Main > Everything Else

Grrr . . . my TV broke

<< < (8/9) > >>

boykster:

--- Quote from: MaximRecoil on December 28, 2007, 07:49:07 pm ---SED (combines the benefits of CRT's with the benfits of flat panel displays like LCD and plasma) should be better than anything out there currently, assuming it is not "vaporware".

--- End quote ---

yep, looks like great technology.  It will be interesting to see how well it scales.

divemaster127:
I was in a meeting about 2 months ago, with execs from mitts & toshiba, I was told the technology is already a dead(its not going to be developed or supported except by cannon & a couple of others) right now the next TV tech being worked on is called HD2
dm

MaximRecoil:

--- Quote from: divemaster127 on December 29, 2007, 03:36:21 pm ---I was in a meeting about 2 months ago, with execs from mitts & toshiba, I was told the technology is already a dead(its not going to be developed or supported except by cannon & a couple of others) right now the next TV tech being worked on is called HD2
dm

--- End quote ---

What is HD2 exactly?

And I'd take an SED even if only one company made it. A thin and light CRT with no potential convergence or purity issues, that uses less power than either LCD or plasma displays? Sounds perfect to me.

And what about OLED (organic LED)? They've been making small OLED displays readily available since about 2000 (usually on car audio head units; Pioneer was the first company to use them that I ever heard about), but I heard they were developing larger displays. I've heard those have some impressive specifications compared to LCD and plasma displays. For example (from Wikipedia):


--- Quote ---OLEDs enable a greater range of colors, brightness, and viewing angle than LCDs, because OLED pixels directly emit light. OLED pixel colors appear correct and unshifted, even as the viewing angle approaches 90 degrees from normal. LCDs use a backlight and cannot show true black, while an "off" OLED element produces no light and consumes no power. Energy is also wasted in LCDs because they require polarizers which filter out about half of the light emitted by the backlight. Additionally, color filters in color LCDs filter out two-thirds of the light.

OLEDs also have a faster response time than standard LCD screens. Whereas a standard LCD currently has an average of 8-12 millisecond response time, an OLED can have less than 0.01ms response time. [25]
--- End quote ---

And how about a reported 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio?


--- Quote ---At the Las Vegas CES 2007, Sony showcased 11-inch (28 cm, resolution 1,024×600) and 27-inch (68.5 cm, full HD resolution at 1920×1080) models claiming million-to-one contrast ratio and total thickness (including bezels) of 5 mm. Sony plans on releasing a commercial version of this television in Japan in December, 2007.[29]
--- End quote ---

I hope something comes along that represents true progress over a CRT in all respects, rather than one step forward and two steps back.

shmokes:
I know that Sony has released an OLED flat panel in Japan at least 11" big.

MaximRecoil:

--- Quote from: shmokes on December 30, 2007, 01:06:01 am ---I know that Sony has released an OLED flat panel in Japan at least 11" big.

--- End quote ---

I guess they had one at the CES that was 27" too.

I'd like to view one to compare to a good CRT display. I've only seen the small, low resolution ones on car audio head units; which do look good for what they are (bright, good color, and no viewing angle issues). I've never cared for the look of any LCD or plasma display I've seen.

I don't care if it's OLED, SED, or something that hasn't yet been announced—as long as it meets or exceeds the best CRT displays in all relevant areas, I'd be pleased.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version