Originally Posted by rogo
LG is likely to jump to 4K very, very quickly on OLED because there is nothing stopping it short of getting its IGZO working at all. The density change will be trivial once they do.
These are going to be orphan sets with relatively lousy performance. LG will have full-resolution passive 3D on its second-gen products if it goes 4K and its first-gen products have gorgeous depth on 3D but lousy resolution. It also will produce the 2nd-gen stuff on 50+% yields, which means products that are likely to have much better longevity and 30-50% lower prices.
I think my objectivity is pretty freaking clear here. No one is forced to take my recommendations not to buy, but the idea that these recommendations are coming from a place of bias on behalf of a manufacturer or self interest is patently false.
You will overpay for under-featured products whose longevity is very very much in question. Why do that? Buy nothing or buy a "hold till reinforcements TV" and revisit this question in 2014 (or more likely 2015)
Yeah, I have to say that I agree with this general assessment and emphasis on the key point is mine. With 4k and OLED trying to hit market at the same time, it's not exactly a great time to jump on board the first-gen of the OLED tech. Or the first-gen 4k sets either.
In a couple years, OLED 4k sets will replace the OLED 1080p sets. They may still be expensive, but I wouldn't be surprised if the LCD 4k sets aren't cheap enough compared to OLED 4k to be worth it. They'll both still be in the premium market space, so I'd wager that the benefits of OLED will be enough to draw the premium TV buyers.
To me, a more interesting question is how this affects Plasma in the coming years. OLED will certainly start to eat away at LCD for large screens as the price comes down. The real question is if it will start to eat at Plasma at the same time, or if the cheaper price (at the expense of weight) will keep it around for some time to come?