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 174

post #5191 of 9481
Vinnie, blooming is a non-issue on the Elite, it really is. I had a Sony 929, and on that panel it was an issue. Sharp developed a mechanism to deal with the blooming (put simply, unlike Sony they never turned the pixels completely off).

The color inaccuracy is overstated and I'd bet you'd never (or rarely) see it. It is associated primarily with low luminance cyan. Remember, I had both the Pro 151 and the Elite for about a month and compared them many times. The only significant difference in color rendition (both panels were ISF'd) was cyan, and I was the first to see it and mention it in the Elite thread as many AVS members can testify. I was totally objective. In fact, the first several professional reviews raved about the Elite's PQ and never mentioned the cyan issue. That's how hard the inaccuracy was to see.

You are correct, there were many Kuro owners who didn't switch. Not many people would have shelled out $5,000-8,000 for these panels if they didn't see major improvements. Of course some people could never be convinced that anything other than a plasma could offer the best PQ. I was among that group for a long time. However others did feel the improvements were significant enough to make the switch.

As for 'voodoo', you do realize that 'voodoo' is employed in the creation of any image on a display, correct? That is the case with CRTs,, LCDs, LED/LCDs, OLED, and yes, drum roll, plasma. I personally could care less what type of 'voodoo' is used in the creation of the best imagery. When we see a spectacular image, the idea is we become unaware of the 'voodoo' behind it, we just revel in the imagery. There are many paths to a great image. smile.gif
post #5192 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Vinnie, blooming is a non-issue on the Elite, it really is. I had a Sony 929, and on that panel it was an issue. Sharp developed a mechanism to deal with the blooming (put simply, unlike Sony they never turned the pixels completely off).
I actually suspect the main reason is the LCD panel used. With the HX900 Sony used an RGB UV2A panel from Sharp, and that suffered from minimal blooming. With the HX920, Sony switched back to using Samsung panels, and blooming was more of an issue. They also introduced "Intelligent Peak LED" which increased contrast at the expense of blooming. You can easily have it not turn the LED zones off by changing it to the "low" local dimming setting, or increasing brightness one notch. Makes almost no difference to the visibility of blooming in my opinion.

With the Elite, Sharp uses an RGBY UV2A panel, which has the same high contrast properties as the HX900, but introduces color inaccuracies and I don't like the pixel structure up close. (though to be fair, the HX900 has similar issues too - Sharp panels get addressed in a weird way)
The Elite also has around 300 dimming zones compared to around 100 zones on either Sony. But I believe it's primarily the panel that makes the difference, as blooming is almost as much of a non-issue with the UV2A-equipped HX900 as it is on the Elite. This is why I think the HX900 is "special" compared to the HX920/950. (though they are great sets in their own right)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I don't like the voodoo being employed to create those deeper blacks, which adds a new distracting artifact, that being blooming. Maybe it's minor enough to keep you satisfied, but it's not a tradeoff I'd like to make.
There's no "voodoo" going on, local dimming is very effective. On the Kuros, the entire black level is raised to a level higher than that of blooming, which makes blooming a non-issue in my opinion. And CRTs which achieved deep black levels without local-dimming "voodoo" suffered from blooming much worse than any local-dimming LCD - the whole surface of the tube lit up, rather than a localized area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

As for 'voodoo', you do realize that 'voodoo' is employed in the creation of any image on a display, correct? That is the case with CRTs,, LCDs, LED/LCDs, OLED, and yes, drum roll, plasma. I personally could care less what type of 'voodoo' is used in the creation of the best imagery. When we see a spectacular image, the idea is we become unaware of the 'voodoo' behind it, we just revel in the imagery. There are many paths to a great image. smile.gif
Yep, the end result is what matters. Knowing how they achieve that result can only help in identifying problems. E.g. knowing how plasmas work, lets me know that after trying out a lot of them including several Kuros, even if Panasonic or someone came out with a Plasma that had a zero black level, I still wouldn't be happy with the display, because there's more to it than just contrast and what a calibrator can measure.
post #5193 of 9481
So it seems that it is more or less confirmed that that Samsung will start the mass-production of their new Amoled screen. With full HD resolution at 1920x1080 on a 4.99" screen will give a pixel density of 440 PPI. That's quite a bit higher than Apple's iPhone 5 "retina screen" at 326 PPI.
Samsung is said to start with 3 million units a month and increasing to 10 million in the coming months if needed.

The new Amoled screen is said to use green PHoled which will increase efficiency with 25%. Oled-info com.

I understand there must be some manufacturing difference between small Amoled screen and big OLED screens, but haven't paid much attention to details of the different processes.
But are there anybody that in a simple way can explain why small OLED screens seems to very doable with good yields and large ones problematic?
Can it be that the much larger organic Dot deposit for big screens is the reason for the problem because it is just too large deposit of organic material par pixel?
Could a simple thing like disregarding resolution and depositing smaller Dots would be better? This would of course make the screens like a 55" with f.ex. 300 PPI of a very high resolution, but they could use pixel binning or up-conversion to accommodate HD or 4K?

The VP of Merck, a manufacturer of Oled material, both vapour based and soluble, claims in this January 2013 interview that "the material performance gap between vapor based and printable materials is closed in R&D".

The commercial from Samsungs keynote at CES 2013 for Youm Flexible OLED Display.

http://youtu.be/sra5_edD0r4
post #5194 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

even if Panasonic or someone came out with a Plasma that had a zero black level, I still wouldn't be happy with the display, because there's more to it than just contrast and what a calibrator can measure.
Isn't a zero black level emissive display with accurate color the end game we all desire?
post #5195 of 9481
^He will always find something about Plasma to complain about (he's probably making a veiled reference to his disdain for dithering there). wink.gif

And sorry, guys (Ken, Chrono), I'd take an actual black level reduction over a clever masking attempt any day, especially at the asking price of the Sharp.
post #5196 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post


I understand there must be some manufacturing difference between small Amoled screen and big OLED screens, but haven't paid much attention to details of the different processes.
But are there anybody that in a simple way can explain why small OLED screens seems to very doable with good yields and large ones problematic?
Can it be that the much larger organic Dot deposit for big screens is the reason for the problem because it is just too large deposit of organic material par pixel?
Could a simple thing like disregarding resolution and depositing smaller Dots would be better? This would of course make the screens like a 55" with f.ex. 300 PPI of a very high resolution, but they could use pixel binning or up-conversion to accommodate HD or 4K?

So yeah, we've talked it before but the thread gets off on tangents.

It has nothing at all to do with pixel size, resolution, or any of that.

It has everything to do with the fact that the small screens are small.

Let me explain.

Samsung "patterns" the OLED material on the substrate using what is a called a fine metal mask, which is basically a mesh or the high-tech equivalent of the "silkscreen" used to make t-shirts. No matter how hard they try, the mesh can only be made so rigid. When the mesh is small, it's not a problem... The fabricating machine can hold it over the substrate, the OLED material can be "injected" through it, and the end result is a nice even layer.

The problem is that the mask can never touch the substrate. If it does, the OLED material is uneven and your pixels don't come out right (especially because you need to lay down three colors. And you get waste.

So on larger displays, they spent some time trying to use large masks. It didn't work. The mask would sag in the middle and touch the substrate and you'd get no yield at all.

The clever guys at Samsung figured out a solution. Take a small mask and move it around the display, pattern a bit of the display each time. There are two big issues here, though:

1) It's really slow and inefficient to do this

2) You need perfect alignment on every move or you again destroy the substrate

This technique, called small mask scanning is what they've been working on for at least a couple of years. And they've yet to get especially close to releasing a TV, even in small quantities. This suggests that it's really hard to scale as a technique, they are attempting to build new methods to make it work, and that it's possible it will never scale as a manufacturing method.

It's for this reason I have speculated (as have others), that Samsung might eventually license LG's method or go a different route entirely. LG's method, for what it worth, doesn't require any patterning of OLED material.

All the hype around "printable OLEDs" is that they do require patterning, but don't need a mask. They pattern directly on the substrate using something that is most akin to the print head in your inkjet printer. Again, that's been worked on for 10 years and the closest it has come to reality is a couple of prototypes at 2013 CES which allegedly might be ready for manufacture in 2015. Of course, we've been hearing that printable OLED is a year or two away for 10 years.

I hope this helps, I could do some diagrams if I get really bored.
post #5197 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post


And sorry, guys (Ken, Chrono), I'd take an actual black level reduction over a clever masking attempt any day, especially at the asking price of the Sharp.

If they both got you to the same observable (and yes, even measurable) place, who gives a rat's tush? I'll never understand that. But hey, whatever makes you comfortable.
post #5198 of 9481
Samsung and LG have settled their various OLED patent suits. No word on the licensing terms, but considering the fact that they settled because of pressure from the Korean government, I wouldnt be surprised at general cross-licenses.

I have heard quite a bit of speculation about Samsung adopting WRGB but surprisingly little about any movement towards an IGZO substrate. If Samsung sticks with LTPS, their televisions will remain more expensive than LG's (assuming that LG works out hte yield issues).
post #5199 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by homogenic View Post

Isn't a zero black level emissive display with accurate color the end game we all desire?
I think the quality of motion on Plasma sucks (false contouring, color break-up) they suffer from dithering & posterization, I suffer from headaches due to the flicker, and they dim the image due to their ABL. They aren't suitable as a monitor either, which rules them out for my needs.

A lot of people would probably be satisfied if all they did was fix the black level on Plasma, but I think you would still find people complaining about other areas too. It's just that black level is the most obvious thing they need to fix to the folks around here. You can't just stick a colorimeter on the screen and have it tell you what gradation or motion quality is like, and make a pretty chart to post online like you can with grayscale and color measurements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

If they both got you to the same observable (and yes, even measurable) place, who gives a rat's tush? I'll never understand that. But hey, whatever makes you comfortable.
I don't think many people that actually complain about local dimming LCD, have ever actually seen a local dimming LCD, and certainly not the better ones properly set up in a home environment.

Sure, you can take over-exposed photos or watch from the side to show how "bad" local dimming is, but that's not how it looks in person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

It has everything to do with the fact that the small screens are small.

Let me explain...
Good info.
post #5200 of 9481
wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

If they both got you to the same observable (and yes, even measurable) place, who gives a rat's tush? I'll never understand that. But hey, whatever makes you comfortable.

I wonder if Vinnie and Art are related?
post #5201 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post

wink.gif
I wonder if Vinnie and Art are related?

Does make you wonder. smile.gif
post #5202 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

So yeah, we've talked it before but the thread gets off on tangents.

I hope this helps, I could do some diagrams if I get really bored.
Thank you rogo for the explanation, gave me a clear understanding of the problem. smile.gif
Almost unimaginable to think of that millions of dollars in R&D and failed productions resulting in low yields is because they can't make "silk screens" rigid enough.

As to the Oled printing. What I have understood is that the big hindrance has been the quality of the Soluble Oled. I hope the guy from Merck, that I linked to, are truthful that the performance gap between vapour based Oled and soluble has been closed in R&D. Always thought that depositing of Oled material with a Ink-Jet printer-head would solve many problems and open up the possibility for other screen types that can't be done on solid material.
post #5203 of 9481
You would think that the LCD world consisted of just a Sharp Elite or maybe a Sony HX 950.

While I wouldn't want either I could respect someone buying a Sharp Elite. Overall would I say that it had better picture quality than the best Kuro?--no but it would be close enough to where if you were sitting right in front of it in the sweet spot it would be comparable. I don't think the same thing could be said about the Sony.

It's not these LCD sets that are concerning--they are comparably high priced but not out of the ball park--what is concerning is the DIRECTION of the rest of LCD land. It is negative.

Edge lit is a step backwards. Less and less Full array local dimming IS a step backwards.

120Hz versus 240 Hz is a step backwards--there are more of the former and less of the latter nowadays.

The majority of LCD is going backwards quality wise.

Are there some people that went from the best Panasonic models of the last few years to Sharp Elites--yes--of course--but that was miniscule.

Ditto for going from the best Panasonic plasmas to the best Sony LCDs.

Why? Most people didn't want to spend WAY more for LCD drawbacks--can you say motion resolution?

For that matter does anyone at the LCD forum even talk about motion resolution improvements anymore?

WHATEVER happened to 480Hz? That kind of went away didn't it?

Now what I'd like to hear is the case FOR the majority of all LCDs getting better quality wise to what was produced two years ago.

I don't think that case can be made.

Anybody want to make those cases? Anybody?

As for LCD quality--no I don't think that aggregate LCD quality is getting better--I think that aggregate LCD quality is getting WORSE!

I don't think that the LCD Godfather pays any of the Ken Rosses of the world. I just don't think there are many Ken Rosses.

I do think that LCD manufacturers try to manipulate enthusiast sites--this isn't the only place it happens--it costs less to do that than to spend the money in advertising. If companies will spend millions for advertising--don't think that they won't spend thousands for PLANT posters.

My point is not to BASH the epitome of LCDs--that would be silly as long as Elites and Sony's best LCD sets exist--my point is to BASH the picture quality direction of the aggregate of ALL the rest of LCDs produced--it is not going up but it is going down.

As to the argument of there being some bad plasmas this of course is true.

Would anybody want to wager about the picture quality winner between the WORST plasma set at 50 inches versus the WORST LCD at 50 inches?

Which would suck more?

For that matter has anybody heard if the Elites will be improved?

I haven't heard anything about that happening.

Has anybody heard ANYTHING about non Elite or non Sony HX950 improvement for 2K sets the next few years--I haven't heard anything--I don't think there is anything to hear.

Has anybody heard of plasmas going away? Who hasn't?

The bottom line is this--Japan and Korea already know that CHEAP LCDs are coming! The other bottom line is those bean counters from those nations don't really believe that the overall standard of living is going to RISE much--it will stay the same basically for many years.

The only hope may be China--they won't produce second rate quality forever.

Mark my words folks--sometimes technology stops for 10 or twenty years. The reason it stops for that long is enough people aren't agitated enough for the dynamic to change.

Will CES 2014 be as uneventful as CES 2013? Probably. Will people here think that? Probably not. That's the REAL problem.
Edited by Artwood - 2/8/13 at 3:40pm
post #5204 of 9481
I'd agree with you about PQ no improvements in past 2 years or even went down.
But, market moves for cheap and not for quality - IMHO.
So, yes cheap 50"+ LCD at $500 or below will win at the end like it or not.
Whoever will buy for $500 or below will look for the size and if it'll come with 4k than will be no 2nd thought at all.
Why to produce PQ TV that can't be sold, while masses will buy anything at right price?

How many will buy 2k 50" OLED for $5k - $10k vs so so 4k 50" LCD below $2k

Look what happened to digi cameras? megapixel war that has nothing to do with PQ, but right opposite PQ went down.

No, I don't like this trend, so what?
post #5205 of 9481
Art, I'd suggest you read some of the comments from people that saw the latest Samsung LED/LCDs at CES, but you've worn me out. We just go round and round and round...I'm dizzy and I'm getting off. I'll leave this to someone else with more patience than me.
post #5206 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post

wink.gif
I wonder if Vinnie and Art are related?
You mean you can't agree with someone without being related to them in this day and age? Shocker.
post #5207 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Thank you rogo for the explanation, gave me a clear understanding of the problem. smile.gif

You're most welcome.
Quote:
Almost unimaginable to think of that millions of dollars in R&D and failed productions resulting in low yields is because they can't make "silk screens" rigid enough.

For what it's worth, I don't believe Samsung will solve the problem. But I believe LG's method and some form of printing will eventually work out... In the meantime, Samsung might squeeze a few displays onto the market with their method at low yields... But the next 1-2 years aren't that important anyway.
Quote:
As to the Oled printing. What I have understood is that the big hindrance has been the quality of the Soluble Oled. I hope the guy from Merck, that I linked to, are truthful that the performance gap between vapour based Oled and soluble has been closed in R&D. Always thought that depositing of Oled material with a Ink-Jet printer-head would solve many problems and open up the possibility for other screen types that can't be done on solid material.

So if it's true that that the soluble OLED material is ready in the labs, it might be ready for production in the next couple of years. I imagine the "print heads" aren't actually a very big challenge given how amazing that technology is elsewhere. I guess we'll learn more as Panasonic, Sony, AUO, et al. announce developments. I'm just skeptical because these problems have allegedly been close to solution before.
post #5208 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

Reviving this old post because it says delivery of the 55EM9700 OLED display is supposed to start the first week of Feb in Korea. Well, it's the first week of Feb. Have we heard from anyone who has received one yet?

LG’s Organic Light-Emitting Diode TVs customers pre-ordered since the start of this year will be delivered to Korean consumers starting from the 20th this month. LG is hoping the sales of these new breed of flat screens will pick up as more consumers experience them at homes.

On the 7th, LG announced that the company will start delivery of its OLED TVs to those who placed pre-production orders in Korea from the 20th. LG also commented it “will move first to be the winner of this year’s newly launched TVs by starting the delivery of OLED TVs, together with the launching events for other new 2013 TV models scheduled to take place in mid and late this month.”

However, LG decided not to disclose how many pre-production orders were placed for the OLED TVs. The OLED TVs come in hefty price tags of about KRW 1.1 million (approximately 10,000 in USD), and their target consumers are VVIPs at the moment, rather than the general public. The trade insiders are speculating that about 130 to 200 pre-production orders had been placed.

LG’s OLED TVs will be rolled-out in the U.S. in March, and in the other parts of the world, including Europe, in consideration of market response and production capacity. Meanwhile, Japanese newspapers reported that LG will launch 55-inch OLED TVs in Japan sometime in this spring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

Samsung and LG have settled their various OLED patent suits. No word on the licensing terms, but considering the fact that they settled because of pressure from the Korean government, I wouldnt be surprised at general cross-licenses.

I have heard quite a bit of speculation about Samsung adopting WRGB but surprisingly little about any movement towards an IGZO substrate. If Samsung sticks with LTPS, their televisions will remain more expensive than LG's (assuming that LG works out hte yield issues).

Have you seen where there was an actual settlement? The latest I saw is they agreed to work on resolving the suits. Both companies had assigned people to work on the resolution. A cross-license would definitely be a positive development for quicker adoption of OLEDs. I'm sure LG doesn't want to give up their WRGB patents but they would probably like to get access to Samsung's flexible technology. It could be an interesting idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

For what it's worth, I don't believe Samsung will solve the problem. But I believe LG's method and some form of printing will eventually work out... In the meantime, Samsung might squeeze a few displays onto the market with their method at low yields... But the next 1-2 years aren't that important anyway.
It's an open question whether Samsung will solve that problem or get to TVs by another method. It is unlikely they'll be releasing TVs soon. For what it's worth, their strategy was to gradually increase screen sizes over time but they had not intended to jump to 55" screens yet. They were caught off-guard by LG's TV plans and decided to try to use their existing technology at larger sizes to not cede the TV race. The RGB method was really just thought of as a stopgap for the pilot line but not necessarily the final technology and they have been working on other technologies, including printing, at the same time. They are making progress on larger sizes though as they are likely to increase the size of their next small screen size expansion from 5.5g substrates to 6.5g.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

So if it's true that that the soluble OLED material is ready in the labs, it might be ready for production in the next couple of years. ... I'm just skeptical because these problems have allegedly been close to solution before.
soluble materials .. close to solution. Ha, nice choice of words.


There's a lot of discussion here about 4K vs OLED. Industry expert Barry Young gave an interview today with his impression.

Both Samsung and LG Display are in OLEDs for the long term and have figured out that they cannot accurately forecast delivery of new technology, but they are firm in their beliefs that the technology will be differentiated and the costs will be competitive. Each company continues to appropriate CAPEX for OLEDs in a strategic fashion, while committing spending for LCDs tactically.

DisplaySearch says that both Samsung and LGD are currently focusing on 4K2K and "delaying" OLED TVs... what's your view here?

Both Samsung and LG have separate groups working on LCDs and OLEDs, so the priorities in one group (LCDs) don’t necessarily effect the priorities of another group (OLEDs). If you look at the Capex for Samsung and LG, they are putting relatively more investment in OLEDs than LCDs.
post #5209 of 9481
Ooor, Samsung is releasing a TV about the same time as LG?

Samsung set to launc OLED TVs February 19?

More likely it's the Samsung Galaxy note 8 though frown.gif

Galaxy 8 Note
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

So yeah, we've talked it before but the thread gets off on tangents.

It has nothing at all to do with pixel size, resolution, or any of that.

It has everything to do with the fact that the small screens are small.

Let me explain.

Samsung "patterns" the OLED material on the substrate using what is a called a fine metal mask, which is basically a mesh or the high-tech equivalent of the "silkscreen" used to make t-shirts. No matter how hard they try, the mesh can only be made so rigid. When the mesh is small, it's not a problem... The fabricating machine can hold it over the substrate, the OLED material can be "injected" through it, and the end result is a nice even layer.

The problem is that the mask can never touch the substrate. If it does, the OLED material is uneven and your pixels don't come out right (especially because you need to lay down three colors. And you get waste.

So on larger displays, they spent some time trying to use large masks. It didn't work. The mask would sag in the middle and touch the substrate and you'd get no yield at all.

The clever guys at Samsung figured out a solution. Take a small mask and move it around the display, pattern a bit of the display each time. There are two big issues here, though:

1) It's really slow and inefficient to do this

2) You need perfect alignment on every move or you again destroy the substrate

This technique, called small mask scanning is what they've been working on for at least a couple of years. And they've yet to get especially close to releasing a TV, even in small quantities. This suggests that it's really hard to scale as a technique, they are attempting to build new methods to make it work, and that it's possible it will never scale as a manufacturing method.

It's for this reason I have speculated (as have others), that Samsung might eventually license LG's method or go a different route entirely. LG's method, for what it worth, doesn't require any patterning of OLED material.

All the hype around "printable OLEDs" is that they do require patterning, but don't need a mask. They pattern directly on the substrate using something that is most akin to the print head in your inkjet printer. Again, that's been worked on for 10 years and the closest it has come to reality is a couple of prototypes at 2013 CES which allegedly might be ready for manufacture in 2015. Of course, we've been hearing that printable OLED is a year or two away for 10 years.

I hope this helps, I could do some diagrams if I get really bored.

Edited by David_B - 2/9/13 at 12:13am
post #5210 of 9481
I don't see why you quoted my entire post to talk about something totally unrelated.... Well, I do know why, but I'm not happy you're still doing things like that.

Regardless, I don't think anyone believes Samsung is in position to ship OLED TVs on LG's schedule -- including Samsung. They didn't even announce a date at CES.
post #5211 of 9481
^Likely it is more dramatic: Samsung must have been under life&death pressure to get 2K portable 5" OLED ready just now when first LCDs with such res start appear. Otherwise OLED would be practically dead.
post #5212 of 9481
Apple Hires a New High Powered Leader in AMOLEDs
February 6, 2013

http://oled-a.org/news_details.cfm?ID=774

"Apple’s recent hire, Jueng –jil (James) Lee--a former Research fellow from LG Display and a senior person in LG Display’s R&D effort to create a printed AMOLED TV. "


I would not be very surprised if down the road LG hits Apple with a number of patent infringement suits, claiming that the guy transferred them to Apple, and that is why they hired the guy.
post #5213 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

Apple Hires a New High Powered Leader in AMOLEDs
February 6, 2013

http://oled-a.org/news_details.cfm?ID=774

"Apple’s recent hire, Jueng –jil (James) Lee--a former Research fellow from LG Display and a senior person in LG Display’s R&D effort to create a printed AMOLED TV. "


I would not be very surprised if down the road LG hits Apple with a number of patent infringement suits, claiming that the guy transferred them to Apple, and that is why they hired the guy.

The problem with such things is that sometimes just the threat of a suit is what has teeth. I wonder how this guy skirted around a NCA (NCC). Also the NDA must've been an inch thick.
post #5214 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I don't see why you quoted my entire post to talk about something totally unrelated.... Well, I do know why, but I'm not happy you're still doing things like that.

Regardless, I don't think anyone believes Samsung is in position to ship OLED TVs on LG's schedule -- including Samsung. They didn't even announce a date at CES.

this forum was founded on dissecting peoples posts sentence by sentence and frequent off topic responses that usually result in a 10 page hijacking at a time. lol i can understand this is a direct result of sheer boredom and a lack of said product to consume time with, but it really does hamper finding any useful information trapped within the thread.

and just so you know, it wasnt me who did this, so dont direct the gunfire my way.
post #5215 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post

LG’s Organic Light-Emitting Diode TVs customers pre-ordered since the start of this year will be delivered to Korean consumers starting from the 20th this month. LG is hoping the sales of these new breed of flat screens will pick up as more consumers experience them at homes.

On the 7th, LG announced that the company will start delivery of its OLED TVs to those who placed pre-production orders in Korea from the 20th. LG also commented it “will move first to be the winner of this year’s newly launched TVs by starting the delivery of OLED TVs, together with the launching events for other new 2013 TV models scheduled to take place in mid and late this month.”

However, LG decided not to disclose how many pre-production orders were placed for the OLED TVs. The OLED TVs come in hefty price tags of about KRW 1.1 million (approximately 10,000 in USD), and their target consumers are VVIPs at the moment, rather than the general public. The trade insiders are speculating that about 130 to 200 pre-production orders had been placed.

LG’s OLED TVs will be rolled-out in the U.S. in March, and in the other parts of the world, including Europe, in consideration of market response and production capacity. Meanwhile, Japanese newspapers reported that LG will launch 55-inch OLED TVs in Japan sometime in this spring.
Have you seen where there was an actual settlement? The latest I saw is they agreed to work on resolving the suits. Both companies had assigned people to work on the resolution. A cross-license would definitely be a positive development for quicker adoption of OLEDs. I'm sure LG doesn't want to give up their WRGB patents but they would probably like to get access to Samsung's flexible technology. It could be an interesting idea.
It's an open question whether Samsung will solve that problem or get to TVs by another method. It is unlikely they'll be releasing TVs soon. For what it's worth, their strategy was to gradually increase screen sizes over time but they had not intended to jump to 55" screens yet. They were caught off-guard by LG's TV plans and decided to try to use their existing technology at larger sizes to not cede the TV race. The RGB method was really just thought of as a stopgap for the pilot line but not necessarily the final technology and they have been working on other technologies, including printing, at the same time. They are making progress on larger sizes though as they are likely to increase the size of their next small screen size expansion from 5.5g substrates to 6.5g.
soluble materials .. close to solution. Ha, nice choice of words.


There's a lot of discussion here about 4K vs OLED. Industry expert Barry Young gave an interview today with his impression.

Both Samsung and LG Display are in OLEDs for the long term and have figured out that they cannot accurately forecast delivery of new technology, but they are firm in their beliefs that the technology will be differentiated and the costs will be competitive. Each company continues to appropriate CAPEX for OLEDs in a strategic fashion, while committing spending for LCDs tactically.

DisplaySearch says that both Samsung and LGD are currently focusing on 4K2K and "delaying" OLED TVs... what's your view here?

Both Samsung and LG have separate groups working on LCDs and OLEDs, so the priorities in one group (LCDs) don’t necessarily effect the priorities of another group (OLEDs). If you look at the Capex for Samsung and LG, they are putting relatively more investment in OLEDs than LCDs.


after all they hype and broken promises, i remain skeptical.

i'll believe lg will ship an oled to the u.s. when i can see one in a retail store
post #5216 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by whityfrd View Post

this forum was founded on dissecting peoples posts sentence by sentence

It wasn't actually. It used to be much better.
Quote:
and frequent off topic responses that usually result in a 10 page hijacking at a time. lol i can understand this is a direct result of sheer boredom and a lack of said product to consume time with, but it really does hamper finding any useful information trapped within the thread.

Yes, that does happen, especially when there is nothing new to talk about. The truth is that it's mostly a flaw with this kind of forum software. You can never resurface the real conversation easily.
Quote:
and just so you know, it wasnt me who did this, so dont direct the gunfire my way.

My reading skills are intact. I know who did what.
post #5217 of 9481
Well, it does appear that LG is preparing for to introduce their 55 inch OLED to the US.

They have posted this on their LG US site.

http://www.lg.com/us/oled/index.jsp
post #5218 of 9481
And at the same time they've removed the OLED microsite in the UK, along with the 55" model product page.

I assume this means OLED TVs aren't coming to the UK any time soon. Disappointed, but not surprised.
post #5219 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

Well, it does appear that LG is preparing for to introduce their 55 inch OLED to the US.

They have posted this on their LG US site.

http://www.lg.com/us/oled/index.jsp

I had to laugh at their pictures of 'conventional' TV images. They look like 1st gen LCD from years ago. biggrin.gif
post #5220 of 9481
Quote:
Originally Posted by grexeo View Post

And at the same time they've removed the OLED microsite in the UK, along with the 55" model product page.

I assume this means OLED TVs aren't coming to the UK any time soon. Disappointed, but not surprised.
The conspiracy theorist in me says the UK cancellation has to do with the low yield issues.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread