Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Displays

LCD Price Fixing? 470

Posted by Cliff from the artificially-inflated-and-passed-on-to-YOU dept.
bilsaysthis asks: "Bill Kearney poses a really interesting question, one which I've been puzzled by for a while too: 'What's with prices on LCD displays? On one hand a laptop can be had with UXGA resolution display for $1000. Try buying that display alone and you'll find it's also around $1000. Then there's how much they're gouging for the same resolution in an LCD television.'" Sadly enough, as much as I want one of these for my wall, the market is willing to bear these prices. How long will it be before this hardware becomes affordable?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LCD Price Fixing? More

LCD Price Fixing?

Comments Filter:

  • Price Will Come Down... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Shuh ( 13578 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:42PM (#5635103) Journal
    When the OLED's come out!

    ;)

  • Mirror :( (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:43PM (#5635108)
    I setup a mirror (posted as AC to avoid karma whoring, I have better things to do with my time). You can read the article
    here, once it's slashdotted. [zachlipton.com]

  • Fast Dirty Mirror of the Page in Question (Score:4, Informative)

    by yeoua ( 86835 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:43PM (#5635112)
    March 30, 2003
    LCD price fixing?
    What's with prices on LCD displays?

    On one hand a laptop can be had with UXGA resolution display for $1000. Try buying that display alone and you'll find it's also around $1000. Then there's how much they're gouging for the same resolution in an LCD television.

    There are, of course, manufacturing yield issues with LCDs. The bigger you make them, the harder it becomes to make one free from defects. But look at the price differentials between OEM panels in laptops vs that of standalone monitors. The disparity is quite wide. Balancing (subsidizing) one market on the backs of another is not a new thing. But it seems a reach to use that as justification for the LCD montior/TV prices.

    So what's going on here? Are the monitor manufacturers pulling a fast one here? Are they gouging consumers? And why are they priced so similarly across the board?

    # | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 03:47 PM
    Comments (scroll down to see all 3 comments...)
    Hope it's okay but I submitted this to /. to see if any good answers come up. Who knows if it will get posted though, since none of my previous submissions have been.

    Posted by: BillSaysThis on March 30, 2003 07:04 PM
    It's been posted! I'm a slashdot subscriber and I see that this story has been posted, it will be up probably within 20 minutes

    Posted by: Zach on March 31, 2003 08:35 PM
    Brace yourself, here it comes. Its on slashdot, or will be in a few minutes. Hope you've paid you bandwidth bill! :)
    Actually, as I am going to say on slashdot, a lot of it has to do with supply vs demand. There are a LOT of laptops sold, but comparitvily, not many standalone LCD screens. It does require some more work to make a LCD screen accept VGA or RCA input.

    Posted by: Zaffle on March 31, 2003 08:39 PM

    • Re:Fast Dirty Mirror of the Page in Question (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:57PM (#5635215)
      Wrong! It has been estimated in 2004 that HALF of all display revenues will be from LCD Screens. By 2006, HALF of all displays sold will be LCDs.

      Low volume is not the issue here. My guess is price gouging is running rampart, especially on LCD TVs...

      P.S. Anyone out there know what the response times are on OLEDs? How do they compare to LCDs?

      (This is docrobot posting, for some insane reason, I can't log into /. at work...)
      • If memory serves, those articles claimed that half of monitor sales by dollars would be LCDs. With LCD prices higher than monitor, that would be less than half of the total displays sold.

        Then again, I think the articles I saw said 2004, not 2006. I'm betting by 2006 LCDs will be cheaper than CRTs and absolutely dominate the market.

  • How long... (Score:4, Funny)

    by aePrime ( 469226 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:43PM (#5635113)
    How long will it be before this hardware becomes affordable?

    The real question is, how much longer until my eBay scam pays off and I can afford one no matter what the price.

    Even if I do have to move suddenly to Vermont.

  • Maybe.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by rice_web ( 604109 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:45PM (#5635120)
    Ten minutes after you make a purchase.

  • As I've said before... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:45PM (#5635124) Journal
    We need an open laptop form factor...

    Three requirements:
    - Chassis spec
    - DC power supply spec
    - LCD spec

    It sparked in my mind when I broke the LCD on my thinkpad... IBM wanted $900 to fix it but I was able to disassemble one of their desktop models and get the component that I required for less than $300...

    Sheesh...

    But can you imagine an open laptop? Neon and clear shit for days... Case modding to the extreme!

    • Re:As I've said before... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      But can you imagine an open laptop?

      Yes. Big, bulky, heavy, ugly, power-hungry, hot as hell, slower than other "non-open" competitors and still with few selections for parts, maybe slightly more than proprietary designs.

      An open laptop is an often brought up idea and it is idiotic.

      You have no idea what it takes to design a good laptop.

    • Re:As I've said before... (Score:5, Funny)

      by s20451 ( 410424 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:02PM (#5635239) Journal

      But can you imagine an open laptop? Neon and clear shit for days... Case modding to the extreme!

      Indeed, I can imagine ... and what's the point? Most of the cool casemods take up power. With neon tubes everywhere, you would probably cut your battery life by a factor of two or three, which would defeat most of the point of getting a laptop.

      I'm reminded of an acquaintance of mine from high school, who bought a Geo Metro and added so many car mods (ground effect, huge stereo, etc.) that his alternator couldn't keep up. He bought a new alternator, which destroyed the car's fuel economy, which is basically the only reason to buy a Metro.

      Then again, this is probably the wrong crowd to ask "Why get a new gadget?".

      • Indeed, I can imagine ... and what's the point?
        Well, in this case it doesn't sound like you're using the "fun" part of your imagination. People make low-rider bicycles for crying out loud. People will mod anything they can because it's a chance at practical application of their imagination. To many that's "fun." So as to your question about the point being, the point is to have fun trying it.
        Not to mention, not just use imagination in some kind of applicable way, but actually create something new for th

  • Laptop screens selling at a loss? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hobbesmaster ( 592205 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:45PM (#5635125)
    Perhaps the cheapest laptop LCD screens are being sold at a loss, and the desktop ones are sold at a high profit?

    Just a random guess.
    • Nice guess but i doubt it. If they were losing money on laptop screens they would quit selling them. Most likely they are making a killing off laptop screens and commiting mass murder on desktop displays.

  • Buy a laptop and separate the base. (Score:5, Funny)

    by baryon351 ( 626717 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:45PM (#5635126)
    Buy a laptop and take off the base. ta-dah, problem solved!. You have a flat-panel monitor AND a small headless server.

    Of course, you do then need to make the interface to connect the flat panel to something useful, but thats where the fun comes into it :)

  • Old answer I'm affraid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Zaffle ( 13798 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:46PM (#5635129) Homepage Journal

    A lot of it has to do with the old story of supply and demand. There is a very large call for LCDs for laptops, and the laptop manufacturers get them at almost cost, then intergrate them into the laptops.

    However, there isn't much (comparitivly) demand for LCD computer screens, or even worse, TV screens.

    When I was in singapore a few years ago, RCA input LCD screens weren't that bad a price, but the problem is that price hasn't drop that much.

    It does take some more work to make a LCD screen take VGA or RCA inputs, so there is the cost the LCD is brought at (a lot more than the laptop manufacturers buy them at), and then the intergration of circuits to accept VGA or RCA input.

    • I think you have that backwards

      Prices rise as demand increases relative to supply and fall as demand decreases. So by that logic LCD computer screens should be cheaper and laptop displays more expensive.

      • Re:Old answer I'm affraid (Score:5, Informative)

        by Osty ( 16825 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:31PM (#5635408)

        Prices rise as demand increases relative to supply and fall as demand decreases.

        That's not how I remember my economics. You have your basic supply/demand curve, with price on the Y axis, and units on the X. As price goes up, more units can be supplied, so the supply curve has an increasing slope. Conversely, there is more demand as price drops (units become more affordable). In other words, the demand curve has a decreasing slope. In ascii art (please let this look decent ...):

        p |\ d /
        r | \ /
        i | X
        c | / \
        e |/s \
        +-------------
        units

        d = demand curve
        s = supply curve

        (the curves aren't very curvy in this example, but they could be depending on the supply and demand dynamics)
        Price is always determined by the demand curve, with the supply curve denoting how many units can be built at a given price. If the price is high, the demand is low, and although many units can be supplied at that price, that's only theoretical -- nobody's buying, so there's no money to manufacture those units. There are always the economincally-enabled few that can afford anything at any price, and the bleeding-edge early adopters that will pay a premium for being the first on the block, but most people won't buy until the price has dropped. When the two cross, you're at the optimum price (for a non-monopolistic competitive market). After that point, more units can't be supplied because the sales won't cover costs, and before that point fewer people will buy because the price is too high. This is where you get into loss-leader (selling to the right of the optimum point, below cost, to generate more demand) and monopoly (selling to the left of the optimum point, because nobody can compete with you to keep your prices down -- there's a point where the price is high enough to allow others into the market, but so long as the monopoly keeps the price below that point, it's got the market to itself).

        Now, what the original poster was suggesting (I believe -- and if not, it's what I'm suggesting) is that laptop LCDs are being sold at a price on the demand curve to the right of the optimum point (lower price), but the manufacturers can afford to do so by selling non-laptop LCDs (desktops, TVs) at a price on the demand curve to the left of the optimum point. If things are ideal, the merged graph should come out with the combined demand and supply crossing properly at the averaged price. I doubt that's the case. It's likely that the price is higher than that, but it shouldn't be by much -- if it were, then competitors would lower their prices to gain more marketshare.


        And just to CMA, it's been 3-ish years since I've had an economics course, so my analysis may be off, but my graph (ugly as it is) should be correct for a baseline S/D graph.

    • But then they charge you even more for DVI. Higher quality, I guess they claim. And of course the video cards with DVI sell at a premium too, even though nobody has to make the DAC/ADCs.

    • Re:Old answer I'm affraid (Score:5, Interesting)

      by chunkwhite86 ( 593696 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:18PM (#5635346)
      It does take some more work to make a LCD screen take VGA or RCA inputs, so there is the cost the LCD is brought at (a lot more than the laptop manufacturers buy them at), and then the intergration of circuits to accept VGA or RCA input.

      While this is true, it is not reflected in the real world price of an LCD display. The Digital flat panels (DFP's) which have NO analog converter always cost more than a comparable analog flat panel!

      That analog display costs more to manufacturer since it requires the analog-digital convertor, but only high-end machines and enthusiasts will opt for the more elegant DFP - and thus are more willing to pay a higher price for what they percieve as a "better" solution.

      Just my two cents.

  • Where's the problem? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:46PM (#5635130) Journal
    What's with prices on LCD displays? On one hand a laptop can be had with UXGA resolution display for $1000. Try buying that display alone and you'll find it's also around $1000.

    Solution: Buy a laptop, nail it to the wall, and watch TV!

  • Bulk Purchasing. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LibertineR ( 591918 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:46PM (#5635134)
    Laptop manufacturers buy screens in bulk, and dont buy fancy packaging, manuals, etc, that drive up the price. The cost for everything is cheaper, especially shipping.

    Consider how many LCD's that IBM buys for their ThinkPads, compared to mom and pop.

    When you think about it like that, we should consider ourselves lucky that our LCD's dont cost more than they already do.

  • Supply and demand. Get used to it.

    But seriously, prices are dropping. I just got a Viewsonic VX900 19 inch LCD monitor for $723 (including taxes) at BestBuys. Of course, I took advantage of their 10% off deal + $100 rebate. :)

  • It's not really price fixing (Score:3, Informative)

    by anotherone ( 132088 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:46PM (#5635138)
    There's only a limited number of LCDs availible. The more a company buys, the cheaper they can get the panels for. Laptops sell more and are sold for more than LCD monitors. A company that sells laptops can, therefore, buy more LCDs than a company that sells LCD monitors. They can get them more cheaply, and afford to sell them more cheaply.

    It's not really price-fixing proper, just basic economics.

    • It's not really price-fixing proper, just basic economics.

      This is Slashdot. Anything that involves economics turns into a conspiracy theory, DMCA violation, or PATRIOT act.

    • Re:It's not really price fixing....not really (Score:5, Informative)

      by adzoox ( 615327 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:10PM (#5635298) Journal
      Samsung and Sharp (and their co owned LG Philips and ChiMei subsidaries) are the largest manufacturers of LCDs. Both Samsung and Sharp also make the largest number of consumer availible LCD TV/Monitors. They also use the same screen, contrary to some posts here. There's hardly a LCD TV out there that doesn't have a laptop screen counterpart, or at the least, a LCD monitor counterpart.

      Prices are being somewhat fixed as the LCD industry is "getting their commodity while they can" much as the memory industry did years ago. The memory industry has learned that volume is the better equation, thus, the low memory prices. OLEDs will change this because they are much cheaper to produce, much brighter and much thinner. Kodak already has OLEDs with Palm soon to follow in a new color Zire from ramblings on the net as well as Apple computer for a new device yet to be announced.

  • From my days in Sales (Score:5, Informative)

    by doorman ( 61472 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:46PM (#5635139) Homepage
    I ran into this same question when I was made responsible for parts ordering for my company. I was told at the time by the manufacturer rep (Toshiba, I think) that some sort of tariff was responsible. LCD's connected to computers were not charged the tariff, LCD's separate were charged. This was the reason given to us why LCD's ordered for broken laptops costs as much as a new one.

    This was 1995, and the answer comes from a sales guy, so YMMV.
  • as long as people will buy CRT's and have the space for them, they will never become mainstream. So they will remain something for corporate offices and people with too much money. (the latter of which is declining rapidly)
    • as long as people will buy CRT's and have the space for them, they will never become mainstream. So they will remain something for corporate offices and people with too much money. (the latter of which is declining rapidly)

      Power costs money and LCD's use less (they also last longer than CRT's in general). For the general employee a 15" LCD for $250 is more cost effective than a 17" CRT (and probably more desirable to the employee). Depending on useage and power costs it'll pay for the delta in cost bet

  • The subject is probably the answer. If people are willing to pay the current prices for the convenience of a flat LCD monitor to recoup deskspace then the price may very well be fair. I'm considering the same to replace my son's 17" Trinitron on his desk because it's huge and takes up too much room to give him space to work. The flat screen LCD would work perfectly. I suppose you could say "Price fixing" with the the apparent disparity between the LCD monitor and the total cost of a laptop -- but it's r
  • Many of the laptop makers either own their own monitor factories (Like Sony) or get incredible volume discounts doing their own importing (say, Dell).

    Items that don't sell well in "retail" channels get a much higher mark-up to make up for the small volume. The same item in lots of 1000 or more over and over again will sell dirt cheap. Ever noticed the price per 1000 of your favorite cpu when it comes out?

    It's a bit of a catch-22. When customers buy more via retail channels, the prices will come down. When the prices come down, customers will buy more...

    Eventually the retailers will get there trying to compete with each other, but with "most" (me and you not among them) customers are perfectly happy with what's out there now, there isn't enough demand for a big retailer to start stocking larger quantities and begin the price death spiral we've grown to know and love about computer parts.
  • My guess is they will go up %20 over 5 years. Interestingly that is what wall street expects most companies to perform for an average rating.

  • As much as I would like to complain. . . (Score:4, Informative)

    by GeorgieBoy ( 6120 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:50PM (#5635170) Homepage
    The prices of LCDs has been steadily getter lower over the past few years. Even if prices seem a little inflated, it's not comparable to something like music CD prices, which have actually gone UP over the years. LCDs are becoming more attainable for the masses at this point, I don't see too much to complain about in this market. Wait for OLEDs and other (competiing) flat-screen technologies to become widely available, and we'll see what happens to LCD prices. Regarding the UXGA available for $1000 remark, it would seem the desktop market is devoid of models that offer greater than 1280x1024 resolution, even on large 19" LCD models - this makes laptop displays more attractive, which is unusual when comparing the possibilities on desktops vs. laptops.
    • with my 18" LCD for my parents at some 450 dollars. Not much more than an equivalent CRT a few years back.

      the desktop market has tons of UXGA and WUXGA (1920x1200) screens. I can think of three or four off the top of my head.

      I think the thing is that the demand isn't so high - because not everybody wants the huge space and people with bad eyes (read "anybody remotely aged") would rather sit at 1280x1024.

      I think "getting a laptop with UXGA for under 1000 is a giant lie, though. find one and I will buy it.

  • Other ways the market should be working (Score:5, Insightful)

    by corebreech ( 469871 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:51PM (#5635177) Journal
    I might be willing to hand over the big bucks for one of the bigger flat-panel displays, but to do so I would have to accept a number of dead pixels in the bargain. For instance, there's the Samsung 240T [samsungusa.com] which goes for about $3,000, regardless of whether the thing has dead pixels or not.

    Why aren't the 240T's with, say, eight dead pixels sold at a different price? I understand the issues with the manufacturing of these displays, that if they were to reject all but those without dead pixels the cost would be prohibitively expensive, but why can't they just count the number of dead pixels and set a price accordingly.

    Monitors are important; I end up looking at the thing most of the day for work and for play, I am willing to pay a premium for a very fine display. But to risk getting one with a bunch of dead pixels right in the middle of the screen, I mean, that would just suck really, really bad.


  • Like it says in the original article, everyone would like to have one of these sleek and "sexy" displays, which means there is a HUGE demand for them. Thus, the companies producing them want to see how long they can keep the prices up while emptying their inventories. After all, they need to cover all of their R&D costs, plus rake in the profits while they still can.


    ... HOWEVER, one has to wonder why the price is still SO HIGH! If they lowered the price by a couple hundred bucks on most models, th
    • Funny that the same thing is happening in the scsi world.

      At first scsi was about %20 more then ide when consumers and all macintoshes used it by default. Then as only bussinesses used it the price skyrocketed while the capacity of over the counter drives at compusa fell.

      Now the cheapest 20-gig drive is $1200.

      Also i want to to point out that scsi and ide drives are %90 identical! The only difference is the electronic interface.

      As long as some people need them and this market has money the price will rema

  • Numbers Way Off (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rashkae ( 59673 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:52PM (#5635186) Homepage

    How long has it been since you examined prices on LCD displays?? A 15" Samsung SyncMaster 152B can be had for roughly $450US, and I doubt your $1000 notebook has a screen this good. (And I see various 17" models price at $600)

    • This goes along with the comments in previous posts about volume discounts, as well as the parent post.

      I was fortunate to take advantage of a Dell offer recently with the purchase of a new system...I got their 18.1" model for $370 (thanks to a $200 discount with system purchase).

      I'm sure part of that is offset by the profit on the system, but still...one heck of a deal. And the thing is GORGEOUS, even compared to my 19" Trinitron.

    • Huh? A 15" LCD isn't UXGA, it is XGA (1024x768).

      I think 17" qualifies as UXGA (I think 1280x1024), which of course, can be had for $500. I am pretty sure one can get a laptop with 1400something x 1000 screen for $1000. Not exactly an apples comparison but the laptop has a better resolution screen than what you can find as a stand-alone monitor for $1000.

  • Different technology? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by donutello ( 88309 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:54PM (#5635192) Homepage
    I may be wrong but I was always under the impression that the LCD screens used in laptops were entirely different from the LCD screens used for monitors or TVs. I know, for example that my laptop screen does not do too well when viewed from an angle - not something I would tolerate from a monitor.

  • D/A A/D Problem (Score:4, Informative)

    by istartedi ( 132515 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:56PM (#5635206) Journal

    I've been researching info regarding using laptop LCDs with a PC, because I want to build a portable PC. One thing I discovered is that the connector on your monitor is essentially analog, whereas the signal in the video card is digital. A laptop can drive the digitial display directly with a digital signal, using LVDS (Low Voltage Differential Signaling) or a similar proprietary standard. Stand-alone LCD monitors take an anlog signal from your PC and convert it to digital. Not only do you have the cost of D/A and A/D conversion, you also have power consumption associated with this.

    The prices on the "controllers" that allow you to drive an LCD from a standard VGA connector are around $200 as separate items, mostly because they are low demand specialty items. Such controllers are integrated into stand-alone monitors, and economies of scale keep them from adding too much to the bottom line.

    So, while there is some justification for the increased cost of stand-alone displays, I tend to agree that the controller, case, and associated parts don't explain the entire difference.

    I'm less bothered by the prices, and more bothered by the fact that low-power technology is simply not available. For that matter, the entire laptop industry is full of artificial controls. However, it's encouraging to note that you can at least get laptop form-factor hard drives. Given time, I think some of the other tight controls will break down too, and we will start to see "screwdriver shops" building laptops from commodity parts. I eagerly anticipate the day that happens, as much as every incumbent laptop maker dreads it.

    • Use DVI; it's the standard digital interface between an LCD and the computer. All Apple's LCDs come DVI-only, and I'm sure other LCDs do as well.
  • The comparison in price really isn't a fair comparison. A $1000 laptop only has a 12 inch screen. An LCD TV needs to be larger than that. I wouldn't want to hang a 12 inch LCD screen on my wall to watch TV.

  • Also keep in mind ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mustangdavis ( 583344 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @09:56PM (#5635211) Homepage Journal


    ... that the people that produce and distribute LCDs are the same people that sell CRTs ... and if they lower the prices on LCDs, they'll kill their CRT sales ... which cuts off one of their revenue streams ..


    As soon as the majority of CRTs that are already produced are sold, the prices on LCDs will drop ... but these companies are still profiting off of old technology, so why should they cut off their nose to spite themselves?


    Just a couple more cents of mine ...

  • Indeed. The prices make no sense. LCD TVs very expensive because their so big, Automobile LCD TVs very expensive because their so small. Stoopid.

    It just means I won't buy one. No biggie. Well, I won't buy two...
    • Automobile LCD TVs very expensive because their so small. Stoopid.

      Actually automotive LCD are NOT expensive at all. You just need to know where to look. Here [partsexpress.com] is a good start. You can assemble a two monitor system in headrests (or one large monitor on ceiling) with a DVD/MP3 player and audio through existing stereo for under $500 if you install it yourself. Skip the dedicated DVD/mp3 player, hook up a Xbox or PS2 instead with a $30 power invertor and have a complete DVD/Game system for roughly the same
  • Like be hip man.

    Seriously, now that LCD displays are becomming the norm and CRT's seem to be on the out, why do these things have to be square?

    I wonder if we'll soon see LCD or similar displays start to conform to the other shapes we see in our world. I know I saw one in a car that had nothing but nice curves, except for the sharp angles of the LCD and it looked so out of place.

  • These numbers don't add up.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by eschasi ( 252157 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:02PM (#5635235)
    I don't recall seeing any $1000 laptops with UXGA resolutions (tho I could have missed it), and I seem to recall those prices or less for LCD panels.

    Further, it's not an apples and apples comparison. The laptop vendors buy wholesale, in comparatively huge volumes, lots of different sizes all at once, and likely committing to purchase volumes over time. IMHO those combine to drive the price way below what the average LCD monitor guy is selling.

    Come to think of it, something similar is going on with memory, processor and disk prices. Take your average laptop, price those components separately, and I'll be you find something that seems to be price gouging for all of them.

  • Walmart? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sfe_software ( 220870 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:02PM (#5635238) Homepage
    I thought the same thing for quite a while, but then I stumbled on this [walmart.com] at my local Walmart. For $400, I got an 18-inch LCD.

    It has an analog VGA connector (a good thing for me; most of my PCs lack digital output), a 160-degree viewing angle (I didn't think that was even possible -- 180 would be viewing completely from the side), 1280x1024 native resolution, and does a great job resampling other resolutions. I can't prove it yet, but I am pretty sure it uses subpixel rendering when resizing lower resolutions.

    So all the things I didn't like about LCDs a couple years ago -- limited viewing angle, bad resampling, digital-only connector, small size, and of course price -- are solved with this Walmart cheapo.

    I'm sure it won't last all that long, but for the price, it's really nice, easy on the eyes, and much sharper than my last monitor (an aging Trinitron).

    So, at one month old, mine has convinced me to never go back to a CRT.

    Oh, and in games or full-screen video it rocks. You still only get 60 actual refreshes a second, but that's more than enough (and unlike a CRT the light is constant anyway). Fast motion can be a tiny bit blurry, but nothing like my crappy Compaq laptop... and in games, the blur actually looks better in my opinion -- more realistic (or I'm just goofy)...

    • Re:Walmart? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sfe_software ( 220870 )
      I hate to reply to my own comment, but regarding the price similarities between a laptop and a stand-alone LCD. For $1000 you aren't going to get a laptop with a good screen (or a good anything else, really). Not with a wide viewing angle, good resolution resampling, etc...

      My Presario cost me $1500 in 2000, and its display is horrible. Resampling is simple pixel-doubling, which is impossible to read. Viewing angle is on the order of 15-degrees (possibly exagerated, but it's pretty bad). Backlight never tur

      • Re:Walmart? (Score:3, Informative)

        by be-fan ( 61476 )
        For about $1500, you can get a cheap P4 laptop with a 15" UXGA screen. Sure, the laptop itself is huge, bulky, and hot, but the screen itself is wonderful. There are only two companies that make 15" UXGA displays, Hitachi and Sharp. Both screens are excellent quality. They're sold under the brand-name "UltraSharp" (Dell) and "Flexview" (IBM) in mainstream laptops.
    • How is it for DVDs? I need to replace my 21" NEC MultiSync...
  • It seems like bigger screens are a lot more expensive. I have an hypothesis on why this is. I'll throw it out and see what people think.

    When screens are produced, there is a certain risk that a pixel is bad and that the screen must be discarded. If each pixel has an equal probability of being bad, then the probability that at least one pixel on the screen is bad grows exponentially with the size of the screen.

    If the price of the screens being sold must cover the costs of all those being discarded tha

  • Because... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheDanish ( 576008 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:04PM (#5635258) Journal
    They're maximizing their profits. That's what companies in a market to. They'll charge an amount such that (sales * (price - cost)) is a maximum. They're greedy capitlists. It's what they do. They're not out for charity. If you don't like it, don't buy them. Wait for the market to be saturated.

    What's that I hear? It's the redundant and troll mods. Oh, well, I've had good karma for too long.
  • I remember looking into turning an old laptop into an LCD and I was disappointed to find that the Analog/Digital converters present in LCDs are very expensive. (That's what allows you to hook it into your VGA port.)

    I don't know if this effects the big-number LCD manufacturers, but it is a good reason. There is now more support for all-digital video cards, but it would be market suicide to become known as "that LCD manufacturer whose products aren't compatible with any of our old systems".

  • People seem to have higher standards for the viewing angle on a desktop compared to a laptop. That is, on my laptop, I experience major color distortion if I look at the screen from a just a few degrees too high or low, whereas the LCD monitors I've seen don't have this problem (at least to this severity).

    Then again, my laptop is a few years old, and it's possible that disparity is much smaller now. Does anybody have a laptop and an LCD monitor roughly the same age that can confirm this?
  • ... when the people building and selling these devices realize that they can make more money overall by selling more at a lower margin than they can make by selling fewer at a higher margin.

    If the monitor costs $300 to manufacture, and the maker sells 1000 at $500 each, he earns $200,000. If he sells 10000 at $359 each, he will earn at least $590,000. I say at least, because at some point he is going to encounter a situation where the next one he sells costs less than $300, perhaps because he had to disca

  • Isn't there a tarrif on lcd screens? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nycheetah ( 172069 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:07PM (#5635282)
    I took an international business class at RIT and I distinctly remember my professor say that there is a tarrif on lcd screens for the US market. Apparantly US lcd manufactures were loosing sales to Japanese and other foreign markets because they could produce them much cheaper. Has anyone else heard of such a thing?
    • I distinctly remember my professor say that there is a tarrif on lcd screens for the US market.

      It was established in 1991, removed in 1993...and it applied only to components, not finished products, if I read it correctly:

      http://www.wtec.org/loyola/displays/c2_s1.htm

  • Okay, so a couple of things. If you buy a laptop, chances are the largest screen you will get will be 15", and the computer will cost ~$2000. That same 15" LCD screen can be bought for anywhere from $260-$400. If you are willing to spend $1000 on an LCD monitor then you can easily get a 19" display. If you buy a laptop for $1000 you will probably only get a 13" display, at best.

    TV's are another issue. People aren't willing to spend that kind of money for a small TV. If you are willing to spend $700 y

  • Different classes of screens (Score:5, Informative)

    by tshak ( 173364 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:10PM (#5635301) Homepage
    Notebook screens differ from desktop LCD's in that,

    * Their viewing angle is usually a lot worse

    * Their contrast ratio and brightness is usually worse

    * They're smaller by at least an inch or two

    * Their response times are generally a lot slower

  • Capitalism (Score:3, Funny)

    by chunkwhite86 ( 593696 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:12PM (#5635308)
    In a capitalist system, the value of an item is equal to what someone is willing to pay for it. As long as there are people paying X thousand dollars for a plasma TV, the retailer and manufacturer have no incentive to reduce the price.

    I'm casting my vote by not paying that high of a price. Just wait a little... It'll come down.

  • About time (Score:5, Interesting)

    by NMerriam ( 15122 ) <NMerriam@artboy.org> on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:12PM (#5635309) Homepage
    I've been wondering about this for over a year, ever since I got a ThinkPad A22p, which has a GORGEOUS 15" LCD that runs native at 1600x1200.

    I have a 19" CRT at home and a 21" at work, and this LCD beats both of them for quality, so i looked around to try and buy one. It literally did not exist -- you can but 19" LCDs with 1280x1024 (I suppose some people enjoy large pixels) but trying to buy one of these beautiful small LCDs was impossible. IBM doesn't sell them, nobody sells them.

    I'm totally baffled by this. We would love to buy these LCDs for our desktops if we could get them for $1,000+ but as it is we keep these huge 21" 75 pound monitors on peoples desks, and most of those are run at 1280x1024 to stay readable.

    I'm actually thinking about buying a cheap IBM and ripping it apart if I can get the screen cabling to go to the digital out on a GeForce card.

  • Where you getting your prices at? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Kraegar ( 565221 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:18PM (#5635342)
    Quick links:

    Samsung SyncMaster 171 S - Flat panel display - TFT - 17" - 1280 x 1024 - 0.26 mm [buy.com] $445.99
    Samsung SyncMaster 151 S - Flat panel display - TFT - 15" - 1024 x 768 - 0.30 mm [buy.com] $294.99

    That was in a very quick search (browsing current deals) at buy.com. Sheesh, it ain't that bad.

  • Quality control (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Logic Bomb ( 122875 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:18PM (#5635343)
    A lot may have to do with quality control. As anyone who's ever experience a dead pixel on his/her LCD monitor knows, most computer companies find as many as 4 or 5 dead/stuck pixels "acceptable" (i.e. will not replace under warranty). This is probably what is keeping costs down; tolerance of such imperfections brings the manufacturing yield way up. Perhaps customers purchasing standalone TVs expect 100% perfect displays, driving up both the initial cost due to low yield as well as warranty costs for replacing any product that develops a defect. Anyone checked into differences between warranties on computer screens and LCD TVs?
  • Prices are set by demand. If a manufacturer/seller can sell LCDs for $1000, they will. And if they can sell them for more as TVs, they will. If they're forced to sell them for less when combined with a laptop, they will.

    I'm always shocked when I hear complaints like this. Doesn't any school teach even basic economics anymore?! Why are such simple concepts so confusing for so many people?!

  • This is why HDTV will never happen in 2006 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GuNgA-DiN ( 17556 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:25PM (#5635381)
    The prices of flat panel LCDS, and HDTV's are fscking ridiculous! When they get to $300 let me know......

  • Not a fair comparison (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Thai-Pan ( 414112 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:27PM (#5635390) Journal
    There are a few things that you're not considering. They are the key differences between a laptop LCD screen and a desktop LCD.

    Desktop LCDs are made to have a very high brightness and high contrast ratio. Laptop LCDs are made for low power consumption, and thus don't need as powerful lighting units.

    Desktop LCDs are built to have a very wide viewing angle. This uses some fancy technology and manufacturing processes that are pretty expensive to accomplish this task. Laptop LCDs are made on purpose to have a narrow viewing angle so the guy next to you on the airplan can't see your screen. A narrow viewing angle makes the LCD's requirements much cheaper to achieve.

  • The SDRAM Effetct (Score:4, Interesting)

    by famazza ( 398147 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [onirazzam.oibaf]> on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:38PM (#5635437) Homepage Journal

    All I can see is that LCD producers are afraid of the price war that we have seen sometime ago among the SDRAM producers. I remember to read about the fear of some producers get out of buissines due to the small profit ranges.

    What could be better? A price war? Or avoiding producers going out of bussiness?

  • Example of price vs cost (Score:4, Informative)

    by sx10 ( 615919 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @10:51PM (#5635505)
    I recently bought an 18" LCD for myself from *insert major computer manufacturer here*. I am a purchaser for a university and our inside sales rep was nice enough to provide me with their approximate cost. No guarantees here by any means, just what our rep told me.

    For this 18" panel retail is $599, the university's price is $480, and cost is in the neighborhood of $375. About a 60% retail markup.
    In comparison, a 19" CRT retails for $249, discounted is $211, and cost is around $205. About a 20% markup.

    I don't expect the huge markup to end anytime soon, everyone is picking them up like hotcakes regardless.

    • Margins on these items are in the neighborhood of 11-15% (gross margin, different than markup). 11-15% is still premo margin in the commodity hardware marketplace which often sells at 2-4% over cost and counts on rebates and mfg incentives to increase margins to 10-12% 20-60 days after the sale is made. You got a good deal, but your rep is jerking you around so you like him.

      $G

  • Get real (Score:5, Interesting)

    by djupedal ( 584558 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @11:03PM (#5635558)
    .....when you buy an LCD monitor, the price is artificially low. When you by products that aren't in that league, you come closer to the actual costs involved.

    We all know that an automobile, in parts, is worth more than what you pay for a complete car off the lot. Try pricing the entire car, part by part, over the part's dept. counter, and then go to 3rd party suppliers, and watch how prices fluctuate. It is easy to imagine fixing if you don't understand how the market works.

    Nothing's fixed, beyond the normal markets forces (supply/demand) causing prices to level for certain products, etc.

  • just a thought (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ebuite37 ( 459068 ) on Monday March 31, 2003 @11:04PM (#5635565) Journal
    If I remember right, Sony and other manufacturers of CD based music just lost a lawsuit for falsely inflating the prices of CDs. Maybe there is something similar going on with the flatscreen business. As long as people keep buying at these high prices, they will continue to have high prices.

    Another thing to think about, though, is the vast quantities that laptop manufacturers purchase in order to keep the prices down. It's kinda like Windows. A bundled version probably cost 2/3 what a shelf copy costs (or less, I'm not sure).

  • Lots of misinformation going on here (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 31, 2003 @11:40PM (#5635766)
    Hi,

    I have to remain anonymous or my boss will kill me.

    I regularly order 50K+ units of TFT montiors, LCD TV, etc.

    The market price fluctuates for a number of reasons:

    1. Demand - ordering patterns of standalone monitors change season by season. For example, a glut of orders after Chinese New Year caused a worldwide shortage in March, with higher resultant prices

    2. Raw material availability - motherglass is only produced by 2 manufacturers worldwide. If they squeeze production or undersupply, then LCD prices rise.

    3. Shipping and insurance costs increase with war, pestilence and famine. March has been particularly bad this year.

    4. The manufacturers (mainly in China and S. Korea) are opportunists who will use the above points to increase their margins. Despite factory audits, price pushing still goes on and some comapnies are known to collude on prices.

    To be fair, when you take into account points 1 to 3, the manufacturers do have to offset fluctuations against average prices.

    The difference between laptop prices and monitors is simply a matter of the size of production run and the power of the bulk laptop buyers.

    Expect prices to rise as Bush proves just what a criminal he really is in the Middle East and beyond.

    If Perle etc. move against North Korea, a lot of the world's production capacity is going to be severely affected.

    As if that is the only problem with dropping bombs on innocent people!

  • DVI input to CRT monitors (Score:4, Insightful)

    by benwaggoner ( 513209 ) <`moc.tfosorcim' `ta' `renoggaw.neb'> on Monday March 31, 2003 @11:54PM (#5635845) Homepage
    The best thing about LCD's is that the display is perfect with a DVI input. Perfect pixel alignment, and no analog artifacts. LCD + VGA is almost worse than CRT + VGA, since analog errors look a LOT worse on a digital display.

    Alas, i do a lot of video testing, so I need a display that is analog resizable - a CRT. But that analog noise in VGA always worries me, since it's hard to prove what image errors are due to compression, and which are due to the cable. So, what I want is a DVI CRT! Something like a LaCie ElectronBlue 22".

    Anyone making anything like that. I don't mind if it's significantly more expensive than a normal monitor.

  • PC/TV Combo (Score:3, Informative)

    by dimension6 ( 558538 ) on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @12:39AM (#5636074)
    Samsung makes some great displays in varying sizes that combine video and PC inputs (some even have a TV tuner built in with a remote control). I have used a 170MP for a year now and it has worked flawlessly (17" LCD with built-in TV tuner and remote control). These units are FAR less money than the equivalent LCD TV: just doing a quick search at pricewatch.com brought up the the 170MP for $450 shipped (CompuHQ.com), and you can use it as a PC monitor!.

  • A Quick Economics Lesson (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gradji ( 188612 ) on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @12:42AM (#5636093)
    Every instance of a good being sold above its cost (or, more precisely, its marginal cost) is *not* an example of price fixing. In general, such mark-ups occur when supply is inadequate to cover existing demand. In the textbook models, it is always assumed that there are competitors with no real capacity constraints who are willing to undercut the imcumbent firms when prices are higher than cost.

    But in real life, especially in electronics markets, firms can face binding capacity constraints. A mark-up in the LCD market is an example of price-fixing only if the existing firms are creating an artificial shortage: i.e. they are explicitly or tacitly colluding to keep supply artificially low. The classic example of such efforts is OPEC and oil. However, if all firms are providing their capacity *and* the price at which quantity demanded equals quantity supplied is greater than cost ... this is not price-fixing; it's just the firms earning a short-run rent until more capacity is added.

  • Yeah, but if the laptop LCD breaks... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by samdu ( 114873 ) <samduNO@SPAMronintech.com> on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @01:20AM (#5636296) Homepage
    ...you'll notice that a vast majority of that $1000.00 price tag on the laptop IS the LCD.

  • What are you talking about? (Score:3, Informative)

    by singularity ( 2031 ) <nowalmart.gmail@com> on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @02:02AM (#5636452) Homepage Journal
    I was just shopping this week for a third LCD screen. I already have a 17" Apple and a 15" NEC.

    I found a Mag 14" for $150 after rebate at Best Buy!

    Also at Best Buy: A off-name 17" LCD for $350. I paid close to $900 for my 17" LCD only a year ago. You can now pick up a 17" Samsung for $400!

    Prices are definitely falling.

  • It's not gouging (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ryan Amos ( 16972 ) on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @03:28AM (#5636668)
    LCDs are incredibly finicky. You can get a laptop for sub-$1000, but it probably has a 15" or less screen. You can get a 15" screen for less than $250, because they're easy to make. Keep in mind that screen area increases exponentially with respect to the inch number. Not to mention that LCDs don't have the greatest fault tolerance. I recall reading somewhere that half of the LCDs they make have to be recycled because of dead pixels etc. The more screen space you have the more dead pixels, thus the more broken screens must be thrown away, so it's gonna cost you more.

    Don't go on slashdot screaming "PRICE FIXING" because that's really not the case. LCD prices have dropped SIGNIFICANTLY in recent years, to the point where a 19" screen is now somewhat affordable (around $700.) I know on a limited budget LCDs may seem expensive, but they're a lot cheaper now than they were 3 years ago (probably about half the price) and prices are still falling. OLEDs will come soon and that will cause even further price drops, because the OLED manufacturing process is less sensitive than the LCD process. In short, this article never should have made it to the front page, because it really doesn't line up with the truth.

  • Difference between gouging and fixing (Score:3, Informative)

    by salesgeek ( 263995 ) on Tuesday April 01, 2003 @09:24AM (#5637521) Homepage
    Little bobby wants to know: "What is the difference between price gouging and price fixing?"

    Price fixing: all the stores in town get togather and have a meeting and decide that everyone will sell 15" LCD monitors fo $299. The consumer is screwed.

    Price gouging: You break the screen in your laptop and the repair center says (after taking it appart), "what's on the hard drive." You say, "my only copy of last year's books." The repair clerk says, "That will be $1759, plus labor." The consumer is hog tied and gang raped.

    The important thing: to remember - either way consumers get screwed.

Slashdot Top Deals

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Close