40" OLED Television Revealed at SID 196
deglr6328 writes "Seiko Epson has unveiled a massive 40 inch OLED display prototype at this years Society for Information Display (SID) symposium in Seattle. The display was printed on to a backplane containing the drive electronics with a specialized inkjet process using Phillip's PolyLED technology. Samsung and Phillips also showed large scale OLEDs they say can also be scaled up to 'television sizes.'"
Wow, I now I understand the implications of OLED. (Score:2, Insightful)
I read a little while ago about how when OLED displays age they loose there color. At the time I thought that while a TV may look nice at first, who wants to spend a grand on a TV that is gonna look bad in a couple of years.
I was assuming of course that the price point of a large screen OLED would be comparable to a large screen LCD which is comparable to a traditional set.
Sometimes it is nice to be wrong.
Basicaly it sounds to me like they create a large circuit board and 'print' the pixels on top of it with a large ink jet printer.
I know I am simplifying it tremendously, but it sounds a hell of a lot less costly then traditional and LCD sets.
Am I right to assume that something like this could seriously come down in price?
I imagine that eventually the price point would be so that when the colors faded you pitched the old set, bought a new one and thought nothing more of it then if you were upgrading a video game console.
Can't wait (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Wow, I now I understand the implications of OLE (Score:2, Insightful)
No reason why it couldn't come down in price just like anything else. More importantly though the lifetime of the OLEDs is increasing, it's hoped that by 2008/2009 they'll be good enough to be used in commercial TV sets properly.
Re:Wow, I now I understand the implications of OLE (Score:2, Insightful)
Great, now we're churning out even more consumer waste to put in landfills.
How can this make you happy?
Re:inkjet is one thing, but what about on a press (Score:2, Insightful)
Who cares how long they last? OLED manufacturing should be cheap enough that you could realistically replace your screen every year and still be under the price of a similar LCD screen after 5-10 years. I know I'd be willing to buy a cheap new screen every 1000 hours or so if I could replace my current RPTV HDTV set with a nice flat panel that doesn't have the problems of plasma (horrible burn-in potential) at a price point much lower than LCD or plasma displays currently available.
This could open up a whole new avenue of revenue to TV manufacturers, following the razor/razorblade model. It'd be nice to see a standard set for replaceable screens, so even though I may buy a Mitsubishi set, I could replace it with a Pioneer screen or a Sony screen, or a no-name Chinese knock-off if I want to save a few dollars. Unfortunately, I doubt that'll happen.
Re:Wow, I now I understand the implications of OLE (Score:2, Insightful)
At least it sounds more recycleable; it's apparantly a PCB + organic compound, which isn't that bad, right?
This may be redundant.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, anything really (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a win for me, any way you hash it. First, technology is going to improve enough in 20 years, that I'd want to replace my speakers before then anyhow. This lets me basically stay on the cutting edge all the time. Second, it makes damage much less of a worry. I have to be careful with these speakers, as it would be a major expense to replace them. I would not need to worry so much if I'd only be out $100. Finally, the value of a dollar today is more than the value of a dollar tomorrow (because of inflation). I'd be better of economically to spend $100/year and invest the rest than $2000 now.
All that OLEDs will need to do is be cheap enough in comparison to the competition, and the disposable idea works fine. If they cost as much as LCDs, no thaks, I'll take the LCD and be happy. If they cost 1/10th as much, sure I'll take them, even if they have to be replaced once a year.
This isn't out of the realm of possibility. Remember these things are PRINTED on sheets using ink jets. Cheap technology, and we have much cheaper mass-production printers called web presses. Also the only part that needs to be replaced is the OLED screen itself, not the supporting electronics. S0 it really could end up being like razor blades. But the more expensive holder (handle) up front and then replace the screen (blade) when it needs it.
As an added bonus, OLEDs are organic (hence the O) and so not nearly the environmental problem of things like CRTs, even if replaced more often.
Re:purple? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well, anything really (Score:4, Insightful)
I wish people wouldn't say that everything "organic" is good - its a chemistry term. Organic in this context doesn't mean natural. The material in these displays is not found in nature and is quite probably highly toxic. Organic (in the chemistry context) means made of carbon and hydrogen and possibly including other atoms (for instance one of these OLED molecules contains Fluorine). The nerve gas sarin is "organic" is it good for you? What about DDT? How about plastic? Yes; plastic is organic but it doesn't biodegrade.
Ok. I have got that off my chest time to go back to lurking
Re:This may be redundant.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes.
It seems regular ol' televisions have gone down in price, why not these larger flat panels?
Completely different technology.
Is it going to be another 10-20 years before I can afford a reasonably priced unit?
No, more like 3-5 years. Just like rear-projection HDTV's used to be super expensive, now you can get them for $2000.
But I wouldn't look for a big price drop with flat panels until OLED starts cranking...
Re:Well, anything really (Score:2, Insightful)
When was the last time you bought razor blades? The blades are way more expensive then the handle. hell they give you the handle for free so that you will buy the blades.