or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CES 2013 - Page 13  

post #361 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Rich, I bet if you saw a properly calibrated Elite, you would be very impressed. smile.gif


hey ken, is sharp releasing a gen 2 elite?
post #362 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Why one earth would you ever be 5 feet from an 75-80" screen...outside of walking past it to sit down/leave the room?

Seems like a pretty goofy reason to spend thousands more on a television, imo.


James


I wouldn't. I just bought a tv this year so I would not be in the market for another 4-5 yrs. I imagine by then that the difference will be more like a few hundred or so by then. Actually, I would think by then that all 75"+ screens might be 4k anyways. I guess I should have made that more clear. Actually, the point of my post was that even the 1080p 80" sets look good from most viewing distances people would realistically watch from, so I think we are in agreement there.
post #363 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally View Post

hey ken, is sharp releasing a gen 2 elite?

Nothing but rumors thus far Wally. Some say that Sharp's 4K displays will, in effect, be the 2nd gen Elites. But Sharp is financially shaky, so who knows. Stay tuned. smile.gif
post #364 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Rich, I bet if you saw a properly calibrated Elite, you would be very impressed. smile.gif

Oh I'm sure of it. I'm already amazed by many of the higher end LCDs out there. Even my Samsung 1080p LCD I bought last year for the basement can look amazing (excepting viewing angles vs my Panny plasma).
post #365 of 412
Thread Starter 
CES Wrapup: 4K, OLED, 4K OLED, and some other stuff

Worth reading HDGuru's take on 4K,OLED, etc.

http://hdguru.com/ces-wrapup-4k-oled-4k-oled-and-some-other-stuff/9809/#more-9809
post #366 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

CES Wrapup: 4K, OLED, 4K OLED, and some other stuff

Worth reading HDGuru's take on 4K,OLED, etc.

http://hdguru.com/ces-wrapup-4k-oled-4k-oled-and-some-other-stuff/9809/#more-9809

In there they said something I'm not sure I understand:
Quote:
Because plasma’s light output is largely related to the size of its phosphor sub-pixel “buckets,” shrinking these buckets to fit more on the screen (higher resolution) means a drop in light output (generally).
Is there something in this I'm not following? Doesn't the light output of the plasma cells scale 1:1 with it's size? A 4K TV would have less output per (smaller) cell, but far more cells, no?
post #367 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

CES Wrapup: 4K, OLED, 4K OLED, and some other stuff

Worth reading HDGuru's take on 4K,OLED, etc.

http://hdguru.com/ces-wrapup-4k-oled-4k-oled-and-some-other-stuff/9809/#more-9809

Interesting read and hard to argue with some of Gary's points. I well remember the 720p vs 1080p tests with the higher contrast 720p winning out. Contrast is huge and should never be underestimated.

He may well be right about 1080p OLED winning out against 4K LED/LCD for the same reason. However we're still a relatively long way from OLED becoming practical in the home. I know with all the growing pains, manufacturing duds, discussions on longevity etc., I'd be reluctant to be one of the first to buy OLED...and I'm usually not afraid to be among the first.
post #368 of 412
Thread Starter 
I tend not to make predictions; but I have a feeling that Panasonic may surprise people by bringing OLED 4K to market in 2015. They are one of those companies that has a history of not over promising; like LG and Samsung have tended to do when demonstrating prototypes.

Panasonic 56-inch 4K OLED TV

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/49165/panasonic-56-inch-4k-oled-tv-detailed-information--pictures-and-hands-on

"Panasonic says that what makes its OLED panel better than any others is the printing technology used to make the display. This method is said to dramatically reduce costs of production, increase yield rates and make the displays more reliable. It works by printing a layer, which is then sandwiched between a backing layer and a transparent cathode placed on the top. This apparently improves the light output, and ensures there are no reflections.

Panasonic claims that its printing process scales very well. So there’s no reason you can’t print both 24 and 56-inch screens using the same technology. It also says there is very little wastage of the organic material, which is another way to reduce costs."
post #369 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

They are one of those companies that has a history of not over promising; like LG and Samsung have tended to do when demonstrating prototypes.

This is not the first time I've heard people say this about Panasonic. Relatedly, Panasonic often seems to leave the impression that they'll wait for the flurry of bleeding edge techno-nonsense to be over and then attempt to implement things predictably or solidly. Beats me, but I seem to see this a lot. Back when I was trying to figure out why and how the heck Pioneer once seemed to win-over the world with this oddity called the Kuro, there seemed to be significant respect for Panasonic's ability to purchase and adapt the technology.
post #370 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

I tend not to make predictions; but I have a feeling that Panasonic may surprise people by bringing OLED 4K to market in 2015...

...Panasonic claims that its printing process scales very well. So there’s no reason you can’t print both 24 and 56-inch screens using the same technology. It also says there is very little wastage of the organic material, which is another way to reduce costs."

I agree, which is why I referenced printing in another thread. I remember some time back about Sumitomo's printing method which had some relation to Cambridge Display's technology. Back in 2010 there was some cooperation between Sunmitomo and Panasonic, if I'm not mistaken.

As far as the stability and longevity of the materials, I always look at a technical "problem" as a challenge and not a dead end.

So, I continue to be optimistic about OLED, but what do you think about burn-in?
post #371 of 412
Quote:
Is there something in this I'm not following? Doesn't the light output of the plasma cells scale 1:1 with it's size? A 4K TV would have less output per (smaller) cell, but far more cells, no?
I sometimes think reporters report without thinking things thru. While there may be some efficiency cost to shrinking cell size down, I think he is wrong, and you are correct. Provided the radiating area for 2160 is the same as it is for 1080, the light level and power consumption should be roughly the same. There is also dead space between pixels which may factor into the amount of light you can get from a given screen size, but (for example) an 84" 2160 plasma should be able to produce 4 times the light of a 42" 1080 plasma but would draw 4 times the power. Please note that that would be 4x the light from the panel as a whole, not 4x per square inch. It would be exactly the same per square inch between the 2 panels.
post #372 of 412
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post

I agree, which is why I referenced printing in another thread. I remember some time back about Sumitomo's printing method which had some relation to Cambridge Display's technology. Back in 2010 there was some cooperation between Sunmitomo and Panasonic, if I'm not mistaken.

As far as the stability and longevity of the materials, I always look at a technical "problem" as a challenge and not a dead end.

So, I continue to be optimistic about OLED, but what do you think about burn-in?

I am not concerned about burn-in,because I have made heavy use of a Plasma set for the past few years, and have never experienced it. Unless OLED is much more susceptible to image retention, which I doubt it will be, because it will not have the charge problems that Plasma had to handle. They can always include a pixel orbiter feature to help out.

Burn In is one of those things, much like Big Foot, that many talk about but few have ever seen. Keep in mind that some people will not take even modest precautions to avoid doing damages. We all know someone who you could not be trust to not break an anvil!
post #373 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

I am not concerned about burn-in,because I have made heavy use of a Plasma set for the past few years, and have never experienced it. Unless OLED is much more susceptible to image retention, which I doubt it will be, because it will not have the charge problems that Plasma had to handle. They can always include a pixel orbiter feature to help out.

Burn In is one of those things, much like Big Foot, that many talk about but few have ever seen. Keep in mind that some people will not take even modest precautions to avoid doing damages. We all know someone who you could not be trust to not break an anvil!

I'm not so sure this isn't an apples and oranges comparison. Here are the questions that formed in me noggin as I read your post....if you know the answer to them I'd appreciate it:
  • To what degree are we sure that IR on OLED is fixable the way it is on a plasma?
  • And to what degree are the first 4 years of OLED going to be as sensitive to it as the first 4 years of plasma were?
  • And further, is OLED helped by a conditioning break-in?
post #374 of 412
Thread Starter 
Each pixel is going to switch on and off much faster than Plasma does, so I doubt if IR will be much of a problem.
post #375 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Nothing but rumors thus far Wally. Some say that Sharp's 4K displays will, in effect, be the 2nd gen Elites. But Sharp is financially shaky, so who knows. Stay tuned. smile.gif

The ICC-chipped 4K sets are the "new Elites" -- with $30,000+ prices. The "regular" 4K sets are going to be expensive enough, honestly, at $15K or so, that even there, they'll make the current Elite seem inexpensive. Maybe there's room for a "2nd gen Elite", but the line is already over-assorted without it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Interesting read and hard to argue with some of Gary's points. I well remember the 720p vs 1080p tests with the higher contrast 720p winning out. Contrast is huge and should never be underestimated.

He may well be right about 1080p OLED winning out against 4K LED/LCD for the same reason. However we're still a relatively long way from OLED becoming practical in the home. I know with all the growing pains, manufacturing duds, discussions on longevity etc., I'd be reluctant to be one of the first to buy OLED...and I'm usually not afraid to be among the first.

4K LED/LCD is going to outsell OLED in the near- and medium-term. How do I know? The same way HDGuru should've known. One can just cut the price at will, one cannot. Also, one market is very competitive, one is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

I tend not to make predictions; but I have a feeling that Panasonic may surprise people by bringing OLED 4K to market in 2015. They are one of those companies that has a history of not over promising; like LG and Samsung have tended to do when demonstrating prototypes.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/49165/panasonic-56-inch-4k-oled-tv-detailed-information--pictures-and-hands-on

"Panasonic says that what makes its OLED panel better than any others is the printing technology used to make the display. This method is said to dramatically reduce costs of production, increase yield rates and make the displays more reliable. It works by printing a layer, which is then sandwiched between a backing layer and a transparent cathode placed on the top. This apparently improves the light output, and ensures there are no reflections.

Panasonic claims that its printing process scales very well. So there’s no reason you can’t print both 24 and 56-inch screens using the same technology. It also says there is very little wastage of the organic material, which is another way to reduce costs."

2015 feels soon to me, but perhaps that isn't impossible.. There is a multiplicity of issues, however.
  • In the U.S., a 56" will be far too small as a flagship set. In other countries, it might be appropriate.
  • The launch price for such a set would need to be less than $4000 by then.
  • If Panasonic goes larger than 60", they will need a larger-than-8G fab to work with, which doesn't seem to exist yet. If they wish to "print" the substrates on a completely new roll-to-roll line, that would theoretically be doable with their tech, but not by 2015.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'm not so sure this isn't an apples and oranges comparison. Here are the questions that formed in me noggin as I read your post....if you know the answer to them I'd appreciate it:
  • To what degree are we sure that IR on OLED is fixable the way it is on a plasma?
  • And to what degree are the first 4 years of OLED going to be as sensitive to it as the first 4 years of plasma were?
  • And further, is OLED helped by a conditioning break-in?

I can't address much of that, but I can tell you something. If you draw the distinction between "image retention", the temporary thing that is caused by residual voltage lying around and that eventually disappears on plasmas, and "burn in", which is a permanent differential wear, I doubt the former will occur on OLED. It might, but it seems less likely because the "charging" of pixels is almost entirely unrelated to the way it works on plasma.

The latter, however, is not "treatable" by "break-in". It's true that the wear curves might not be linear such that a small period of coddling might help mitigate the risk, but honestly, much of that is in the urban myth category and I doubt very much anyone has evidence it applies to OLED anyway.

What you need to know is "can OLED burn in over a reasonable number of hours?" If the answer is yes, it will not be "fixable" the way image retention is on a plasma nor by "break in".
post #376 of 412
Everyone that's been working on OLED has made a deal with someone selling "OLED Printing" tech, this includes Samsung.

Samsung's end game has always been to use other manufacturing methods to bring down the price of OLEDs they haven't stuck with OLED this long unless they had a good idea how 2 or 3 generations of manufacturing methods could possibly be obtained.

Light, plastic backed, quickly manufactured displays are the future.

Although this new LCD on plastic may actually give LCD a lease on life if it works out too.

Like most technologies, people make predictions of how good or long something my last, and sometimes new ideas extend that life beyond any expectations.

Who would have guessed that NTSC would have lasted as long as it did and improved as much as it did without any complete overhaul that ruined compatibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

I tend not to make predictions; but I have a feeling that Panasonic may surprise people by bringing OLED 4K to market in 2015. They are one of those companies that has a history of not over promising; like LG and Samsung have tended to do when demonstrating prototypes.

Panasonic 56-inch 4K OLED TV

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/49165/panasonic-56-inch-4k-oled-tv-detailed-information--pictures-and-hands-on

"Panasonic says that what makes its OLED panel better than any others is the printing technology used to make the display. This method is said to dramatically reduce costs of production, increase yield rates and make the displays more reliable. It works by printing a layer, which is then sandwiched between a backing layer and a transparent cathode placed on the top. This apparently improves the light output, and ensures there are no reflections.

Panasonic claims that its printing process scales very well. So there’s no reason you can’t print both 24 and 56-inch screens using the same technology. It also says there is very little wastage of the organic material, which is another way to reduce costs."
post #377 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Everyone that's been working on OLED has made a deal with someone selling "OLED Printing" tech, this includes Samsung.

Samsung's end game has always been to use other manufacturing methods to bring down the price of OLEDs they haven't stuck with OLED this long unless they had a good idea how 2 or 3 generations of manufacturing methods could possibly be obtained.

Light, plastic backed, quickly manufactured displays are the future.

Although this new LCD on plastic may actually give LCD a lease on life if it works out too.

Like most technologies, people make predictions of how good or long something my last, and sometimes new ideas extend that life beyond any expectations.

Who would have guessed that NTSC would have lasted as long as it did and improved as much as it did without any complete overhaul that ruined compatibility.

The thing is, Samsung is failing to scale their method uses for smartphone displays to TV displays because it doesn't really scale. It's perfectly fine for smartphone displays, which isn't to say that a "printable" wouldn't be better, but Samsung has mastered making 4-6" AMOLED using FMM techniques just fine. They can nearly match the pricing of LTPS LCD with it and that's good enough.

What they can't do is use FMM with SMS to make 55" displays at this point. That's why there is no release date for their 55" OLED.

As for plastic backing, it's not currently being considered seriously for TVs, although it certainly might in the future. Glass remains the superior substrate and Corning has even released a roll-to-roll glass that will work well with "printable" OLED techniques, should they catch on.

What Samsung demoed at CES in terms of flexible screens was about unbreakable, small screen displays for the moment. And that makes sense for two reasons:

1) They can't make large screens anyway
2) Unbreakable screens are valuable on portable devices

They neglected to mention much about the fact that there is no flexible or unbreakable touch overlay at this time, however.
post #378 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

4K LED/LCD is going to outsell OLED in the near- and medium-term. How do I know? The same way HDGuru should've known.

Mark, I should have clarified my comment. When I said Gary may well be right about OLED winning out against 4K LED/LCD, I meant strictly from a perceived performance standpoint, not from a sales perspective.
post #379 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

What Samsung demoed at CES in terms of flexible screens was about unbreakable, small screen displays for the moment. And that makes sense for two reasons:

1) They can't make large screens anyway
2) Unbreakable screens are valuable on portable devices

They neglected to mention much about the fact that there is no flexible or unbreakable touch overlay at this time, however.

Atmel's XSense was *supposed* to be in production quantities by the end of 2012. They not there yet?

Back in Aprill: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/05/flexible-touch-screen-bends_n_1405869.html
post #380 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Atmel's XSense was *supposed* to be in production quantities by the end of 2012. They not there yet?

Back in Aprill: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/05/flexible-touch-screen-bends_n_1405869.html

I doubt it, but more significantly, Samsung has no flexible touchscreen tech to show with the flexible OLED.

This is a solvable problem, of course, just not one that has yet been solved.
post #381 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post

So, I continue to be optimistic about OLED, but what do you think about burn-in?
I wanted to add an anecdote to this.

I had a discussion with my local Magnolia (Best Buy) manager recently. He says he is not optimistic about the OLED sets for two reasons: the first is the burn-in they saw on the original small Sony OLED was terrible. He also says the OLED cell-phones they sell have severe burn-in on their display models. So he indicated he would not be comfortable selling the expensive OLED sets without some proof that was resolved.
post #382 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

I wanted to add an anecdote to this.

I had a discussion with my local Magnolia (Best Buy) manager recently. He says he is not optimistic about the OLED sets for two reasons: the first is the burn-in they saw on the original small Sony OLED was terrible. He also says the OLED cell-phones they sell have severe burn-in on their display models. So he indicated he would not be comfortable selling the expensive OLED sets without some proof that was resolved.


Selling a super expensive product that doesn't last and ends up burning people (no pun intended) is the very last thing I would want associated with my retail outfit. The public would look at me as being "in" on the money grab.
post #383 of 412
Thread Starter 
And yet people pay hundreds of dollars every year or two for the latest smart phones. Best Buy managers are not what I would consider experts on developing OLED technology. The reality is that deep pockets early adopters do not care about getting many years out of any set. They will continue to purchase the latest and greatest every couple of years or so. Only those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale do, and they are not the targeted consumers for new high end expensive product introductions anyway.
post #384 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

And yet people pay hundreds of dollars every year or two for the latest smart phones. Best Buy managers are not what I would consider experts on developing OLED technology. The reality is that deep pockets early adopters do not care about getting many years out of any set. They will continue to purchase the latest and greatest every couple of years or so. Only those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale do, and they are not the targeted consumers for new high end expensive product introductions anyway.

There are many people you might not be taking into account: the people who can afford a new $12,000 technology, but can't afford to replace it every other year. The ones you are talking about are not that crowd. There's a slightly lower tier, that's able to afford it, but not able to reconcile being burned.

Further, these things don't come with a massive placard above them saying "Might Easily Be Destroyed" (or to whatever degree the truth really is). Instead they're covered with hyperbolic superlatives and no one, not even a billionaire, "likes" to be had. And I don't think many people will instinctively view these things as more sensitive than plasma. Again, the actual truth is up for grabs here, because no one knows yet, but it'll certainly be a black mark that no retailer would want to be associated with.
post #385 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

And yet people pay hundreds of dollars every year or two for the latest smart phones. Best Buy managers are not what I would consider experts on developing OLED technology. The reality is that deep pockets early adopters do not care about getting many years out of any set. They will continue to purchase the latest and greatest every couple of years or so. Only those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale do, and they are not the targeted consumers for new high end expensive product introductions anyway.
$500 every couple of years for something you keep on your person at all times is hardly the same as spending $12,000 on a television.
post #386 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

And yet people pay hundreds of dollars every year or two for the latest smart phones. Best Buy managers are not what I would consider experts on developing OLED technology. The reality is that deep pockets early adopters do not care about getting many years out of any set. They will continue to purchase the latest and greatest every couple of years or so. Only those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale do, and they are not the targeted consumers for new high end expensive product introductions anyway.

$500 every couple of years for something you keep on your person at all times is hardly the same as spending $12,000 on a television.

Or $200 or so, with their incentives. Most contracts are up after 2 years with the "option" (what a favor they do you! wink.gif) to upgrade to a new phone. Most were in the $200 range....funny, that number seems so common----it was that even since my old cell-one-carphone days.
post #387 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Or $200 or so, with their incentives. Most contracts are up after 2 years with the "option" (what a favor they do you! wink.gif) to upgrade to a new phone. Most were in the $200 range....funny, that number seems so common----it was that even since my old cell-one-carphone days.
Well it's probably the number they have calculated to be the most they can charge, that a significant enough number of people will stick with them and continue their contract.

I only said $500 because I am not in the US and have no real idea of how much it costs there, so it's even less than I thought.
post #388 of 412
I don't like contracts...I bought one at just under full price (SRP for the Samdung S3 Galaxy was $580 or thereabouts) so will probably end up keeping it 2 to 4 times what the average throwaway consumer does barring some unlikely must-have phone development.
post #389 of 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

$500 every couple of years for something you keep on your person at all times is hardly the same as spending $12,000 on a television.

Well it depends on your priorities I guess. I would get my money's worth on a tv than a phone. I would use the tv way more than I use the phone. The same goes for cars. Which people spend over $30,000 on by the way.

My family thought I was crazy for spending $4000 on my kuro. I told them this is what I wanted, this is what I enjoy. Your car cost way more than $4000. But it's a car they say.

Like I said, it's all about priorities.
post #390 of 412
Ken, understood.

Greenland/Sparano, you get the point everyone is making, right? You can get a new subsidized phone every 2 years in much of the world. If the screen is ruined -- or even a bit worse -- on your Galaxy S3, so what? You'll get a Galaxy S5 for $199. There is no equivalent for the $12,000 TV.

Rich, I hadn't even considered the headwind from retailers being unwilling to push them. Contrary to some of the comments here without retail support, OLED will be even more stillborn.

Chron, yeah, it's $200 US for pretty much all advanced smartphones with a 2-year contract. And you can get a new one at the subsidized price every 2 years as well.

Vinnie, even at 2-4 years, if your screen goes bad, you're out (a) a screen replacement or (b) $400-600. That's a huge cry from $12,000.

I don't want to fan the flames of burn-in risk here. but it's going to be a possibility, at least. And I'd say more say with Samsung than with LG, but not riskless with LG.

Do people have good links to modern phones with OLED burn in?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked