Originally Posted by rogo
One problem with predicting the future is that 25" TVs used to cost $900 in 1975 dollars. That's $3600+ today, which would buy you a 70" Sharp TV at any big-box retailer. If we were having fun and extrapolating, that'd be the equivalent of about a 175" TV before 2050 for the same kind of money.
Now, life is not so linear, but I promise you this: As much as I've been a skeptic about OLED and other flat-panel techs taking over (largely for reasons I've repeated 100x over: exactly three TV techs have ever actually "made it" in the market, despite dozens being announced), 35 years is a long time.
If we step into the Wayback Machine and examine people's beliefs about what was doable in 1975, I can assure you that while the notion of really big flat-panel TVs existed, the understanding of how/when/if they'd get built did not. The first active-matrix, mass-market display wouldn't exist on a laptop for another 15 years (heck, even full-resolution passive-matrix LCD wouldn't exist for 10 or so). Plasma existed as a lab experiment.
In 2011, it's possible to imagine that someday, somewhere, someone will have massive inkjet printing technology to deposit OLED material by the barrel load. Just because no one has, doesn't mean within the next decade or three someone won't figure out how to mate already existing technology. And TFT backplanes based on IGZO can already be made big enough to support the 70" Sharp in a 2x3 configuration.
Do I believe 120" TVs will be $100 30 years from now? No, I sure don't. Do I believe they will be $1000 30 years from now? Quite possibly. And if we mean $1000 of 2011's dollars -- i.e. that number can grow with inflation -- then I haven't a shred of a doubt. They might still only be popular with a small segment of the population for a lot of reasons, but they are going to exist. And they are going to have more than 2 million pixels. By a lot.
I don't have an issue with most of this. In fact, I wouldn't doubt much of it will be a reality...much, much, further down the road, is all.
Higher resolutions are coming and certainly- all being equal- I (like everyone else) welcome them with open arms.
But clearly that future is not now -or perhaps better put: shouldn't
be now- and in my opinion, we're nowhere near as close to it as some think.
Let's wait to see where 70" screens are priced in the next 5 years before we begin to guess how much a 100" version will cost, never mind when it will exist
. Even if they're halved, what % of the populace spends nearly $2,000 on a television? 1%? I know, prolly much less.
The bigger problem though is of course that there's other areas of display technology that are more deserving of time, money, and resources now
that would offer the consumer improved image quality over increased resolution when considering how televisions are currently
When, not if, your and my future of gigantic, inexpensive/affordable screens becomes a reality, these resolutions will be exponentially more beneficial, until then, it leaves me with not much more than the feeling that we have an industry (again) focused upon selling "the (perceived) next best thing" and much less concerned with improving image quality. The $$$'s, to no one's surprise.
But that's their prerogative of course.