle grey washed out colour is going to cut it in a board-room presentation when you've spent 6 million dollars making a AAA title and people are standing all over the place? I don't sit right in the middle of my TV's sweet spot in my loft, I move around, I cook, I have guests over. When OLED gets here, I will upgrade, because I use my TV as a computer monitor and watch a lot of dark sci-fi movies and fantasy. Do you really expect me to believe LCDs can compete here? I go over to my friend's place who has an LCD that cost double my plasma, and it SUCKS.

Read every single review of those OLEDs, people almost universally were awed. The iphone LCD is only good because of its pixel pitch. Apple will get rid of LCD soon enough, and then this "debate" will be moot and your predictions will be long-forgotten.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #2688 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 03:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

No need to pretend, it isnt a well constructed argument. It is an argument based on your notions of the ultimate price of OLED's. Yes, I absolutely agree that if OLED's are order of magnitude more expensive than LCD's that they wont sell. There arent enough advantages for OLED's to overcome that kind of price premium.

Happy?

Let's be honest. You used ad hominem again there, it was just softpedaled. And let's be further honest, you again pulled what I'd call "Limbaugh Logic" except I don't really want to associate it with a particular political belief but rather a particular kind of intellectual dishonesty. I described a framework where competing TVs are around $1000 and the first OLEDs are in a band of $3000 and up. I actually left it open ended where in that band they were. Perhaps Samsung goes so far down the learning-curve pricing, they open at $3000. I suggested that at $5000 there is no path to volume and that even at $3000 they'd have to capture the entire segment to hit full utilization on the plant.

The reader paying attention would've understood what this means: Either they find a way below $3000 pretty darned quick or they don't bother. Simply opening at $5000 and moving to $3000 doesn't get it done. There is no way Samsung takes 100% of the segment -- especially because the closer they get the more competition simply moves the segment to $2000 and recaptures share of "premiums" at a lower price band. But instead you "Limbaughed" me there. You took one strand of the argument and you extrapolated to claim I didn't really make an argument. Bravo.

Quote:


Of course, we have very different ideas on where the ultimate price of OLED's will be.

You don't even know what mine are, other than me stating that it's nearly impossible they will catch TFT-LCD costs this decade, no matter what a bunch of Korean i-bank analysts seem to think.
Quote:


I particularly love this part of the argument. As if this isnt the problem faced by nearly every new technology when it comes to market. It is amazing that we ever see new technologies ever manage to overcome it. Samsung must have waved a magic wand to solve this gordion knot and become profitable in cellphone sized OLED's.

We don't see new technologies come to market very often. In display it has happened twice since Zworykin. Each -- plasma and LCD -- took about 30 years to commercialize (I am leaving out projection-based technologies as none has ever sold 10 million units in a year and none are currently selling even half that, including office projectors... also, DLP took its own sweet time). We see packaging of existing technologies come to market regularly -- iPhone is an amazing example. We don't see new forms of memory displacing flash, despite reading about that since the 1990s and flash hitting numerous "walls" since then. We don't see the x86 architecture getting displaced on the desktop or in servers despite basically not increasing in clock speeds for years.

Generally, new technologies don't overcome the hurdles or the "Gordian Knot" as you put it. And when the "ante" is $3 billion or more, the problem is that much trickier. It explains why virtuallly everyone researching OLED has already bailed on pursuing it commercially, including Sony (blah blah blah, Sony broadcast monitors, blah blah blah... Show me a TV fab and we can talk about Sony pursuing it, until then, [i]they aren't pursuing it). All the hype from Epson, Kodak, duPont, yada yada about roll-to-roll printable OLEDs with flexible backing... Dates back to the Y2K era. And ... yet... nothing.

You global warming deniers ought to look at the pictures of Greenland ice in 2000 vs. 2011 and then the list of promises about OLED TVs in 2000 vs. 2011. It's pretty amazing to actually see the ice gone. And to actually see the OLED TV promises coming from fewer places, with still no products to buy (oh, accept for that Sony broadcast monitor.... pop that baby in your home theater).
Quote:


Here's the thing. There's no secret to being right the majority of the time in arguments about new technologies. Simply take the side against it ever coming to market. You will be right the majority of the time. The real trick is figuring out when a technology can overcome the myriad obstacles that are an inevitable part of commercialization. I think there is increasing evidence that OLED televisions are doing exactly that.

When Samsung builds a fab, there will be evidence of it.
Quote:


By the way, I'm not married to this position. If Samsung doesnt announce a significant OLED capex budget in 2012, I'll reevaluate where the market is going. I do wonder what you will do though. Will you simply double down on your vociferous opposition or will you take the new data and start to soften a bit?

If they announce a fab, I'll be excited. I want this stuff to make it. I wish they weren't so damn stupid about making them on a Gen 8 fab that basically can't ever make a size that true videophiles want. The fact they are positioning this as some sort of mainstream product actually makes me wonder what the selling proposition is going to be. To be honest, for me, a 65" would do. A 70" would do. I think I'm like a lot of people in that regard. Heck, I might tolerate a 60" if it was the best thing ever. 55" is already too small. And Sharp is getting people who really love TV/home theater rapidly accustomed to that notion. I think everything about Samsung's business plan is fail. And I want them to succeed. I have no opposition to anything.

I doubt they are announcing this capex in the middle of this global economic clusterF@#$. But more power to them if they do. I believe that it's a bet as much on the tablet market as it is on any certainty the TV business plan is viable.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2689 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 04:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GmanAVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ridgewood, NJ
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by htwaits View Post

Auditor55! What memories!

SED is still dead
GmanAVS is offline  
post #2690 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:05 PM
Member
 
Sunidrem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I actually used entirely different price bands. And I actually never said no one would buy them. But thanks for again boiling an hour's worth of work into 30 seconds of either not reading or an intentionally misleading "sound bite".

Incidentally, since that is the second time you referenced how long it took you to write your response, someone asked Abraham Lincoln how long it takes him to write a speech and you may find his response illuminating: "Two weeks for a 20-minute speech. One week for a 40-minute speech; and I can give a rambling two-hour talk right now.""
Sunidrem is offline  
post #2691 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

When they are talking themselves into getting a new OLED that's not especially large to replace an already existing 2009 LCD or plasma (or projector)? Please.

You're focusing on people upgrading from recent and large sets, but that's only a part of the equation isn't it? How about people shopping to replace their 2005 LCD? Or people shopping to replace a broken display? Or people shopping for a display that isn't a replacement?

I agree the arrival of OLED is nothing like the arrival of flat panels. I don't think OLED will explode. I don't think it necessarily has to.
Airion is offline  
post #2692 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
specuvestor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I tried to create a layperson's analogy to both answer your question and provide another angle for someone perhaps visiting this thread for the first time. I imagine you sense my frustration at this point not that people don't agree with me (quite frankly I don't actually care about that), but rather that some people refuse to construct an argument -- or deconstruct one. Thus I keep littering my posts with disclaimers. Which reminds me: OLED believers, if you have gotten here, please understand, OLED will win and remove every trace of competing technologies from existence. It will be like the dinosaurs, plasma and LCD will be basically left to nothing more than a fossil record.

rogo u know I respect your opinion but why do you keep saying this when no one else is?? Frankly this does qualify as a rant

You have your opinion and I have mine but the beauty is that it will not be a decade wait but next 6 months. I will not rehash my same points but we will revisit the VIABILITY then and examine the pudding. What is clear though is OLED on tablet has yet to progressively convince you after a year of skepticism. I'm wondering by your logic does OLED has to be in EVERY tablet or handset to finally prove viability?

PS I'm not sure why u keep deviating to Global warming but here's my post for your consideration:

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

Here's the recent boo-boo on global warming. If you look at the picture it looks credible. But devil is always in the details. I'm not saying global warming does not exist. But environment changes is a complicated global ecosystem phenomenon, and balance can be destroyed by a myriad of not so obvious derivative factors. My point is science is not as obvious or convenient as many of us wants to believe, or choose to take the time AND effort to understand PROPERLY. People nowadays just want fast and quick answers that appeals heuristically, hence why there's a market for 1" thick TVs

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...-greenland-map
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-m...ional-ice-melt

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post21013642

Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post

You've made a very strong case, even if I may quibble in relatively small areas. OLED has a very challenging road ahead, at least in larger panel sizes.

Reading this thread, it's becoming clear that there are a few in here who are vying to be this decades OLED version of Auditor55.

Obviously you have not been reading this thread and don't know non vaporware OLED TV is coming while I have yet to hear any hint of SED being resurrected. Whether most of us can actually afford to buy one in next 3 years is another matter altogether.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xrox View Post

LOL - My question was purposefully restrained and conservative relative to my view but I agree completely. Unlike handheld devices which are replaced constantly it is going to be extremely difficult to convince the average consumer to replace thier current LCD/PDP.

With all due respect xrox, if u are right then I should be shorting TFT stocks, not to mention OLED stocks BTW CRT TV are still being sold in emerging markets. Sammy's CRT division is lasting longer than Auditor55's forecast of PDP death
specuvestor is offline  
post #2693 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
I described a framework where competing TVs are around $1000 and the first OLEDs are in a band of $3000 and up. I actually left it open ended where in that band they were. Perhaps Samsung goes so far down the learning-curve pricing, they open at $3000. I suggested that at $5000 there is no path to volume and that even at $3000 they'd have to capture the entire segment to hit full utilization on the plant.

I dont care where the opening price for OLED televisions is set. It is irrelevant to me whether Samsung sells the first 55" OLED TV at $15000 or $7500 or, as I have said before, they simply set them on fire. The question I have is the price point where a Gen 8 fab is capable of producing a 55" TV when they hit commercial yields. That is going to determine the success or failure of the fab and Samsung isnt going to approve a fab where that price is $5000 or even $3000.

We are in absolute agreement that the market for >$3000 55" televisions is going to be limited. They are going to need to get in the range of $2000 to make this a mass market item that can justify the necessary capex and R&D.

Quote:
I doubt they are announcing this capex in the middle of this global economic clusterF@#$. But more power to them if they do. I believe that it's a bet as much on the tablet market as it is on any certainty the TV business plan is viable.

The '08 credit crisis set back the capacity expansion for the Gen 4 fab by at least a year. A meltdown in Europe would definitely have an impact on any potential Gen 8 fab.

As for tablets, the market outside of Apple is tiny. Samsung is likely going to have capacity for 10 million 10" OLED screens a month just from their Gen 5.5 capacity in 2013. The idea that they are going to build a Gen 8 fab that requires new processes and technologies to add 16K wafers (~3 million 10" screens) makes very little sense to me.

but as spec just said, the wait isnt long. Six months from now we should have a far better idea about the industry's plans for OLED televisions.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2694 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 05:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
and just for the record, the 15" OLED from LG did sell commercially in Europe. You can buy one for $1450.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/LG-Electroni...7343066&sr=1-1

The only person that I have ever found that bought the TV used it for gaming...and loved it. Of course, he had to sit 3' away from the thing .

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1586235&page=4

Quote:
I have that LG Oled tv. I use it only for the PS3.... and yes gaming is amazing on it. There is zero blur, the blacks are so black that playing in pitch black the eyes can not make out if its on or off.

Been playing Super Sf4 and MK on it... its been a real pleasure for sure( no input lag!!) and labeling the input as PC correctly handles the 4:4:4 chroma! Very sharp!. I am probably the only person using it for gaming but coming from a Pioneer Elite pro 111 tv to this... just wow!

I was at first very skeptical of the size and the resolution of the tv, but after getting it and using those concerns have gone away. I can sit up to 3 ft away from it and enjoy it, the clarity is WAY clearer then lcd, the way the Oled pixels are arranges the screen honestly looks like looking at a magazine, its that clear!!

If you have the $ grabbing one is def worth it for gaming, the console games look INSANE on this panel And this is coming from someone that used to have a Sony FW900 24 inch CRT monitor that I used 360 with vga cable on. The LG Oled destroys that monitor in clarity and contract and color. I need to put some pics of it in action with games on here.

slacker711 is offline  
post #2695 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 06:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

rogo u know I respect your opinion but why do you keep saying this when no one else is?? Frankly this does qualify as a rant

Because I want you OLED believers to know you have won. You are right. OLED will take over and rule the earth. If anything, your belief in OLED is pessimistic. It's obviously cheaper to make and better. How can it not just totally rule?
Quote:
You have your opinion and I have mine but the beauty is that it will not be a decade wait but next 6 months.

I'm sure I heard that like 6 months ago. But hey, what do I know. I was so clearly wrong about OLEDs inevitable takeover.

Quote:
I will not rehash my same points but we will revisit the VIABILITY then and examine the pudding. What is clear though is OLED on tablet has yet to progressively convince you after a year of skepticism.

There is no shipping tablet with OLED. There is one announced, 7+" tablet. That market, which to date has shipped an infinitesimal number of units. is about to dominated by Amazon, with an LCD-based tablet. What am I supposed to be convinced of? That Samsung can deliver a 7+" OLED screen? Never doubted that, sorry. That Samsung can sell millions of those tablets? Definitely not happening anytime soon. So not sure what point you are proving.

Quote:
I'm wondering by your logic does OLED has to be in EVERY tablet or handset to finally prove viability?

I've stated who knows how many times that it's viable in phones, despite it being basically in one phone from one company. That phone is a runaway hit and I have no doubt that if Apple wanted an OLED display for iPhone 6 and went asking Samsung for one, they could supply it. I've never stated it's not viable in the small end of the market. Quite frankly, after I made that one math error on the 5.5G fab output, I stated it was viable for iPad, except that without a second source and a better relationship between Apple and Samsung, it wasn't coming to iPad. That's not a statement on its viability; it's a statement on the business relationship between the two companies and Apple's obvious policy of multi-sourcing components at this point.
Quote:
PS I'm not sure why u keep deviating to Global warming but here's my post for your consideration:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post21013642

I'm curious if you've seen any of the millions of pictures from around the globe that show gigantic retreats of ice sheets, record-breaking pieces falling off ice shelves, etc. The fact that Harper Collins -- not a well-known climate-science organization -- made an error printing a Greenland map doesn't change how much ice is melting around the globe. This is where science deniers drive me flat out insane. Just because there are small errors doesn't change the underlying science. Huge amounts of permanent ice has disappear since I've been alive. Since my grandparents birth? The amounts are that much greater. There are minimal sources global of new permanent ice. You folks can keep pretending that's not happening. Pretend until the ocean is in your living room for all I care. Seriously. Don't you live someplace that qualifies as coastal lowlands? I'd move to a higher floor just in case. And get a boat.
Quote:
With all due respect xrox, if u are right then I should be shorting TFT stocks, not to mention OLED stocks BTW CRT TV are still being sold in emerging markets. Sammy's CRT division is lasting longer than Auditor55's forecast of PDP death

8 million CRTs out of about 220 million TVs. It exists, but barely. And most of them go to China, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan for not many yuan.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2696 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 06:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

The question I have is the price point where a Gen 8 fab is capable of producing a 55" TV when they hit commercial yields. That is going to determine the success or failure of the fab and Samsung isnt going to approve a fab where that price is $5000 or even $3000.

We are in absolute agreement that the market for >$3000 55" televisions is going to be limited. They are going to need to get in the range of $2000 to make this a mass market item that can justify the necessary capex and R&D.

Right, so I've spent about 100,000 words basically explaining that there are scenarios by which it's entirely realistic that never happens. I've never once said it can't happen. I've never once said it definitely won't happen. I've basically laid out a very detailed argument on why it might well not happen, which includes market forces, competitive forces, etc. And most of your response has been, more or less, "you're just not especially intelligent". I'd have a response to that, but there are rules against it here that I'll adhere to.
Quote:
The '08 credit crisis set back the capacity expansion for the Gen 4 fab by at least a year. A meltdown in Europe would definitely have an impact on any potential Gen 8 fab.

As for tablets, the market outside of Apple is tiny. Samsung is likely going to have capacity for 10 million 10" OLED screens a month just from their Gen 5.5 capacity in 2013. The idea that they are going to build a Gen 8 fab that requires new processes and technologies to add 16K wafers (~3 million 10" screens) makes very little sense to me.

You have to remind me again what the substrate size is / substrates per month is for the Gen 5.5 fab. I presume Samsung is going to make a huge move to try to get their AMOLED screens on a lot more cellphones in 2012 and 2013, including those of competitors. It seems to me the smartphone market is likely to be about 500 million screens in 2013 and they could realistically be hoping to capture 200 million of that (again, the interests of the display group and corporate vis a vis Apple are so horribly mis-aligned). I imagine a lot of the future capacity in the phone/tablet market gets absorbed if peace is made with Cupertino and some of it never gets used otherwise.
Quote:
but as spec just said, the wait isnt long. Six months from now we should have a far better idea about the industry's plans for OLED televisions.

So we're waiting till the end of March then? More or less Q2, not really Q1.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2697 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 06:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
specuvestor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
rogo I will rest it here for now. I frankly don't think you are rational discussing this right now. I think we know why there is no 7" OLED tablet shipping to US currently and we also remember Sammy has a 7" LCD tablet. We also remember that Apple does not need OLED because retina LCD is better. We will discuss again when the OLED TV comes out.

And no, no one here saying global warming is not true. It is too obvious such that this is another rant. BTW the second article ends up with anecdotal evidence that ice is melting for a rounded view. But the reason and observation is far more complicated than you suggest that simple "science" can explain (chaos dynamics) when the community at large cannot agree.

And disagreement is fine when it makes us think. Less useful when it degrades to who's right or wrong.
specuvestor is offline  
post #2698 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 07:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,055
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 375
The Samsung tablet is not shipping anywhere. It's not available outside the U.S. either. So far, the global market has massively rejected 7" Android tablets. I'm sure you can explain to me why that's going to change thanks to OLED. Or Ice Cream Sandwich. Or unicorns. But the actual facts are (1) The tablet is not shipping anywhere (2) The 7" Galaxy Tab was pushed into channels everywhere; sell through was horrendous and Samsung more or less dropped it quietly (3) No one has sold many 7" tablets anywhere (4) Whatever market opportunity existed for 7" tablets is about to almost entirely absorbed by Amazon -- at least in the U.S.

The global scientific community agrees the global climate is changing by the way. The only dispute comes from the denier community, which uses fake parameters to suggest the consensus is nowhere near as strong as it actually is. There are people who also still deny the Holocaust. They too have to be argued against (see Mill, J.S. "On Liberty" for an explanation as to why) even though their arguments are equally ludicrous.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #2699 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 07:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

You have to remind me again what the substrate size is / substrates per month is for the Gen 5.5 fab. I presume Samsung is going to make a huge move to try to get their AMOLED screens on a lot more cellphones in 2012 and 2013, including those of competitors. It seems to me the smartphone market is likely to be about 500 million screens in 2013 and they could realistically be hoping to capture 200 million of that (again, the interests of the display group and corporate vis a vis Apple are so horribly mis-aligned). I imagine a lot of the future capacity in the phone/tablet market gets absorbed if peace is made with Cupertino and some of it never gets used otherwise.

The estimate is for 196,000 Gen 5.5 (1320mm x 1500mm) substrates a month by sometime in 2013. Each substrate is capable of producing either 264 4.3" or 50 10" displays. Taking your estimate of 200 million OLED enabled smartphones in 2013 would use ~63,000 substrates a month leaving another 133,000 substrates for the tablet market. That means Samsung would have a yearly capacity of 80 million 10" tablet displays.

I am an absolutely huge bull on the tablet market and you have it exactly right. Apple is grabbing the top end of the market and everybody else is going to have to compete on price. I think Samsung may have trouble finding a home for all of their Gen 5.5 capacity much less building a Gen 8 facility to add even more capacity that will likely be at a premium due to the necessary R&D and capex.

So unless you believe that Samsung has a secret agreement with Apple to supply them with OLED's, the most logical explanation for a Gen 8 fab is going to be televisions.

Quote:


So we're waiting till the end of March then? More or less Q2, not really Q1.

Samsung and LG will announce their capex budgets near the end of January. So we'll get some concrete details in four months.

I was about to write a response to your initial comments, but why bother.

Slacker
slacker711 is offline  
post #2700 of 10438 Old 09-29-2011, 09:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 748
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
OLED with a .001 pixel response time = no crosstalk right? Soooooo...basically amazing 3D. With super bright leds along side perfect black and perfect high viewing angles?

Roll your own wall sized screens...

fold your own 46" Tv for the flight?

Case closed, bring OLED on.

Lets get back to the "technology advancements" talk eh?
tory40 is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

Tags
Led Hdtv , Lcd Hdtv , Plasma Hdtv , Oled Tv , Lg , Samsung

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off