Originally Posted by mark_1080p
Power usage continues to amaze me, the backlight seems to have settled in a bit, power usage is down below 110 watts
, which includes the CableCARD fan. I think that is a real breakthrough for a panel of this size. Forget about LED backlighting, let's be responsible and enjoy CCFL technology. A more flat CCFL would be a plus, but with continuing evolution of phosphors I see no real reason to ever have to go to power hungry LED. Now if LED could equal power usage of CCFL, ok, but it may never get there or even close.
Nice confirmations about the power usage. I have read several articles about LED usage for backlighting. It struck me that there two contrasting issues, among many, that stand out: First, on the positive side, designers should be able to choose the color output from LED much more precisely than FL technologies (ie. The warmth, or lack thereof, of white should be able to be more custom tailored to match, or fix, coloring problems the designer may be having with a particular LCD panel design.) Most likely a fixed "white" shade of light will be chosen for the LED sheet, but it may be possible to actually dynamically drive color warmth changes to the LED sheet based on content (almost a "display behind a display" and it would add expense but I wonder if someone will eventually try it.) If the LED sheet can give the designer more precise color control, it will be significant, despite the addition of heat (I wonder how a whole big sheet of LEDs will compare to several CCFLs with their drivers), power usage and complexity. Depth and weight differences are a harder call.
Secondly, on the negative side, and this is a big, possibly show-stopper negative for designers (unless the companies just take the path of just not telling us) is the unfortunate issue of LEDs "yellowing" with age. With time, usage and heat, these LED sheets age and their "color" output apparently changes much more radically than CCFL. Of course, mother nature manages to break down anything we humans make, given enough time. It becomes a question of which "color drift" is worse, the ageing chemical on the inside of the CCF tube or the ageing encapsulation material around the diode materials of the LED. Hopefully, for LEDs, this will be satisfactorily solved by materials science folks, but I'd be a little worried that early adopters of LED backlighting may be in for a worse ageing experience in their panels than the users of the more established CCFL tech.
This doesn't speak to the inherent advantage that the LED will have by being a "flat rectangular panel of light" -- have you seen a picture of one of these sheets? They are amazing, just a panel of light with no distinguishable features (If you haven't seen one, you might be imagining a panel of little plastic bumps like we see in our LED flashlights, but it's not that at all, it's entirely flat.) For CCFL you are having to take a tube source and blend out the shadows with a mask like a frosted bathroom window, it's hard work getting rid of the bands.
LED may also have a depth advantage, not needing as deep a "backlight box" as the CCFL tube/diffuser structure. On the other hand it may have more heat and still need space to allow that to disburse.
My take is that LED power sucking (as of now it will be like making an LCD have as much heat and power usage as a plasma perhaps?) and the issue of premature ageing of the LED sheet make LED backlighting still risky for the early adopter. (Insiders or those more well-read on this subject may beg to differ!)
Gee, does it show that I'm drinking my early-morning coffee and it's the holiday?
Best to Mark and all you guys -pixelswim