or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Will any other display technology overtake LCD in sales by the year 2025?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will any other display technology overtake LCD in sales by the year 2025?

post #1 of 91
Thread Starter 
OK all you great speculators out there--is the world DOOMED to LCD dominance all the way to 2025?

Will Joe Six pack still be buying LCDs in 2025 at Wal-mart or at Wal-mart online?

Will OLED still be a vanished pipe dream come 2025?

Can any other technology gain sales dominance in 11 years?
post #2 of 91
So, when I went on record as proclaiming with certainty that LCD would dominate the display industry in 2020, that was met mostly with derision.

Now, we have DisplaySearch suggesting that by 2020, even smartphones will be mostly LCD and only minority (30%) OLED at decade's end.

Tablets are certainly going to be lower, it seems (10-20%?). Notebooks lower still (0-10%?). TVs optimistically are headed for about 10%, 20% if everything magically falls into place.

Add 5 years to that and things can certainly change. The economics of LTPS are suboptimal, though by then Oxide/IGZO might have solved all its problems and matched enough of the performance of LTPS to get where it needs to be. Of course, whatever backplane is cheapest benefits OLED, too.

Where OLED really shines is on power, which seemingly matters most in mobile phones, though. Tablets already have pretty good battery life (they work all day) and notebooks too (mine can run 14-16 hours often). And the leading industry watcher no longer sees OLED taking over the phone business. Of course, if LEDs improve, power improves on LCDs.

I don't think OLED has much chance of going away as things are currently constituted. But if "printable" OLED doesn't become real by decade's end, perhaps by 2025 the industry will have grown bored with it and moved on to something else. Manufacturers are ridiculously good at making TFT-LCDs. And TFT-LCDs are ridiculously good at most of the display characteristics people care about. Yes, contrast and viewing angles are not easy to combine (VA vs. IPS). Yes, mura / uniformity remains a perpetual issue. But time may fix these and if LCD gets seen as inevitable, fixing them gets more interesting.

So I dunno.... But I wouldn't necessarily get all pessimistic just yet.
post #3 of 91
Remember the only real OLED display product are AMOLEDs in Samsung smartphones, especially in its Galaxy flagships. Critical test for OLED lifeline wille be thus when the next Samsung Galaxy 5 flagship is unveiled on Feb. 24th. If the Galaxy 5 has LCD (and some rumors say that it will have ultrares 2560x1600 LCD) it will mean OLED is dead in its main potential market. So just two weeks and we know if there is still some light for OLED.
post #4 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Remember the only real OLED display product are AMOLEDs in Samsung smartphones, especially in its Galaxy flagships. Critical test for OLED lifeline wille be thus when the next Samsung Galaxy 5 flagship is unveiled on Feb. 24th. If the Galaxy 5 has LCD (and some rumors say that it will have ultrares 2560x1600 LCD) it will mean OLED is dead in its main potential market. So just two weeks and we know if there is still some light for OLED.

There may be a S5 model with a LCD, but it is extremely unlikely to be the flagship version. The S4 Active used a LCD and I wont be surprised if that happens again.

The story for mobile OLED's this year will be Samsung moving them into mid-tier handsets and into tablets. They have an enormous amount of unused capacity right now and the economics now justify their use in new markets.
post #5 of 91
If the market goes miniature and personal by 2025...as some of us believe...OLED will reign supreme IMO. Especially if it can flawlessly handle UHDTV resolutions of 8k-16k+ with FPS north of multiples of 120-960. Let the arrows fly! I have my mighty chainmail on. wink.gifsmile.gif
post #6 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

There may be a S5 model with a LCD, but it is extremely unlikely to be the flagship version. The S4 Active used a LCD and I wont be surprised if that happens again.
The story for mobile OLED's this year will be Samsung moving them into mid-tier handsets and into tablets. They have an enormous amount of unused capacity right now and the economics now justify their use in new markets.

Just 2 weeks and we will see....
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly View Post

If the market goes miniature and personal by 2025...as some of us believe...OLED will reign supreme IMO. Especially if it can flawlessly handle UHDTV resolutions of 8k-16k+ with FPS north of multiples of 120-960. Let the arrows fly! I have my mighty chainmail on. wink.gifsmile.gif

Admiring your supreme imagination but hard fact is that OLED is loosing resolution battle and fast. If smartphone displays move beyond HD this year OLED is out of the game. There is physical reason for this: with the increasing resolution one has to ensure every light emitter in OLED is perfect and this becomes more and more problematic with growing number of subpixels. While in LCD light emitting is more or less constant independent from resolution, LCD light switching cells are much more simpler and keeping them perfect is easier.
post #7 of 91
Unless they start cranking out plastic unbreakable LCD I don't see LCD out living bendy break resistant OLED mobile devices.
Everything else being equal which would you have? A phone that shatters if you drop it to much? Or one that mostly will never shatter?
post #8 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Unless they start cranking out plastic unbreakable LCD I don't see LCD out living bendy break resistant OLED mobile devices.
Everything else being equal which would you have? A phone that shatters if you drop it to much? Or one that mostly will never shatter?

It's all about Return On Investment (ROI) - LCD has a huge advantage in terms of installed capacity and existing manufacturing base. The advantages of OLED need to be a slam-dunk before similar investments in manufacturing capacity will be justified (which is why there are just a very few high-priced OLED TVs available today - no real manufacturing machine in place to crank them out in much higher volume...).

-fafrd
post #9 of 91
You still need a glass/sapphire front to have scratch resistance on your mobile at this point. That's why the "unbreakable screen" isn't current important or relevant. It's already possible to build an OLED screen that is more or less unbreakable (or at least very break resistant). What you can't do is make a usable phone that surrounds it and is also unbreakable.
post #10 of 91
Thread Starter 
I notice that new alternative discussions to LCD for TVs quickly move to small phone sizes as if it was inevitable that whatever happens with phones will happen with much larger TVs.

Is that 100% certain to happen?

My question in this thread is about TVs--not silly phones.

Is the answer to the question in this thread the answer that no one is willing to face?

The answer that we are looking at a future of LCD ONLY when it comes to TVs with no other alternative in sight?

How enthused should people who care about picture quality be about that?

Should you be overjoyed about LCD only technology if you aren't dead center when viewing a TV?

LCD owners pleasure themselves at dead center while their friends on the sides never get off!

And this is what we have to look forward to even unto 2025?!!!
post #11 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post




LCD owners pleasure themselves at dead center while their friends on the sides never get off!

Friends !!? What are they Artwood?
Who needs friends when, as rogo and others have pointed out, the future is people watching movies/tv on their tablets or phones?
Anyway, since I am old I can only hope that I will be dead before such a sad state of affairs takes over. rolleyes.gif
post #12 of 91
Thread Starter 
I never really got much discussion about this question which makes me think that the real answer is this:

We're looking at ONLY LCD that sucks forever!

The way you can tell this is true is that no one will discuss display alternatives. It is always--let's change the discussion to phones because OLED isn't going to happen and we don't want everyone to know that we're facing only in the long run Chinese 4K LCD that will suck--suck being defined as SUB Sharp Elite LCD quality.

It is a pretty sad state of affairs when discussion is always about tablets and phones--that should tell you that the future for quality when it comes to TVs is quite bleak.

Anyone want to guess the odds that there will not be a shootout comparison this year of 2014 LCDs versus the best plasmas or Sharp Elites?

I think this will be the case--if today's displays are a step backwards in quality you won't see any comparisons because that wouldn't help sales.

If 2014 LCDs and 2014 OLEDs aren't better than the best plasmas or Sharp Elites--then what good are they? And if such is the case do you think that you'll hear that fact around here? I doubt it.

My bet is that 2014 displays when it comes to picture quality performance versus previous years are what what 1975 cars were to automobile performance versus previous years.

Do you really like 1975 Mustangs or 1975 Corvettes? If so then you'll probably like 2014 LCDs or 2014 curved OLEDs.

Yes folks--sometimes technology does indeed go backwards!

Maybe one shouldn't moan and cry over such a thing but one should be able to state that such a thing is indeed the truth.

Musclecar performance has been exceeded versus 1970 models but it took many years. If what I'm hearing around here is true about OLED not getting anywhere and LCD not being any better than Sharp Elites and NO ONE being able to state that there is ANY technology besides LCD come the 2025 horizon then it may take as many years for display performance to make a comeback as automobile performance took to make a comeback.

Someone wake me up when at this enthusiast forum people wax as poetic about big display TVs as they do about silly phones and tablets!

Maybe they should make a silly tablet and phone screen forum?!
post #13 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

I notice that new alternative discussions to LCD for TVs quickly move to small phone sizes as if it was inevitable that whatever happens with phones will happen with much larger TVs.

Is that 100% certain to happen?

My question in this thread is about TVs--not silly phones.

Is the answer to the question in this thread the answer that no one is willing to face?

The answer that we are looking at a future of LCD ONLY when it comes to TVs with no other alternative in sight?

How enthused should people who care about picture quality be about that?

Should you be overjoyed about LCD only technology if you aren't dead center when viewing a TV?

LCD owners pleasure themselves at dead center while their friends on the sides never get off!

And this is what we have to look forward to even unto 2025?!!!

Small LCD screens got bigger and bigger and bigger till they where big enough for TVs.
No reason OLED won't do the same.
Samsung's not giving up on OLED.
Unless someone comes up with a "super LCD" that has better contrast then current ones.
post #14 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Unless someone comes up with a "super LCD" that has better contrast then current ones.
That could happen. Dolby's demonstration device for its "Dolby Vision" is a modified 1080p LCD device:
post #15 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Small LCD screens got bigger and bigger and bigger till they where big enough for TVs.
No reason OLED won't do the same.

Well, there are, in fact, lots of reasons.

(That's not to say I am not still optimistic about OLED TVs carving out a chunk of the market, but there are lots of reasons why it's not a given. Heck, LCD wasn't a given. It required a breakthrough in manufacturing that was not at all guaranteed to ever develop.)
post #16 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Remember the only real OLED display product are AMOLEDs in Samsung smartphones, especially in its Galaxy flagships. Critical test for OLED lifeline wille be thus when the next Samsung Galaxy 5 flagship is unveiled on Feb. 24th. If the Galaxy 5 has LCD (and some rumors say that it will have ultrares 2560x1600 LCD) it will mean OLED is dead in its main potential market. So just two weeks and we know if there is still some light for OLED.

Huh? LG is producing OLED screens as well. Apple is starting production on their iWatch using an OLED screen. And basically every lighting manufacturer is working on producing OLED lighting.
post #17 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Just 2 weeks and we will see....
Admiring your supreme imagination but hard fact is that OLED is loosing resolution battle and fast. If smartphone displays move beyond HD this year OLED is out of the game. There is physical reason for this: with the increasing resolution one has to ensure every light emitter in OLED is perfect and this becomes more and more problematic with growing number of subpixels. While in LCD light emitting is more or less constant independent from resolution, LCD light switching cells are much more simpler and keeping them perfect is easier.

Doesn't look like OLED has any problem with ridiculous PPI:
Quote:
Samsung Display confirms it is developing a QHD 5" AMOLED panel

Even though earlier rumors suggested Samsung will adopt an LCD for the upcoming GS5 phone, it was later reported that the GS5 will actually adopt a 5.2" WQHD (2560 x 1440, 560 PPI) AMOLED panel. Today, at a display technology roadmap seminar, Samsung confirmed that indeed they are developing a QHD AMOLED panel.
post #18 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Small LCD screens got bigger and bigger and bigger till they where big enough for TVs.
No reason OLED won't do the same.
Samsung's not giving up on OLED.
Unless someone comes up with a "super LCD" that has better contrast then current ones.

Not only does OLED have basically infinite contrast, it's thinner (no backlight) and has refresh rates and pixel response rates orders of magnitude faster than the best LCD will ever achieve.
post #19 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdoherty972 View Post

Not only does OLED have basically infinite contrast, it's thinner (no backlight) and has refresh rates and pixel response rates orders of magnitude faster than the best LCD will ever achieve.
"Basically infinite contrast" just means the blacks are completely black, right? It says nothing about how bright the highlights are.

I don't follow the industry and technical details the way some of you do, but my uninformed intuition is that OLED for TVs is always going to be just around the corner. It seems like forever ago that I started reading optimistic articles about OLED. But it never quite happened. Now that plasma is dying, my guess at the answer to the thread title is "no". It's going to be an LCD future. So I am pleased to know that LCD is potentially perfectable -- the dynamic range can be extended with high luminance LEDs. I know this is not exactly news to many of you (I've seen this thread from 2007: http://www.avsforum.com/t/916868/dolby-contrast-dolby-vision/0_60), but it was news to me.
post #20 of 91
I still think SED will eventually get revisited. Especially since the legal issues over it were settled. I just don't think Canon will be the company that will bring it to the TV market. Toshiba or Sony? Maybe. If for no other reason that it could become a high premium technology differentiator to OLED.
post #21 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly View Post

I still think SED will eventually get revisited. Especially since the legal issues over it were settled. I just don't think Canon will be the company that will bring it to the TV market. Toshiba or Sony? Maybe. If for no other reason that it could become a high premium technology differentiator to OLED.

 

If they can do SED without PWM, then I'll be up for it.

post #22 of 91
Please remind me what is your beef specifically with PWM again (as you might imagine, I find it more than acceptable for viewing). If someone has actual development news concerning SED, that would be swell. Otherwise it's blind speculation (seemingly more blind than the rest of the supposition in this thread smile.gif). Also, some new developments on OLED lighting would be useful to see for curiosity's sake (LED is just now beginning to make serious inroads to replace CFL).
post #23 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Please remind me what is your beef specifically with PWM again (as you might imagine, I find it more than acceptable for viewing).
PWM means that the display is constantly flickering, and if the subpixels do not have an equal response time (see: Plasma displays) you will have temporal artifacts. ("Phosphor lag")

There's been a lot of backlash against LCDs which use PWM when dimming their backlights as well. (generally cheaper displays)
I'm very prone to getting headaches when spending any length of time watching a PWM display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

LED is just now beginning to make serious inroads to replace CFL.
Only if you don't care about lighting quality. They're just starting to get the color of LEDs to look right (close to halogen lights) but the spectral distribution is crap. Color rendition under LED lights is awful. CFLs in general aren't great, but there are at least some high quality options available.
post #24 of 91
I'm not susceptible to any of the aforementioned PWM artifacts in comparison to the positives of screen uniformity, black levels, and superior contrast ratio afforded by plasma. Haven't seen it incorporated in LCD because I don't do LCD or pay much attention. I can once in a blue moon detect flicker but the frequency is at such a high rate that it's rarely a visible problem.

And Philips actually did manage to get a CRI of 92 on their L-Prize bulb (no longer being manufactured): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007RKVT4C/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_5?ie=UTF8&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

These excellent bulbs (hooray, Switch) that are reasonably priced and rated for enclosed fixtures are only at 83, but the complaints from users so far is minimal: http://www.amazon.com/SWITCH-Lighting-A240FUS27B1-R-infinia-Replacement/dp/B00EZCT212/ref=sr_1_2?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1382770738&sr=1-2&keywords=switch+infinia

That said, CRIs as low as the 70s are not offensive to me, and I've switched out the whole house already. The efficiency, lifespan, instant-on, and lack of mercury make up for any spectral deficiency they may possess.
Edited by vinnie97 - 2/10/14 at 10:49am
post #25 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I'm not susceptible to any of the aforementioned PWM artifacts in comparison to the positives of screen uniformity, black levels, and superior contrast ratio. I can once in a blue moon detect flicker but the frequency is at such a high rate that it's rarely a visible problem.
Well that's nice for you, but many people are susceptible to the flicker of displays which use PWM.
And if it's an emissive display using PWM, that also means it has very limited gradation and is going to make up for it with temporal dithering. (noise)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

And Philips actually did manage to get a CRI of 92 on their L-Prize bulb (no longer being manufactured): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007RKVT4C/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_5?ie=UTF8&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

That said, CRIs as low as the 70s are not offensive to me, and I've switched out the whole house already. The efficiency, lifespan, instant-on, and lack of mercury make up for any spectral deficiency they may possess.
CRI is not a good metric for color rendering (despite the name) and while 92 might sound high, things still look terrible under the best Philips LEDs.

I'm now in the process of replacing many of the LED bulbs I purchased with non-LED options.
post #26 of 91
I don't know if LCD sales will still be on top in 11 years, but If it is, TVs will likely be dirt cheap in 2025.

My gut tells me that eventually the manufacturers will figure out a way to make OLED work and if it happens in the next 5 years, I don't see how it won't overtake LCD by 2025.
post #27 of 91
I added more content to the above post.....and "many"? I would love to see from where you've pulled this figure. Dithering is another bogeyman that isn't visible at a typical seating distance unless you have eagle eyes, and I was already aware that this is a byproduct of PWM.

If things looked so "terrible" under these LEDs, there would be much less tolerance and acceptance of them. CRI is the only scientific measure of which I'm aware that addresses this highly concerning parameter of yours.
post #28 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I added more content to the above post.....and "many"? I would love to see from where you've pulled this figure.
I'm not specifically talking about plasma displays here. A lot of people who are used to the completely stable, flicker-free image that an LCD has, notice it when they upgraded their notebook or bought a tablet which uses PWM.
That's one thing Apple have been very good about - as far as I am aware, they have never used PWM to dim the backlights in their displays, and they make sure that the backlight can dim to very low levels in addition to being able to go very bright. (both are common issues with Android tablets or cheaper notebooks)
It's a common criteria on a lot of sites which review monitors, or tech forums where people are asking what monitor to buy etc. http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/specials/backlight.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Dithering is another bogeyman that isn't visible at a typical seating distance unless you have eagle eyes, and I was already aware that this is a byproduct of PWM.
Again; speak for yourself. Dithering is very obvious to me, and one of the reasons I use LCD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

If things looked so "terrible" under these LEDs, there would be much less tolerance and acceptance of them. CRI is the only scientific measure of which I'm aware that addresses this highly concerning parameter of yours.
I believe NIST is developing another standard (CQS?) to replace CRI because it doesn't do a good job describing the quality of light these bulbs are providing. I have used the best bulbs that Philips offer with their 90+ CRI rating and they were awful.
post #29 of 91
Likewise, speak for yourself! Using a plasma as a monitor is the only application where dithering should be visible much less bothersome. The color renditioning of modern LED bulbs is not perfect but is far from awful, but it's good to hear there is a new measurement coming for those who are particularly demanding.
post #30 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

"Basically infinite contrast" just means the blacks are completely black, right? It says nothing about how bright the highlights are.

I don't follow the industry and technical details the way some of you do, but my uninformed intuition is that OLED for TVs is always going to be just around the corner. It seems like forever ago that I started reading optimistic articles about OLED. But it never quite happened. Now that plasma is dying, my guess at the answer to the thread title is "no". It's going to be an LCD future. So I am pleased to know that LCD is potentially perfectable -- the dynamic range can be extended with high luminance LEDs. I know this is not exactly news to many of you (I've seen this thread from 2007: http://www.avsforum.com/t/916868/dolby-contrast-dolby-vision/0_60), but it was news to me.
I'm not sure what you mean by OLED TV being right around the corner. It's already here. Both LG and Samsung have 55-inch sets on the market and both have dropped the price extremely quickly (something like a 40% drop in just the last 8 months).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Will any other display technology overtake LCD in sales by the year 2025?