or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 69

post #2041 of 9447
Yes I am using pixel density in smart phones to estimate the resolution that tablets could possibly achieve. Hence iPad 2 was disappointing in this aspect as retina display on TFT were already mass produced.
post #2042 of 9447
This might be positvie with respect to cost and presentation:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-...echnology.html

tt
post #2043 of 9447
That's interesting Ted, but I'd put in a long category of 1000s of improvements over >10 years that have yet to produce 1 interesting television. There are so many articles about breakthroughs lowering OLED production costs, when will be see OLEDs based on these breakthroughs?
post #2044 of 9447
Color me a bit worried that the major manufacturers will find a way to take what should be a picture perfect technology and 'gimp' it with oversaturated color, etc on it's "presets" and make it so that you can't tune a 'perfect' picture even though you should be able to.
post #2045 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

There are so many articles about breakthroughs lowering OLED production costs, when will be see OLEDs based on these breakthroughs?

The cynic in me tends to believe that this might be the current generation SED. I would like it to be within my affordability lifetime which grows shorter daily.

tt
post #2046 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post
It all depends if the 5.5G fab ramps smoothly and profitably in 2Q. And we'll probably see a 32" AMOLED from Samsung at $5k next year.

But with the earthquake in japan, not even sure if 2Q will be realistic as Japan provides 2/3 OLED layers needed. People forget that the nuclear plant provides at least 1/3 of Japan's power and they are having power ration now. This will be a structural problem for some time.
"According to ET News, a Korean online newspaper, SMD seems to be facing
difficulty to procure equipments for its 5.5G OLED capacity ram-up.

SMD has set the full ramp-up of the 5.5G by year end, and was set in four
phases. As of now, 5.5G A1 line is in operation (24k units/month), and the
loading of the equipments for the A2 line has been already completed. The
problem seems to be stemming from its A3 and A4 lines, which SMD is looking to
complete ramp-up by the end of this year. SMD expects about 1 month delay in
phase 3 capacity expansion. The problems arose as Nikkon's Lithography
equipment has problems being shipped to Korea, while Toki's Evaporation
facility has problems due to component misses, making SMD difficult to start
the phase 3 ramp-up."
post #2047 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvted View Post

The cynic in me tends to believe that this might be the current generation SED. I would like it to be within my affordability lifetime which grows shorter daily.

horntoot
I explained for a couple of years here why SED would never reach the market during the alleged build up to production by Toshiba / Canon. I was largely mocked and sometimes ignored. I don't think OLED is quite that grim, but it's again worth noting that one of the central advantages of "the TV technology you cannot buy" is that it's "cheaper than existing technology".

Some people here are pretty convinced 60 inch LCD is going to reach $1000 in the next year or two. If that happens, I don't see anyone following through on Spec's reports of CapEx spending to make TV-sized OLEDs. It'd be a half decade before they got production costs down to a profitable level. And when they can already make money selling TVs, it just won't make sense.

Again, I'm still hopeful/sanguine OLED TVs will reach the market and be somewhat affordable someday. I was never that sanguine about SED.
post #2048 of 9447
Your premise has always been it has to be price competitive with LCD. IMHO it would be competitive if it sells at twice of LCD price, as long as there is perceivable difference between LCD and AMOLED.

The biggest risk IMHO is not pricing but rather LCD improving contrast amd technology as much as Nielo expects. That is why an AMOLED tablet launch will be an important milestone: it will determine if it is competitive in the mid size market.
post #2049 of 9447
"Your premise has always been it has to be price competitive with LCD. IMHO it would be competitive if it sells at twice of LCD price, as long as there is perceivable difference between LCD and AMOLED."

My premise is more nuanced than you shorthand it to be.

It either has to be price competitive or it has to be "really clearly superior" to sell for anywhere near 2x the price. And that kind of superiority is simply not a given.

But furthermore, the ability to bring it to market at anywhere near as low as 2x LCD is also hardly a given. And LCD is a moving target on price and picture quality. It's moving down the learning curve, it's getting improvements almost annually, etc. etc. OLED is still a mostly theoretical product for TV. Time is marching on and OLED has to be competitive with 2015-16 LCDs.
post #2050 of 9447
Transcript from LGD results:

: Oh, LCD fab. And lastly just on OLEDs, can you give us an update on what the status is of your OLED production facilities?

