Sony Crystal LED Display - new display tech - Page 5

That's what Sony claimed, or something to that effect.

Well if I'm not mistaken OLED has one major hurdle that until correct will stop 90% of buyers from buying and thats "Burn in" I have a Nexus One phone that has an OLED display and while beautiful, the info bar at the top has long burned in with the battery icon, clock ect.... no correcting it and it is noticeable when I watch a movie. I think Google switched the bar from white to black to hide it back around Android 2.2(but maybe it had noting to do with it). So correct me if I'm wrong and OLED has no burn in issues, but for me right now if I could go get a 55" OLED @ $2,000 but the sales clerk had to say well there may be a small amount of burn in I'd pass as I love to game sometime for hours and hours and my burned in speedometer will watching blurays --- no way would I buy it. As far as the size of the CLED's while new and small its nothing in todays nano era I just don't see it as a problem, and for screen door its not going to be any different than most any other tech at the same size..ie at 1080P virtually non-existent. I personally see nothing but massive potential.

Due to the two different types of Oled one with Samsung (3 subpixel rgb) and one LG (4 subpixel rgbw)

I have not heard any one who is really in the know say that RGBW will have any type of significant burn in and probably much less than even the most modern plasmas. With the picture quality so much better on an Oled its worth any small risk.

Also did you see the LG 55" Its super sexy.

Solved?
http://www.oled-info.com/new-microfa...ion-efficiency

As far as I can see it this is strictly speaking not a 'burn in' like the one in plasma. It is rather a 'dim-out' effect when the OLEDs loose their emission efficiency after prolonged use. The effect then could in prinicple be compensated by increasing the driving signal to the OLEDs in question.
It will be hard to beat LED LCD on the lifetime.

I totally agree, I just don't see any downside to this technology.

Irkuck, what do you think plasma "burn in" is?

Some of the cells "dim out" because they've been overused.

It's the same exact thing you're describing for OLED.

(As to your second point, I'm not sure how you are going to teach an OLED display which pixels are overused and drive them harder unless you're devoting a lot of real-time processing to tracking that. But even if you could, you'd only make the problem even worse, even more quickly.)

I do agree that LED LCD is likely to win on lifetime, but even there, the LEDs get dimmer eventually. It's probably more useful to note that normal humans have a tough time running their display more than ~2500 hours per year. In commercial, the most you can get to is 8760 hours per year. Any display that can offer reasonable performance over 60,000 hours is going to meet the needs of any environment.

While it's true that some airports try to run their displays for >10 years, it's equally true that many have been replaced more than once since 2000 already.

If image element dimming is a problem with OLED and Plasma I do not understand why manufacturers do not solve it in software.

It would be relatively simple to have a frame buffer of 1920x1080x3 2048 bit integers that are incremented once for every frame of footage being shown on screen in a manner that represents the intensity of the sub pixel in question for that frame in time.

This permanent frame buffer would be reset to zero at time of manufacture and subsequently could be used by the TV's processing unit to keep an eye on how much wear each subpixel receives throughout the life of the panel.

Thus using an algorithm that keeps in mind the rate of dimming per subpixel the image being displayed could be adjusted to increase intensity for more effected pixels which would diminish or, if the algorithm is really good, eliminate it altogether.

Of course the downside to this algorithm would be that the subpixels most effected by dimming would receive even more strain and dim more which near the end of life of the panel could force the algorithm to dim the entire image so as to compensate for that, but that shouldn't be a problem for years.

Besides using this method you could even develop a mode where you could leave the set in a unify mode that displays an adjusted white image for a few hours which is tweaked to wear down all the subpixels that have the least dimming so as to bring all element dimming to the same level.

I postulated this same thing a couple of years ago with the idea that the TV could turn itself on at 2 AM or so and run a perfect cumulative reverse image to maintain uniformity. xrox responded that such an idea had already been patented in multiple embodiements. Not sure why it hasn't been implemented.

jeff

So, the reason why this isn't done, I'm guessing is two fold:

1) It would cost a lot of power and lead to the weird autonomous TV going on most every night for a meaningful fraction of the time it was on all day.

2) Very few people experience burn in.

Hmm, i was about to post that my OLED Galaxy 1 doesn't have any burn-in. But i just looked at it and it certainly does. I've had it for about 1.5 years. In the last 3 to 5 months, there has been a problem with the phone where it stays on after waking up from a phone call or when it notifies me in the middle of the night that its charged ( with a noise... ) and it stays on all night. The message that come on the screen when it wakes up, "Swipe to unlock screen" is burned in and is easily srceen on light backgrounds....

The good news is that nothing else is burned in or at least its very, very, very slight at this point, but given my computer use, with my computer on sometimes all day, with bright icons against a dark background (as i speak), i don't see how OLED can be used as a computer monitor unless they've made some major changes. If i used my computer screen this way, it would be burned in even faster with my use.

I hope this inorganic Sony tech doesn't burn-in, perhaps thats why they went this direction in the first place.

All display techs burn in, some just do it easier than others.

Some establishments keep their TVs on 24 hours/7 days a week (i.e. always on forever). I do wonder how modern day TVs (i.e. like the HDTVs we have these days) handle such abuse and strain where the device is never turned off at all...

Running 24/7 may actually be easier on a TV than normal use. It eliminates the stress of thermal cycling which can eventually lead to things like cracked solder connections. It's the warm up and cool down periods that are the most stressful to many components.

LED's half-life is up to 100000 hours according to the info I have found.
Here is one link:

http://www.focusdigitaldisplays.com/...ting-important


White OLED half-life is more than 100000 hours according to this link:

http://www.oled-info.com/kodak/kodak...terview_page_2


This is what LG's 55 OLED TV seems to use.

So the probability for burn-in could be lower for white OLED TV than
inorganic LED TV.

LG's OLED doesn't use "white OLED". It used three stacked layer of red, green and blue OLED to generate white light. It is believed LG will have good half life, but referring to a Kodak paper on a true white OLED isn't very telling.

Didn't LG buy Kodak patents for "white" OLED ?

EDIT: Removed info since it seems incorrect.

LG bought the entire Kodak OLED business. They continued with Kodak's White OLED architecture, as can be witnessed in this presentation linked in the OLED technology thread:

http://www.olednet.com/focus/focus_b...ew.asp?idx=404

Unfortunately the lifespan is not mentioned here, so it's difficult to compare the unknown lifespan of OLED with the unknown lifespan of CLED.

LG owns all of that now, I saw a graphic of how it works here I will post them both I think you are incorrect on this.




So it Looks like WRGB is the way to go.

I am not incorrect on this.

That graphic is misleading. Please read my posts in the LG OLED thread and the OLED advancements thread (and those of others).

But, I am not incorrect.

Heaven has opened Sony fans have a future... (hopefully)

" Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Sony Corp. named Kazuo Hirai as
president and chief executive officer, replacing Howard
Stringer, amid a projection for a fourth consecutive year of
losses.
The change is effective April 1, Sony said in an e-mailed
statement today. Stringer will become chairman of the board
after the June shareholder meeting.
The promotion will test the games chief’s ability to carry
out Stringer’s vision to integrate Sony’s TVs and computers with
content from its entertainment businesses. After the Walkman’s
domination of portable players in the 1980s, Tokyo-based Sony
lost against Apple Inc. with the iPod, failed to fend off
Samsung Electronics Co. in TVs, while Nintendo Co. took the lead
in video-game consoles."

Now when will Steve Ballmer be next

^Why Steve? Due to the losses MS' gaming division faced at the launch of the 360? IE's market erosion? Google's encroachment? Haven't kept up with their balance sheets admittedly.

Don't need to look at their balance sheet. Microsoft and Apple have enough reserves built up to slowly lose competitive advantage over a decade of incompetence. That's what happened to Sony.

But just look at how they are positioned. Besides the 3 you mention, they are losing out on mobile devices including tablet and handsets. While Apple change their Mac OS to iOS for Mobile devices, Ballmer changed their Windows Mobile to Phone 7. Shows how clueless he is.

Cloud computing which Bill Gates, Scott McNealy, etc envisioned a decade ago during the dot coms (nope Apple did not invent it) is also hardly in place.

As far as I can see, they are losing competitiveness and losing direction. Steve Jobs' nemesis is Bill Gates. Things would have been very different if Gates was still in charge. Gates is ruthless... don't be fooled by his looks

I have no fondness for Gates, don't worry. I also see cloud computing as a way to bilk the customer (if one doesn't own a physical copy of the OS, it makes it easier for the end user to be abused).

I mistakenly had not kept up with what was happening in the mobile market, which is a gold mine in and of itself.

So far, cloud computing is adding features to existing stuff for free. If we get five-nines reliable backup and always on access to our data, many people will be willing to pay a little something for that... But I digress....

When you fire the CEO and leave him as chairman, oy vey, you don't get it.

I don't see a turnaround for Sony, but I hope there is one.

^Yea, I like the data backup prospects, don't get me wrong. I just think it could be ripe for abuse in a more monopolized environment.

Actually things we take for granted like internet mail, google earth, facebook etc are part of cloud computing. It is more than backup. The ultimate concept is that the PC/ node / terminal is nothing but an input device. Tha's where Chrome OS/browser/NB is going.

It is standard protocol that the CEO gets "promoted" to chairman of board if the board likes him but think others can do a better job (or he is somehow linked to the major shareholder). One "resigns to pursue other interests" means the board don't like you but allow graceful exit. "Resigns for personal reasons" means you suck

I hope so too. It is sad to see once-giants like Kodak go as well. I'm pragmatic but also nostalgic

The thing is Kodak used to make all of its money from products that don't exist anymore. Sony still makes most of its money from the same products it made 10 years ago (or longer). It just fails to do it profitably. Honestly, I don't believe it's going to change, but we'll know soon: Less assortment, more innovation. If they back CLED, I'll be more optimistic about their future even if CLED never succeeds.

These are not times for such statements. Either fat profits from blockbuster products or harakiri . CLED has zero chances even for commercialization not even speaking about profits. New Sony CEO is coming from the Play Station area in which they were relatively most successful and were there seems to be best potential for the future.

BTW, it was not widely noticed but Microsoft biggest sales are nowadays not coming from Windows but from the Xbox. This means they have big chance not to be left behind as the previous generation company.

It seems like Howard Stringer was never really in in control anyway?