Originally Posted by 8mile13
I was under the impression that sony showed us something at CES what they were working on...in the lab. I don't believe sony pretended it was more than that.
Originally Posted by xbdestroya
The "hand-built" prototype though did not have these various pixels with the tri-LED elements assembled by hand though in the absence of machine assistance; the scale alone would be prohibitive. And if there was machine involvement in the assembly of the pixels themselves, then it is a technology that can be scaled.
Your reasoning is wrong. I tried several times to write this more politely, but I lacked the ability to do so and still convey meaning. Your reasoning is simply wrong. The module fabrication may not be possible in an economic way. You need to stop getting caught on the whole "hand built" vs. "machine" and try to understand that they will be able to mass produce the LED modules cost effectively or they won't. Then they will be to assemble them or they won't.
Whether they will pursue it or not, that is a different matter. But the comparisons to fusion are absurd.
The National Ignition Facility is closer to making fusion than the Sony prototype was to being a product in Best Buy. So, yes, to an extent I was being kind to Sony.
If it can be done by hand, it can be done by machines - that's my take.
That conclusion is in error. It fails to account for the very real possibility that a hand-built prototype took, say, 50,000 man hours and a machine-built prototype needs to have a cycle time of perhaps 1 hour. It's very possible
the gap will never be bridged. No FED display, for example, ever crossed the threshold of manufacturing viability.
And when it comes to electronics assembly and nano-scale projects, so much the truer. The barrier is in the decision to invest in the capacity & technology vs other display technologies. Which could very well doom it, but not because it's impossible.
Actually, it might be impossible. It might also merely be too costly. It might be both.
The engineers wouldn't have bothered trotting it out last year if there were already a predetermined 0% chance that it would ever see a drop of additional R&D funding - and wouldn't have received said funding in the first place to lead up to that moment. Sony could just as easily trotted out some 55" OLED like everyone else.
Well, first of all, no one said it has 0% chance. But they most certainly would have trotted it out without any promises
of a single yen of additional funding. That's the way these things work. Sony's 27" (or thereabouts) OLED TV, for example, was shown when they announced their 11" model. Never produced, announced for manufacture, funded for manufacture, etc. As to whether Sony could've prototyped a 55" OLED, well, I doubt very much they could have.
Originally Posted by tgm1024
Something slipping by the arguments though is that if even if it took 15,000 failed panels to get a 55" using whatever smoke and mirrors technique the Sony guys came up with, we don't know how hard it is to produce smaller panels. That radically changes
the notions of "ready to go", "anytime soon", "around the corner", and any other amorphous descriptor.
The pixel size seems to render smaller panels out of the question.
Originally Posted by xbdestroya
I wouldn't think that smaller screen sizes would be inherently harder than larger sizes - when you think about the empty space in most sets, increased control circuity and PSU considerations should still fit in a traditionally sized cabinet. It might not be less than 1" thick or what have you, but I wouldn't think something that would be considered unduly "fat."
Again, it's not depth, it's the pixel pitch. The CLED didn't seem to have much fill ratio to begin with and I'm sure the individual LEDs are large. I doubt strongly you'll see smaller sets anytime soon.
Anyway I agreed with Pogo as to the notion that 'ready to go' and such was off the mark for where this technology is at the moment. For me, I'm looking for one thing alone from CES as it pertains to CLED: is it present, is it discussed, or is it absent, and is Sony silent? Given the state of Sony's executive ranks and a shift in philosophy, I will interpret a CLED presence as evidence of - at least for the moment - further investment in the technology. Further colored of course by whatever they might say at the show.
If the set is absent and Sony has not much to say about it, then I will consider the technology as abandoned.
I would like to see some evidence of something as well; but I'm not particularly excited about this technology. It's years from the market in all likelihood even if they decide to produce it, which seems unlikely. As for Pogo, didn't he say, "we have met the enemy and he is us"? Sounds like Sony's corporate motto.