: For now, we already started small sized OLED production at end of first quarter this year and the capacity is around 4K in terms of [indiscernible] (19:52) input and it will be increased to 12K in the middle of this year, that's over our capacity growth, our plan for small sized OLED fab. And then we will also - we also have planned to eighth-generation OLED fab ramp-up maybe in the middle of year 2013. So that's our - just planning for our ramp-up schedule for TV OLED. So it means this year we will test our suitable technology for eighth generation OLED. If we decide to choose one suitable solution maybe at the end of this year, we will announce CapEx investment made next year.

: Got it. And the 4K to 12K ramp that you're doing now is in which generation facility?

: 4.5 generation.



: Hello. Thank you for you presentation. I wanted to ask about AMOLED. I had heard from an analyst that very, very recently you had sold 7,000 or 8,000 AMOLED panels to Nokia. This may or may not be true. Did you sell AMOLED panels to Nokia? And why Nokia instead of LG Electronics? Question number two, on the same subject, is I noticed here that you've got IPS in the upper-right corner of your presentation. Is there a view internally that the IPS solution, which is in the Retina Display as I understand it, is somehow equal to or even superior to AMOLED in -especially in text reading - for text reading purposes?

: For your first question, as I mentioned before, we already started the production of our small-size OLED fab in first quarter this year. It means we already start provide our small size OLED panel to a major global customer. The major global customer, we cannot disclose their direct name, but we think you might be right. And in the middle of this year, we also have a plan to provide our small-size OLED panel to our local customer, LG Electronics.

And for your second question, IPS technology, actually if you look at iPhone or iPad, although this is our - this iPhone uses IPS technology, we are main suppliers. Actually if you look at iPhone, although that's not OLED display you can easily see the text message because of our sophisticated high resolution characteristics. This kind of sophisticated resolution technology is driven by IPS technology. Is it okay, for your answer?

: So just then you're saying that the company has strong belief in the IPS technology relative to OLED technology; not necessarily better. And you do confirm that you have sold AMOLED panels globally, but I guess I - the question is why did you not sell AMOLED panels for the Optimus?

: Why - actually, that's not our - that's not our issue; actually, it is related to our customer's product line up and product line up schedules. So we already have a plan to provide our OLED and IPS panel to our customers; that's customer's product line up and schedule issue.

: Okay. Your customer is, of course, your largest shareholder. But in any case, thank you for answering my question.

Mr Seggerman's question is the same one I asked LG last year around this time. That is why I say LG is incoherent and will continue to be 2nd fiddle. If OLED TV is to be, it will be a Samsung. Sony has to resolve her schizophrenia first Sony could spin off its multiple divisions and no one would have noticed a difference.
post #2051 of 9447
Incoherent is a great description of that snippet. "Oh, yes, you are asking about LCD panels so we will talk a little bit about LCD panels even though you think you are asking about OLED panels."

At least they are ramping from 4k somethingorothers to 12k somethingorothers.

As an aside, if iPad is indeed not a fad and the next great computing platform (and I believe it is), all theoretical future OLED capacity at this point could be absorbed solely by tablets and phones for the next decade if those form factors migrated to OLED.
post #2052 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

As an aside, if iPad is indeed not a fad and the next great computing platform (and I believe it is)

Ahh Rogo. Standup in the morning!

I thought that psyorg article from last week about the energy savings from the thin film coating was an excellent indicator of progress. Will that breakthrough all for these panels to scale cheaply enough to be seen in sizes of at least 50" by the end of the decade?
post #2053 of 9447
That PhysOrg article was one of 200+ articles on OLED over the past decade that purported to offer some breakthrough that makes OLED manufacturing viable/cheap/whatever. It's not clear any of the developments described in any of the articles have ever been implemented on an OLED production line.

And, yes, I'd bet on a 50-inch by the end of the decade. But I wouldn't bet my entire life savings on it.
post #2054 of 9447
Quote:


It's not clear any of the developments described in any of the articles have ever been implemented on an OLED production line.

Yeah, that reminds me of a man I heard on NPR a month or two back who was involved in trying to bring scientific discoveries out of the lab and onto the market. He was talking about how there is a lot of time, money, and effort put into discovering new things but there are no clear channels for introducing these breakthroughs into the market as a product.

I recall him making some mention of organizational inefficiencies but I suppose we could talk about that topic for another 6 pages.
post #2055 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

As an aside, if iPad is indeed not a fad and the next great computing platform (and I believe it is), all theoretical future OLED capacity at this point could be absorbed solely by tablets and phones for the next decade if those form factors migrated to OLED.

Yes IMHO Samsung strategy is right... go with smaller sizes before TV, like LCD used to do. LG on the other hand is trying to do TV first??? They trying to compete first to market with SED?? But for sure 4.5G and 5.5G is ramping more or less +/- 6 months according to schedule.

Incoherent because LG develop a differentiating product just to sell to... their competitor?? :P At least Samsung sell scraps to HTC and now to Nokia... if there are scraps. LG mobile can't even put it on their phones but Nokia can?? I can't believe the stupidity until I remember CIA bought drugs from Columbia and sells in US to fund their operations in Columbia. Then I can be less harsh on LG.

And yes Tablet is here to stay (can't say the same for 3D). I doubt it will be dominated by Apple in 5 years' time but that is pertinent on how long Jobs gonna be on the job The disastrous Newton was just ahead of its time.
post #2056 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

Your premise has always been it has to be price competitive with LCD. IMHO it would be competitive if it sells at twice of LCD price, as long as there is perceivable difference between LCD and AMOLED.

Exactly - and there is a huge and obviously-perceivable positive difference of OLED over LCD (and in fact all other display types). Also, it's not very fair to compare OLED HDTVs to the cheapest LCD (for those discussing $1000 60-inch LCD TVs). The proper comparison would be the price of high-end LCDs compared to OLEDs as even high-end LCDs will be put to shame by OLED.
post #2057 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

"Your premise has always been it has to be price competitive with LCD. IMHO it would be competitive if it sells at twice of LCD price, as long as there is perceivable difference between LCD and AMOLED."

My premise is more nuanced than you shorthand it to be.

It either has to be price competitive or it has to be "really clearly superior" to sell for anywhere near 2x the price. And that kind of superiority is simply not a given.

But furthermore, the ability to bring it to market at anywhere near as low as 2x LCD is also hardly a given. And LCD is a moving target on price and picture quality. It's moving down the learning curve, it's getting improvements almost annually, etc. etc. OLED is still a mostly theoretical product for TV. Time is marching on and OLED has to be competitive with 2015-16 LCDs.

By then OLED will be as cheap or cheaper to produce than LCD (no backlighting being one factor) and it's already better quality by far. I would expect it to be even more so by that time.
post #2058 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanSheen View Post

Ahh Rogo. Standup in the morning!

I thought that psyorg article from last week about the energy savings from the thin film coating was an excellent indicator of progress. Will that breakthrough all for these panels to scale cheaply enough to be seen in sizes of at least 50" by the end of the decade?

What's this about 8 years? Samsung has a gen 8 plant underway starting this year that will be producing 55" and smaller OLED HDTVs likely within 18-24 months from now.

http://www.oled-info.com/samsung-inv...ion-oleds-2011

Quote:


We already know that Samsung is committed to a $2.2 billion 5.5-Gen AMOLED plant which will go online in July 2011, but now Samsung announced further investments in 2011. A couple of months ago there were reports that Samsung plans a Gen-8 pilot line for OLED TVs that will produce 4000 55" OLED TVs monthly. Perhaps Samsung will indeed build this plant during 2011.
post #2059 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I'm not saying that Samsung isn't gearing up to make OLED TVs. But I sure am skeptical that they are. They haven't done so to date. They are dominant in LCD and ridiculously strong in plasma. They need a third TV technology like Jay Leno needs another car.

By that logic Samsung wouldn't be producing OLED for cellphones either. But they are, big time.
post #2060 of 9447
Except there is no such plant that is making these TVs. There is a plan to make a plant that might be used for TV at some point. That has so little to do with actually making TVs.

And, you're quite frankly wrong about phones/tablets. They didn't have 2 phone-screen technologies, they had one (LCD) and they aren't nearly as dominant there. It's also true that making small OLED displays can be done. It can even be done in reasonable quantity -- although no one is arguing they are cost competitive with LCD yet and they might never be.

TV is not mobile phones. The technological challenges of making very large OLED displays with reasonable power supply requirements have not been solved. The ability to produce a high yield on large panels is not proved. The possibility of marketing meaningful amounts of TVs at 2x - 5x the price of LCDs and plasmas is not a given.

Again, I'm not saying Samsung will never produce OLED TVs. I am, however, saying, that no matter what you read at OLED fanboy sites, they have not committed to do any such thing and there is almost no reason to believe any plant capable of producing 55-inch TVs will be online in 2011.
post #2061 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Except there is no such plant that is making these TVs. There is a plan to make a plant that might be used for TV at some point. That has so little to do with actually making TVs.

How do you figure investing US $4.8 Billion in a gen 8 OLED factory has "little to do" with making OLED HDTVs? That's the only purpose of a gen 8 factory.

Quote:


And, you're quite frankly wrong about phones/tablets. They didn't have 2 phone-screen technologies, they had one (LCD) and they aren't nearly as dominant there. It's also true that making small OLED displays can be done. It can even be done in reasonable quantity -- although no one is arguing they are cost competitive with LCD yet and they might never be.

OLED screens on cellphones are ALREADY cost-effective against LCD, which is why they're being ramped so quickly. They barely cost more than LCDs to make and sell at a premium.

Quote:


TV is not mobile phones. The technological challenges of making very large OLED displays with reasonable power supply requirements have not been solved. The ability to produce a high yield on large panels is not proved. The possibility of marketing meaningful amounts of TVs at 2x - 5x the price of LCDs and plasmas is not a given.

LCDs and plasmas cost a lot when they released too. But neither had OLED's advantages in display quality and low cost of construction/materials.

Quote:


Again, I'm not saying Samsung will never produce OLED TVs. I am, however, saying, that no matter what you read at OLED fanboy sites, they have not committed to do any such thing and there is almost no reason to believe any plant capable of producing 55-inch TVs will be online in 2011.

Is this a "fanboy" site too?

http://www.displaysearchblog.com/200...ents-in-china/
post #2062 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdoherty972 View Post
Exactly - and there is a huge and obviously-perceivable positive difference of OLED over LCD (and in fact all other display types). Also, it's not very fair to compare OLED HDTVs to the cheapest LCD (for those discussing $1000 60-inch LCD TVs). The proper comparison would be the price of high-end LCDs compared to OLEDs as even high-end LCDs will be put to shame by OLED.

By that argument, Plasma should be winning out over LCD. It has similar advantages. Superior viewing angles, better blacks, better response time.

LCD being only a little cheaper pulled ahead massively.

You haven't heard of the concept of "good enough".

Sure I would like pure blacks, but until it is under $2000, I really don't care, because I really don't notice once I am watching a movie on my LCD.

We are probably looking at 2 or 3 years until a reasonable size (40" +) OLED TV shows up and another 5 years on top of that until it is reasonably priced.

So yeah, the future is probably OLED. I will probably be shopping for one in 2018.

But it doesn't really matter much today.
post #2063 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidryp View Post
Sure I would like pure blacks, but until it is under $2000, I really don't care, because I really don't notice once I am watching a movie on my LCD.
What about in dark scenes when the finer detail is washed out by a poor contrast ratio? Even my Kuro isn't deep enough to prevent this completely.
post #2064 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
What about in dark scenes when the finer detail is washed out by a poor contrast ratio? Even my Kuro isn't deep enough to prevent this completely.
Exactly. And what about having a TV set that's 2mm thin? Or how about 3D performance for movies and gaming? Only OLED is fast enough to do it properly. And what about rollup screens that look like the projector screens of today, only they aren't projectors but rather OLED screens that rollup when you're not using them? Also something only OLED can do.

Thinking that a comparison of plasma to LCD is any way analogous to a comparison with OLED isn't considering enough, IMO.
post #2065 of 9447
Well, thinness and rollup capability don't affect PQ one iota (the latter being 10 years away if not more, I have little doubt). I was only focusing on the most important aspect of PQ, which OLED seems poised to be more than capable in performance. On the other side of the coin, though, there are also other considerations like the lifetime of OLED panels, which I don't think measure up to present-day Plasma/LCD.
post #2066 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
What about in dark scenes when the finer detail is washed out by a poor contrast ratio? Even my Kuro isn't deep enough to prevent this completely.
You mean black crush? that sounds like a calibration issue to me.
post #2067 of 9447
No, I do not. My 111FD was procalibrated by David Abrams of Avical. There is a limit to how much detail can be perceived on all flat panels when it pertains to scenes with low light.
post #2068 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdoherty972 View Post

How do you figure investing US $4.8 Billion in a gen 8 OLED factory has "little to do" with making OLED HDTVs? That's the only purpose of a gen 8 factory.

Call me when it's built. Then call when it's producing panels. Until then, it's an announcement, which doesn't mean anything.

Quote:


OLED screens on cellphones are ALREADY cost-effective against LCD, which is why they're being ramped so quickly. They barely cost more than LCDs to make and sell at a premium.

They cost more. They last for less time. Oh, and they cost more.
Quote:


LCDs and plasmas cost a lot when they released too. But neither had OLED's advantages in display quality and low cost of construction/materials.

Ok, this is the worst of the canards. LCD and plasma cost more 10-20 years ago than they do know, yes. But now they are dirt cheap. When they came into being, they faced no competition. Now, there is competition from them. This competition is why there is not OLED TV. And I'm sorry, but OLED just flat out does not have "low cost of construction/materials". If it did, it would be cheaper than LCD. It isn't.
Quote:

Wow, did you even read that article? First of all, it says nothing about building an OLED factory anyway. Perhaps you zeroed in on this one sentence and mis-read it: "The Samsung and LG groups will continue investment in Korea, especially AMOLED and the Gen 8+ fabs."

What that sentence is actually about is that Samsung and LG both want to invest in building plants in China -- for LCD (and perhaps plasma). But the Korean government wants them also to keep domestic mfg. strong. So they are basically promising the Chinese new plants, investments, jobs, etc. and also promising the Korean gov't that they will not stop investing domestically. The reference to Gen 8+ fabs is about LCD, not OLED. The reference about AMOLED is about investing in AMOLED. I'm sure a strained reading of that sentence out of context could lead one to believe they are committed to Gen 8+ fabs for OLED, but that's certainly not what's being said.

Furthermore, it should be obvious that Samsung is still committed to OLED for its phones and eventually its tablets, assuming that business ever really takes off for them. I'm also sure they'll eventually sell those displays to Apple, et al. Concluding from that there is any inevitability to OLED TVs is akin to concluding that because lawnmowers are powered by lawnmower engines there will eventually be cars powered by them. It might happen, but it's not a foregone conclusion.
post #2069 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Well, thinness and rollup capability don't affect PQ one iota (the latter being 10 years away if not more, I have little doubt). I was only focusing on the most important aspect of PQ, which OLED seems poised to be more than capable in performance. On the other side of the coin, though, there are also other considerations like the lifetime of OLED panels, which I don't think measure up to present-day Plasma/LCD.

The phosphorescent red and green material that Universal Display provides to manufacturers like Samsung have lifetimes over 100,000 hours. I'd say that's plenty for a TV (that's 11 YEARS of 100% time on). As for blue they use the less-efficient fluorescent blue which also has a long lifetime.
post #2070 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

They cost more. They last for less time. Oh, and they cost more.

Here are the facts (as opposed to your generalized "they cost more" comments):


(source Gabelli and iSuppli)

As for lifetimes, the red/green materials being used for today's OLED displays has lifetimes of over 100,000 hours. More on that below:

http://www.universaldisplay.com/defa...?contentID=604

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread