OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 265 - AVS Forum
First ... 263  264  265 266  267  ... Last
OLED Technology and Flat Panels General > OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread
rogo's Avatar rogo 01:28 AM 01-04-2014
As dsinger mentioned above, yes, it's assembly plants.

They haven't even been able to greenlght one production fab, they're obviously more than a decade away from building fabs around the world.

Rich Peterson's Avatar Rich Peterson 06:51 AM 01-04-2014
Despite the need for some significant editing, there's lots of good information in this Forbes article entitled "Is OLED Dead? Here's Why The Answer Is No"

Here is some info the author wrote based on info provided by Kateeva's CEO Alain Harrus:
Quote:
Kateeva in a few months will ship its first commercial demonstration plant to a large manufacturer in a few weeks with more going to other manufacturers by the end of the year. By 2015, expect to see 5- to 10-inch tablets made with Kateeva-made OLED screens by 2015, he added.

By 2016, Kateeva will be selling equipment for making pilot lines that can process 8,000 sheets of month, which will rise to 25,000 sheets a month. Several systems can fit into a single factory. As an added bonus, manufacturers can leverage a lot of the machinery and capacity for producing LCD now to produce OLEDs.

TVs he added will follow.

tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 08:24 AM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

Despite the need for some significant editing, there's lots of good information in this Forbes article entitled "Is OLED Dead? Here's Why The Answer Is No"

Here is some info the author wrote based on info provided by Kateeva's CEO Alain Harrus:
Quote:
Kateeva in a few months will ship its first commercial demonstration plant to a large manufacturer in a few weeks with more going to other manufacturers by the end of the year. By 2015, expect to see 5- to 10-inch tablets made with Kateeva-made OLED screens by 2015, he added.

By 2016, Kateeva will be selling equipment for making pilot lines that can process 8,000 sheets of month, which will rise to 25,000 sheets a month. Several systems can fit into a single factory. As an added bonus, manufacturers can leverage a lot of the machinery and capacity for producing LCD now to produce OLEDs.

TVs he added will follow.

 

Interesting.  However, I doubt the part of this article where he states that OLED sales (of the 55") haven't met expectations.  I don't believe anyone in any company would have expected the results to be anything other than noise.  How could they think otherwise?


*UFO*'s Avatar *UFO* 11:21 AM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Interesting.  However, I doubt the part of this article where he states that OLED sales (of the 55") haven't met expectations.  I don't believe anyone in any company would have expected the results to be anything other than noise.  How could they think otherwise?

Doesn't everyone have $10,000 to spend on a 55" tv? biggrin.gif
Esox50's Avatar Esox50 12:29 PM 01-04-2014
It's less a question of "could you spend 10K on a TV" and more whether "should/would you spend 10K on a TV". For me the answer is no. I decided about 7 years ago that I would never spend a ton on a preamp/processor or a TV (after getting burned by Theta for $5,000, in 1999 dollars, on their "upgradable" Casanova). The most I'll spend in 2014 dollars on each is about $5,000, though I'd prefer it to be more like $3-4,000. Tech moves so fast...you wind up having to upgrade every 3-4 years anyway. I think money is better spent on the "foundation" of one's home theater system such as Amps and Speakers.
tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 01:34 PM 01-04-2014

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Interesting.  However, I doubt the part of this article where he states that OLED sales (of the 55") haven't met expectations.  I don't believe anyone in any company would have expected the results to be anything other than noise.  How could they think otherwise?

Doesn't everyone have $10,000 to spend on a 55" tv? biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esox50 View Post

It's less a question of "could you spend 10K on a TV" and more whether "should/would you spend 10K on a TV". For me the answer is no. I decided about 7 years ago that I would never spend a ton on a preamp/processor or a TV (after getting burned by Theta for $5,000, in 1999 dollars, on their "upgradable" Casanova). The most I'll spend in 2014 dollars on each is about $5,000, though I'd prefer it to be more like $3-4,000. Tech moves so fast...you wind up having to upgrade every 3-4 years anyway. I think money is better spent on the "foundation" of one's home theater system such as Amps and Speakers.

 

I'm fairly certain that UFO was joking.


Esox50's Avatar Esox50 03:37 PM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post


I'm fairly certain that UFO was joking.
Of course he was (hence the big smiley), but my post was more in relation to those that could afford to buy one...would it necessarily make sense? It's like Ian Malcolm saidin Jurassic Park "Just because you could, doesn't mean you should." To me, it doesn't make sense to buy a 10K TV in any circumstance, but I also understand its a personal opinion/matter and "everyone" may feel different.
tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 04:00 PM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esox50 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post


I'm fairly certain that UFO was joking.
Of course he was (hence the big smiley), but my post was more in relation to those that could afford to buy one...would it necessarily make sense? It's like Ian Malcolm saidin Jurassic Park "Just because you could, doesn't mean you should." To me, it doesn't make sense to buy a 10K TV in any circumstance, but I also understand its a personal opinion/matter and "everyone" may feel different.

 

Oh sure.  We've discussed this at length.  Even billionaires don't like to be had.  I previously related this to a time when I refused to buy a very expensive candy bar.  I could afford it.  But I just wasn't going to pay that much for a candy bar no matter how hungry I was.


*UFO*'s Avatar *UFO* 05:32 PM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Oh sure.  We've discussed this at length.  Even billionaires don't like to be had.  I previously related this to a time when I refused to buy a very expensive candy bar.  I could afford it.  But I just wasn't going to pay that much for a candy bar no matter how hungry I was.

Generally speaking, millionaires and billionaires are more stingy with their spending habits than the poorer classes. Someone who is going to be buying a $10,000 55" television is most likely going to be the person that puts it on three or four credit cards. (ie. money they dont really have to spend)
Esox50's Avatar Esox50 06:03 PM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Generally speaking, millionaires and billionaires are more stingy with their spending habits than the poorer classes. Someone who is going to be buying a $10,000 55" television is most likely going to be the person that puts it on three or four credit cards. (ie. money they dont really have to spend)
Bingo.
tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 06:21 PM 01-04-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esox50 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Generally speaking, millionaires and billionaires are more stingy with their spending habits than the poorer classes. Someone who is going to be buying a $10,000 55" television is most likely going to be the person that puts it on three or four credit cards. (ie. money they dont really have to spend)
Bingo.

 

Sorry, not going that far---way too big a leap.


irkuck's Avatar irkuck 07:48 AM 01-05-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Doesn't everyone have $10,000 to spend on a 55" tv? biggrin.gif
Ppl who have have better things to do than hanging on avs smile.gif
*UFO*'s Avatar *UFO* 11:36 AM 01-05-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Ppl who have have better things to do than hanging on avs smile.gif

What could possibly be better than hanging on avs wink.gif
JimP 11:57 AM 01-05-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

What could possibly be better than hanging on avs wink.gif

Hell if I know. smile.gif
rogo's Avatar rogo 02:49 PM 01-05-2014
So this is a pointless sideshow, but there are plenty of people who can spend $10,000 on a television. It's often not a great idea and it will often come at the expense of something else, but it's not like there's a straight function that says your TV:net worth ratio needs to be no higher than X.

I'm pretty sure my total dollars on computers and tablets:net worth ratio exceeds the average person's by quite a bit, and it's surely unnecessary from a pure need perspective, but it's how I chose to spend some money. That said, once you are talking (a) a television (b) $10,000... other factors tend to come into play.

Most people don't want to change out their TV very often. Heck, I was even told by a leading TV retailer not to buy a new TV to replace by year-ish old Panasonic. ("Why would you go through that hassle? Yours is still great!") Given that, when considering a replacement TV, we tend to think in multi-year timeframes.... "Is this the right choice for the next several years?" "Will I have buyers remorse with a 2013 versus a 2014?" One of the reasons why people still talk about their Pioneer Kuros is they never experienced that kind of regret (still don't?).

Add in the fact that at $10,000, you are buying a TV that is price like no other television products and it gets more challenging. Let's stop talking about the TV market circa 2000 where TVs used to cost much more. No one does this with PCs. I paid $2500 (much more valuable inflation-adjust dollars) for my first Macintosh; the idea of spending that on a computer now is patently absurd. I just spent $600 on what will almost certainly be the last Windows machine I ever buy and honestly it will not be replaced as quickly as that Mac was. (Aside: I use both types of computers as well as Apple and Android tablets. I am OS and brand agnostic, though use lots of Apple products in the mix.)

When the Sharp Elite was briefly available, the larger model was something you could buy for $6000-7000, which at the time was about twice what a 65-inch plasma cost. Even that seemed a bit absurd. There was a serious question (for me and apparently the market, which bought virtually none of them, leading to a rapid discontinuation of the product) as to whether the product delivered more than twice what competing products offered and, for that matter, would be satisfactory for years to come. In the end, the Sharp proved an excellent product that was flawed by a lot of traditional LCD problems (reflectivity, viewing angles), a few bugs (color accuracy), and what will ultimately prove to feel like obsolescence (it's not 4K). At the time it was on sale, however, it was a reasonable enough choice for many AVSers, who bought them and continue to use them.

Given that LCD technology was so proven by then, the odds favored the longevity of those sets as well. That said, their orphan nature means a failure down the road might lead to an inability to get it repaired.

Compare this to the OLED, which competes with products that typically run around $2,500 (sometimes a bit less, depending on which comp we are using). It's at least 3x more expensive, arguably 4x. By next year, perhaps the multiple will shrink to under 3x, but it seems like it won't be much cheaper.

You get a set that clearly will outperform the comparable LCD in things like contrast. But you don't get any clear guarantee of longevity, especially since this is bleeding-edge technology being manufactured with techniques that neither manufacture has shown much willingness to commit to long term. There reluctance isn't coincidental, either. While the performance of 2015's OLED is unlikely to be much better, its inclusion of 4K technology seems all-but certain. Similarly, you can be certain it will be much less expensive and built on much more mature processes.

When I recommend people don't buy one of today's OLEDs, it doesn't much matter to me if they are exceptionally well off. It matters to me that they would spend a great deal of money buying first-generation technology that is unlikely to have the longevity of second-generation technology. There are countless examples here from early plasmas to Sony's SXRD and the like. It matters to me that they would integrate into their systems and their homes a TV that is unlikely to satisfy them for the long haul. I don't believe in disposable technology and think a quality television should be good for 5-10 years. I'm not persuaded the current OLEDs fit that bill and don't see why anyone should support them. And, yes, I understand the ramifications of no one supporting them. But that's not my problem; people who seek my counsel are.

In short, nothing about 2014's models is likely to change the equation vs. 2013's. They may be slightly different in features. If they are at least flat, well, the dealbreaker of the curve would go away (and, yes, I see that as a huge dealbreaker) but not much more. I am very skeptical you will actually see other sizes go on sale this year (and would be delighted to be mistaken). I have a feeling that a long time ago, I was of the mindset that the time this technology would be "ripe" was 2016-17. I have repeatedly confessed to being very fooled by CES 2012 into believing something had accelerated the timetable. It clearly did not. I don't have time to return to the archives to fully remind myself of the evolution of my thinking but I doubt it meaningfully differs from the beliefs I currently hold:

* Wait until the second or third generation of this technology
* Don't buy a size smaller than what you really want, especially not to get bleeding-edge tech
* When a major shift is in the middle of happening (to 4K), don't buy 2K convincing yourself you'll never care about 4K
* Don't talk yourself into accepting something weird just to get bleeding edge tech (e.g. a separate media box -- yuck; a curved screen -- double yuck)
* Don't thoroughly overpay for any of this even if you can afford it. The feeling of getting ripped off seems to really harm people's enjoyment of technology beyond any rational limits.
slacker711's Avatar slacker711 07:21 PM 01-05-2014
Take this with a very large grain of salt as I trust little that comes from a marketing manager. The price of the LG OLED has dropped to $7999 AUD ($7163) on their official site though.

http://www.gadgetguy.com.au/lg-cracks-oled-production-drops-prices-accordingly/
Quote:
“We see OLED technology as the future of television, and we believe consumers with plasma and LED/LCD TV’s will look at superior OLED technology as a real option for their next purchase,” said Lambro Skropidis, General Manager for Marketing at LG Australia.

“The new price point will bring our most innovative TV technology to more Australians seeking greater picture quality combined with absolute style.”

To make the reduced price point happen, LG has had to work out how to make the Organic Light Emitting Diode panels in higher quantities, which was one of the problems that caused OLED to take so long to reach retail over the past few years.

“Very few companies have been able to master the manufacture of OLED TV technology, and we’re incredibly excited that not only have we been able to innovate and lead in this new segment, but we’ve worked out how to produce at high volumes,” said Skropidis, adding that he feels “like we’ve ‘cracked the code’ on OLED TV production efficiency.”

Wizziwig's Avatar Wizziwig 08:06 PM 01-05-2014
Cnet claims the LG 77" UHD Curved OLED is coming in June for an unknown price:

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/lg-77ec9800/4505-6482_7-35833699.html
vinnie97's Avatar vinnie97 10:27 PM 01-05-2014
Sorry, Rogo, but I'm salivating right now (not that I wouldn't have to take out a small loan to afford one of these curved monstrosities) and the infinite contrast ratio they promise. I remember being highly skeptical about LG's PR announcements last year (after they kept missing release windows), but then they surprised me with the actual unveiling of this curved nonsense. I'll forgive them that slight if they can find a way to bring a flat screen in 2015?
rogo's Avatar rogo 03:42 AM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Sorry, Rogo, but I'm salivating right now (not that I wouldn't have to take out a small loan to afford one of these curved monstrosities) and the infinite contrast ratio they promise. I remember being highly skeptical about LG's PR announcements last year (after they kept missing release windows), but then they surprised me with the actual unveiling of this curved nonsense. I'll forgive them that slight if they can find a way to bring a flat screen in 2015?

You owe me no apology.

I am providing my general sense of things; it is meant to convince no one who wishes to go in a different direction.

That you need to take out a loan, however, speaks volumes... In a few years, the price ought to be quite mainstream.
Rich Peterson's Avatar Rich Peterson 09:30 AM 01-06-2014
At LG's CES press conference they announced:

1. Their 77" curved 4K OLED is planned for June as previously suggested.

2. They will have a 55" and 65" 4K OLEDs this year (no date mentioned)

3. They will release the gallery flat screen in the US this spring.

No prices mentioned.
bonzichrille's Avatar bonzichrille 09:38 AM 01-06-2014
Is it just me or is the latest design of the 77 inch OLED kind of ugly? I am kind of disappointed. Looks like the bastard was assembled at Vizio headquarters. FFS.
vinnie97's Avatar vinnie97 09:40 AM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

You owe me no apology.

I am providing my general sense of things; it is meant to convince no one who wishes to go in a different direction.

That you need to take out a loan, however, speaks volumes... In a few years, the price ought to be quite mainstream.
Well, at $30k (the price I've seen quoted), you bet your bippy that would take a loan, lol
tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 10:11 AM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Well, at $30k (the price I've seen quoted), you bet your bippy that would take a loan, lol

 

To put this into perspective, if you got that loan for 5 years at 0% (and the TV managed to last 5 years without terrible problems like blue fade), you'll have effectively rented the friggen thing for $500 a month.

 

I'll pass.  Artwood aside, LCD will be "good enough" for now.


vinnie97's Avatar vinnie97 10:26 AM 01-06-2014
I think my ZT60 is good enough as well. wink.gif 77" sounds crazy....but I used to say the same about 65".
RadTech51's Avatar RadTech51 11:19 AM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post


When the Sharp Elite was briefly available, the larger model was something you could buy for $6000-7000, which at the time was about twice what a 65-inch plasma cost. Even that seemed a bit absurd. There was a serious question (for me and apparently the market, which bought virtually none of them, leading to a rapid discontinuation of the product) as to whether the product delivered more than twice what competing products offered and, for that matter, would be satisfactory for years to come. In the end, the Sharp proved an excellent product that was flawed by a lot of traditional LCD problems (reflectivity, viewing angles), a few bugs (color accuracy), and what will ultimately prove to feel like obsolescence (it's not 4K). At the time it was on sale, however, it was a reasonable enough choice for many AVSers, who bought them and continue to use them.

I was was one of the original people to preorder the 70" Elite and receive it. Sure I paid almost full price and I was taking a risk but it sure paid off couldn't be happier today and I still think it's the best display out not only in its category but for its size. I say if people want to take a risk and be an early adapter of this new technology and can afford it, more power to them. wink.gif
Rich Peterson's Avatar Rich Peterson 11:36 AM 01-06-2014
At Panasonic's CES press conference they made no mention at all of OLED TVs. But they did say they will deliver Plasma picture quality on LCDs. They say their engineers have worked long and hard on that and conquered it.
tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 11:54 AM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

At Panasonic's CES press conference they made no mention at all of OLED TVs. But they did say they will deliver Plasma picture quality on LCDs. They say their engineers have worked long and hard on that and conquered it.

 

For sale, by Panasonic:


Chris5028's Avatar Chris5028 11:58 AM 01-06-2014
Maybe Panasonic intends to sell plasma TV's with an LED sticker on the bezel?
remush's Avatar remush 02:32 PM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I think my ZT60 is good enough as well. wink.gif 77" sounds crazy....but I used to say the same about 65".

For some reason it doesn't look that big



tgm1024's Avatar tgm1024 02:52 PM 01-06-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by remush View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I think my ZT60 is good enough as well. wink.gif 77" sounds crazy....but I used to say the same about 65".

For some reason it doesn't look that big

 

I think that it's perhaps a wide-angle lens used to film the guy.  So he's larger than he should be because he's closer to the camera.  Look at how very much his hand shrinks when he moves it closer to the TV.  His right hand (closest to the camera) is gargantuan by comparison.


Tags: Led Hdtv , Lcd Hdtv , Plasma Hdtv , Oled Tv , Lg , Samsung
First ... 263  264  265 266  267  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop