Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Media Television Hardware

Intel To Produce Cheap LCoS Chips 272

Posted by timothy from the thinner-is-better dept.
SeattleGameboy writes "NY Times has an article about Intel's plan to produce low-cost liquid crystal on silicon (LCoS) chips. This could result in high-resolution 7"-thick rear-projection TV costing around $1000 by next Christmas (not to mention cheap projectors). I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel To Produce Cheap LCoS Chips More

Intel To Produce Cheap LCoS Chips

Comments Filter:

  • Google Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by pegr ( 46683 ) * on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:47PM (#7748109) Homepage Journal
    Obligatory reg-free Google link here [nytimes.com].

  • Google link for the tinfoil hat crowd (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I told them not to post the raw link.

    Here you go [nytimes.com].

  • "TrustedTV(tm) (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:48PM (#7748116) Homepage Journal

    Such a powerful marketing and technology combination could blend easily with Microsoft's media center software, which is aimed at using personal computing technology as the heart of home entertainment centers.

    That concerns me. Microsoft makes no bones about their "Trusted-this" and "DRM-that" direction. Considering their relationship with Intel I don't doubt that we'll see some sort of DRM crud built right into the TV to "protect consumers from themselves".
    • I'm still calibrating my tin-foil hat, so maybe you can give me a hand. What kind of DRM (which of course isn't mentioned anywhere in the announcement) would be integrated into a display device?
      • The kiind that makes it so nothing is decrypted until it gets to the screen itself -- closing the so-called "analog hole", unless you want to videotape the image from the monitor.

        • Re:"TrustedTV(tm) (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Ben Hutchings ( 4651 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:06PM (#7748309) Homepage
          I expect that in the future video cameras will detect watermarked images and refuse to record them.
          • That would be great.

            I'll get a watermark from a copyrighted product tatooed onto my forehead (or perhaps have my freckels re-arranged). Then I'll go around and steal stuff and rob people, because the security cameras won't record the image of my face; I'll be a walking pirated DVD.

            Woopie!
          • Wow, we're decades away from having AI good enough to do that! Detecting watermarks in a rectangular video stream is hard, sure. But in the real world? That's basically asking for reliable object and feature extraction from real-world images. This is canonically one of the things humans are incredibly better at than computers. Any watermark visible enough to be detected by a moving camera, at an angle on several axes, in variable lighting, etecetera, would be so blindingly obvious it wouldn't qualify as a w

      • Re:"TrustedTV(tm) (Score:3, Interesting)

        by grub ( 11606 )

        Many devices (such as existing LCD displays) can take a digital signal already. In the "Intel/MS" scenario, assume the data stream comes from an unsigned source: the screen could refuse to display.
        • Then you simply refuse to buy. Joe six-pack isn't dropping a grand on a TV he can't hook up his (insert any currently manufactured video device) to.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:"TrustedTV(tm) (Score:2, Informative)

      by ad0gg ( 594412 )
      mmm FUD...

      How does this have to article have to do with DRM? It mentions nothing about encoding of video signal just displaying it. TV still needs to get signal from some source(DVI or component inputs). So how exactly would DRM work, scramble the image on the display so you can't video tape it? DRM has to be farther up in the chain aka sattelite reciever,cable reciever, dvd. And all these output component or dvi.

    • Re:"TrustedTV(tm) (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 )
      at this point that hardly matters as the device has to accept analog signals to be of any use, and for anyone to buy it(so that they can use it with their dvd players, pc's and consoles, not to mention regular tv).

      -

    • Re:"TrustedTV(tm) (Score:5, Insightful)

      by leifm ( 641850 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:45PM (#7748619)
      You know, this whining about MS and DRM is getting old. MS sees an opportunity with DRM, and they are taking it, and I don't blame them as it could be quite lucrative. But in order for DRM to work, at least as far as DRM for music/movies, comsumers have to accept it. So if the terms of the DRM MS uses for whatever aren't acceptable to the general public it will fail, doesn't matter what MS does. I think Apple's DRM is fair, so I buy from iTMS, and others must feel the same way. MS DRM will work the same way, if people feel it's fair they'll buy into it, if not it'll die.

      If IntelTV has some kind of hardware DRM that won't let you TiVo or whatever, then don't buy one, and if enough people feel the same way and avoid the technology MS/Intel/whoever will have to adjust. You don't see DivX players or media in Circuit City anymore do you?

  • Article (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:50PM (#7748129)
    December 17, 2003
    New Intel Chip for Digital TV Could Remake the Market
    By JOHN MARKOFF

    SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 16 - The Intel Corporation is planning to do to digital television what it has already done to computing.

    At the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, which opens on Jan. 8, Intel is expected to disclose the development of a class of advanced semiconductors that technologists and analysts say will improve the quality of large-screen digital televisions and substantially lower their price, according to industry executives close to the company.

    Intel's ability to integrate display, television receiver and computer electronics on a single piece of silicon is likely to open new markets for a class of products - including plasma, projection and L.C.D. TV's - that now sell for $3,000 to $10,000.

    Intel, as well as other large chip manufacturers, should be able to expand the benefits of Moore's Law, named for Gordon Moore, a founder of Intel, which accurately predicted decades ago that computer chips would continue to double in capacity roughly every 18 months, while their price would continue to fall.

    "I think this brings Moore's Law to digital television," said Richard Doherty, a consumer electronics industry analyst who is president of Envisioneering, a consulting firm based on Long Island. He predicted that the low-cost display technology, which can be incorporated into the traditional rear-projection television sets, could lead to lightweight 50-inch screens only 7 inches thick for about $1,000, perhaps as early as the 2004 holiday season.

    Intel's expected decision to enter the television market is another powerful indicator of the computer industry's assault on the consumer electronics industry.

    Both Gateway and Dell are already selling large-screen digital TV's made for them in Asia, and Hewlett-Packard has indicated it will also enter the market. Such a powerful marketing and technology combination could blend easily with Microsoft's media center software, which is aimed at using personal computing technology as the heart of home entertainment centers.

    The Intel announcement, which is expected to be made at the show by Paul S. Otellini, the company's president and chief operating officer, would come just as high-definition digital television is beginning to take off in the United States.

    A spokesman for Intel said the company would not comment on Mr. Otellini's presentation to the consumer electronics show.

    This year, the Consumer Electronics Association, the trade group for the industry, said it expected revenue from digital television sets to surpass revenue from conventional analog sets for the first time. In June, sales of digital sets were running 110 percent ahead of sales in the month a year earlier.

    The technology Intel has been exploring is known as liquid crystal on silicon. It is one of a number of competing technologies, including a novel approach pioneered by Texas Instruments called digital light processors, or D.L.P.

    The Texas Instruments approach involves a silicon chip that has hundreds of thousands of microscopic mirrors that can tilt to reflect light. So far, it has been limited to relatively expensive digital TV's.

    By contrast, the technology used by Intel employs vast arrays of tiny electronic shutters that can alter the amount of reflected light, an approach that may allow companies to make big-screen TV sets using rear-projection technology that matches or exceeds the quality of flat-panel TV's at a much lower cost than plasma and conventional L.C.D.

    Although Intel is not expected to enter the market for digital televisions for at least a year, Philips Electronics, the Dutch manufacturer, and several American start-up companies have already begun offering liquid crystal on silicon, or LCoS, components and televisions.

    "LCoS had a Phase 1 in the mid-1990's," said Sandeep Gupta, chief executive of the MicroDisplay Corporation, a chip maker in San Pablo, Calif., that ha

  • Hmm... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JoeLinux ( 20366 ) <joelinux@ g m a i l . c om> on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:50PM (#7748133)
    As long as they can do everything the HP MP3130 can do, I'll be happy.

    brightness: 1800 peak ANSI lumens
    display resolution: 1024 x 768 True XGA
    colors: 16.7 million
    light source: 180-watt compact P-VIP projector bulb

    optics

    lens: Non-telecentric
    zoom capability: Digital and optical
    projection distance: Approximately 3.3 to 29.4 ft

    mobility

    weight: 3.8 lb
    dimensions: (w x d x h) 9 x 7.8 x 2.9 in

    connectivity

    video: Built-in full-screen NTSC/PAL/SECAM/HDTV video capability with S-video inputs (from DVD, Camcorder or VCR), HDTV (480p, 480i, 720p, 1080i, composite and component video
    computer connectivity: XGA, SVGA, VGA, SXGA, SXGA+, Mac Lc13", Mac II 13", Mac 16", Mac 19", Mac, Mac G4, iMac DV

    • Apples and Oranges (Score:3, Informative)

      by GrnyS ( 131646 )
      Isn't the HP MP3130 more than twice as expensive
      as the ~$1000 units based on this technology predicted by Doherty?
    • I'll be happy if they can give you a decent picture without the room light control you need with a projector.
    • Yeah, and 1024x768 is sub HD. You really want 1280x720 at a minimum. And in order to get as many pixels out of the screen as are being broadcast, you really need 1920x1080.

      I've been doing a ton of HD video authoring the last couple months. It's a startling realization to discover that a 1920x1200 23" LCD is the SMALLEST monitor that can be used for this kind of stuff! And for quality grading, I'm sitting there with my nose eight inches from the screen for a couple of hours at a time, looking for minute com

  • Oops, (Score:2, Funny)

    by ActionPlant ( 721843 )
    I'd be go do some retractions to my christmas wishlist.

    A year? That's not so long to wait. Then again, it's been how many years.

    It's about time. Now for some big-screen, high-res fragging.

    Damon,

  • You can always put it off ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by El Cubano ( 631386 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:53PM (#7748168)

    I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ...

    You can always put it off for another year. Eventually you just have to take the plunge and buy it, realizing that you will kick yourself in 6 months when the same product is available for 25 - 50% less. But if you keep putting it off, you'll never buy anything.

  • Forecasting. (Score:5, Funny)

    by saintlupus ( 227599 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:53PM (#7748171)
    I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ...

    Yeah, that's what I said when I read that HDTV was "right around the corner." In _Commodore Magazine_. In 1988.

    Long fucking corner, that's for sure.

    --saint

  • Oh really? (Score:5, Funny)

    by iamdrscience ( 541136 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:54PM (#7748176) Homepage
    Quoth the article:
    The Intel Corporation is planning to do to digital television what it has already done to computing.
    They're going to bully out competition and make ethically questionable deals with other companies (cable, movie and videogame most likely) to maintain their market dominance?

  • What about the Light Bulb? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by keep_it_simple_stupi ( 562690 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:56PM (#7748193) Homepage
    With current DLP projection (front and rear) systems, there is a relatively expensive light bulb to be replaced every 3-5 years at around $200 a pop. If this is the case with the LCOS technology as well, I don't think it will fare as well as predicted. Time will tell.

    • Re:What about the Light Bulb? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by trailerparkcassanova ( 469342 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:03PM (#7748282)
      Yeah, and those damn cars will never take off either if you have to replace the tires every 3-5 years at $300 a pop.

    • Re:What about the Light Bulb? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by djbentle ( 553091 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:05PM (#7748303)
      From the article: "The true market test only started this summer," he said. "Rear-projection D.L.P. systems are flying off the shelf."

      If it hasn't slowed down DLP, it probably won't slow this down either. Besides when you pay the $200 to replace the bulb in 5 years, your DLP will look brand new, exactly as it did the day you bought it. Try that with a five year old CRT rear projection set.

      David
      • Of course, in five years you'll likely be able to buy a better TV for $500, meaning few of the bulbs will be replaced.

        If this works out to $200 a year for a pretty decent thin high-def TV ($1000 for the set with an expected lifetime of 5 years), many will find it a good deal.
      • Fair enough... But you're paying minimum 10 grand for a (crappy) new car, which only requires a $100 set of (just as crappy) tires (for the slow at math that's 1% of the total cost). Even a $400 set for a $20,000 car ends up being just 2% of the total.

        Ok now the Current DLP TV's... $4000 for a 50" TV. $200 for a bulb. That's still only 5%.

        Now if we have $1000 TV's requiring a new $200 bulb every 3 years, that's a whopping 20% of the purchase price!

        Of course none of this proves anything. So move along
        • Okay, so how many of you have inkjet printers out there?

          $199 printer
          $ 40 cartridge
          sounds to me like %20 of the purchase price...

          That of course leads to (by analogy) cheaper third party light bulbs that turn out not to last as long, and home filament repair kits...

        • Consider what will happen when there are more sets in operation that need these bulbs.

          Just like some small cars with strange tires cost more..
    • Like your still going to have it in another 3-5 years!
    • Sure, for big displays you're probably going to end up with a Real Light Bulb (i.e. projection bulb), or maybe a Carbon Arc setup like in a spotlight (though they're awfully high maintenance for a home TV set...)

      But couldn't you make a smaller display with

      • 3 lcos chips
      • 1 each red, green, blue high output LED
      • translucent screen

      The LED's pretty much never burn out, so it would be a really long-life solution. On the other hand I'm not sure how bright of an LED you can get these days...

  • Moore's law for TVs??? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Beek ( 10414 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:56PM (#7748195) Homepage
    Are we going to have to upgrade our TVs as often as we upgrade computers?
    • "Are we going to have to upgrade our TVs as often as we upgrade computers?"

      Perhaps. And if M$ manages to entrench themselves into all of our tvs in the future, expect to have to download service packs for your tv too. Oh, and don't bother trying to change the channel, you'll just get a BSOD.

  • Cheap panels (Score:5, Interesting)

    by presearch ( 214913 ) * on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:57PM (#7748207)
    Will there be $1000 panels or $3000 panels with a much higher profit margin?

    Then again, there might be a new, huge mass market for large panels...

    "Behind Winston's back the voice from the telescreen was still babbling away about pig-iron and the overfulfilment of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously.

    Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover,
    so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard."

  • waiting, yay. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:57PM (#7748213) Homepage
    This could result in high-resolution 7"-thick rear-projection TV costing around $1000 by next Christmas (not to mention cheap projectors). I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ..."

    Yeah, it could result in that. But how long have we been waiting for stuff that could happen in a year. Broadband over power lines rings a bell. If you'd been waiting for that, you'd still be on dialup.

    • Re:waiting, yay. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by keep_it_simple_stupi ( 562690 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:59PM (#7748234) Homepage
      Yes but there's a difference. Broadband over power lines is technically unfeasible because of the ridiculous amount of radio interference generated. LCOS screens are already available. You are correct in another way, we have to wait and see if the price really drops or if they just enjoy a higher profit margin.

  • AAAAAAAARGH (Score:5, Funny)

    by GMFTatsujin ( 239569 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @03:57PM (#7748223) Homepage
    Intel, as well as other large chip manufacturers, should be able to expand the benefits of Moore's Law, named for Gordon Moore, a founder of Intel, which accurately predicted decades ago that computer chips would continue to double in capacity roughly every 18 months, while their price would continue to fall.

    Can we please, please, PLEASE stop mentioning Moore's Law in every single freaking article about Intel?

    What are they going to do: make televisions cost half as much and go twice as fast after 18 months?

  • LCoS is not as new as the article suggests (Score:4, Informative)

    by Zed2K ( 313037 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:03PM (#7748283)
    "several American start-up companies have already begun offering liquid crystal on silicon, or LCoS, components and televisions."

    Toshiba has had an LCoS TV out for quite awhile now. I believe Mitsubishi also has one out. They are super expensive though. Native 1080p resolution and really thin though.

  • hah (Score:3, Funny)

    by happyfrogcow ( 708359 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:03PM (#7748289)
    <obscene gesture>I got your 7 inch thick rear projection right here</obscene gesture>
    • rear projection? Are you deformed? I'm all about my 12" front projection... but that's just me.
      • After he does the tuck, it still measures 7" out behind him.

        aw geez... why did I put even a LITTLE bit of thought into that one...?

  • Breakdown of the different HDTV technologies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mh_tang ( 307188 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:04PM (#7748293)
    From what I understand, the main drawback of plasma besides price is that there is permanent burn-in of images. So if you watch the news, the tickers and other graphics at the bottom of your screen might leave permanent traces. Even worse, since most programming these days is still in 4:3 format, you will have black bars on the sides of your screen; I'm not exactly sure if the black is either burned in, or if it is turned off does the center get unproportional wear and tear over time?

    DLP is nice, but a main issue with DLP is that you have to replace the bulbs every 3-4 years. Currently, bulbs for DLP units range anywhere from $300-600, which is no small investment. Of course, DLP is also a projection format, so the viewing angle is not as wide, and from what ones I've seen at the store, the blacks aren't quite as dark as the plasmas or traditional CRTs.

    Does the LCoS technology address these issues of screen burn in, viewing angle, accurate colors & brightness, and bulb replacement?

    • LCoS doesn't have any burn-in problems. There was talk awhile ago about a type of "memory" problem that would fade but it wasn't a permanent burn in. I don't know if that was just a software problem or a hardware problem or if it even exists anymore.

      The biggest problem with the big tv's is burn in. That is permanent. Viewing angle is not that big of a deal these days. Accurate colors and dark blacks is a problem, but that can be solved by getting the box calibrated correctly.
      • Is the memory problem related to "image stick" that can happen in LCD's? From what I understand, if the LCD drive signal has a DC component to it then the liquid crystal may not relax back to an undriven state. This can be avoided if LCD drive electronics are designed properly.
        • I haven't personally seen it, I just read some postings on it, but it sounds just like that. There were screen shots taken with a digital camera. It looked like burn in but would fade after awhile. It might not be a problem anymore and might have just been related to it being brand new technology at the time.

    • DLP is nice, but a main issue with DLP is that you have to replace the bulbs every 3-4 years. Currently, bulbs for DLP units range anywhere from $300-600, which is no small investment. Of course, DLP is also a projection format, so the viewing angle is not as wide, and from what ones I've seen at the store, the blacks aren't quite as dark as the plasmas or traditional CRTs.

      There is a new TI chip on the market that greatly improves the contrast levels of DLP. Not quite as good as a really good CRT, but ce

    • Re:Breakdown of the different HDTV technologies (Score:4, Informative)

      by swb ( 14022 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @05:57PM (#7749153)
      From what I've read on the AVS plasma forums, burn-in is pretty much a non-issue for typical television watching, especially if you watch 4:3 content in one of the 16:9 stretch/zoom modes the sets support. We have two plasmas in our conference room and they're used significantly with presentations (you know, long-winded marketers that have a logo in the bottom right the whole 3 hour meeting..), and they show no signs of burn in. My concern with plasma is longevity -- there are some concerns about how long a plasma display can last.

      Lamping is a serious technology problem for DLP, LCoS and LCD rear projections, and each technology has some particular issues unique to it, such as the DLP colorwheel and LCD reaction times.

      I personally expect direct-view plasma to become a more popular option, and a cheaper one. It has a very bright image, is thin, and does not require any lamping. I think in a couple of years 42" HD plasmas will be easily available for $2000 and ED models for even less.

      I personally bought a Sony LCD RP. Cheaper than plasma today, and I think a superior image to my eyes than DLP. There really aren't many LCoS sets on the market now, or at least few at a price point competitive with alternatives like LCD or DLP.

  • In other news: (Score:5, Funny)

    by holysin ( 549880 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:12PM (#7748355) Homepage
    AMD has announced it will be producing even lower cost chips that while rated for lower resolution, achieve higher resolution, but only when used with much larger cooling solutions.
    • i know this is a joke, but with current generation products, the intel stuff runs a LOT hotter then amd stuff does.

      Ever since intel moved to the P4 line, they've had constant heat issues and the only reason its not totally out of control is that the P4 has a kick ass thermal throttle built into it that clocks down the cpu if it starts reaching certain thermal limits. You can even remove the heatsink outright, and the cpu will clock down to something absurb. Clamp the heatsink back on, and the cpu will ru
    • "AMD has announced it will be producing even lower cost chips that while rated for lower resolution, achieve higher resolution, but only when used with much larger cooling solutions."

      Greaaaat. Next thing you know you'll walk into your friends dorm room to be confronted with a huge flat panel tv, with a transparent case, internal strobe lights, and liquid nitrogen cooling systems.

      Perhaps I should register www.tvcasemods.com.

  • Intel... (Score:5, Funny)

    by DaneelGiskard ( 222145 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:12PM (#7748356) Homepage
    The Intel Corporation is planning to do to digital television what it has already done to computing

    Get 3.999998456 digital television sets for the price of 2.00000000 + 2.000000000? ;-)

  • chip availibility/inventors place in 21st centry? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:13PM (#7748369)
    I hope Intel does the right thing and make this chip availible to experimenters as TI refuses to make their reflective mirror chip availible to experimenters. That way you could make your own displays/multiple screen displays. It's too bad companies like TI refuse to sell their (refflective chips) to the exprimenter/small product developers, we have reached an age where nobody works on their own cars anymore or people don't build as much things anymore (we just buy stuff)...I know that it's more expensive to build stuff, but the whole computer revolution was started by people working in their basement/garages developing cool stuff. The high-tech culture we live in is determined to a great extent by the ability of the people around you to be able to develop new products, not just big companies (look at linux). I hope that someday cheap fpga's come around and eventually real cheap nanotech allows everybody the ability to make something new.

  • put off buying a new TV (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NonaMyous ( 731004 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:17PM (#7748392)
    "I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year ..."

    I am putting of purchasing a new HDTV because I don't understand what the impact of the broadcast flag [eff.org] will be TVs and related products. I will be very upset if my expensive digital TV stops working 2005.

    • Actaully, better to buy now in that sense...
      The broadcast flag will have no effect on what is currently being made. It will only affect devices that are built to be affected

  • is LCoS for you (Score:5, Informative)

    by HogGeek ( 456673 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:28PM (#7748481)
    Read this [projectorcentral.com] to find out...

  • rich commentary (Score:2, Funny)

    by tr0p ( 728557 )
    "I guess I can put off buying a new TV for another year..."

    I love the wiseass remarks at the end of every news post on here. Its more fun than reading the articles ^^

    "In other news, Intel has announced a new 64-bit computing platform costing around $1000 by next Christmas..."

    I guess I can put off buying a new computer for another year..."

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:56PM (#7748725)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • No! (Score:2)

    by R-2-RO ( 766 )
    The current high priced bulky projection TVs may be 1000 bux next year. But im sure any 7" thick lcos whatever will be high-dollar.

  • Content (Score:4, Funny)

    by raider_red ( 156642 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @04:58PM (#7748748) Journal
    Now, can someone please make a television that shows something worth watching?

  • "This could result in high-resolution 7"-thick rear-projection TV costing around $1000 by next Christmas (not to mention cheap projectors). "

    Yeah...it'll cost $1000, and the RIAA will start offering non-DRMed music at a reasonable price in whatever format we want. I absolutely HATE how these types of articles make things sound affordable, simply by adding the qualifier "could". Yeah, it COULD also cost $1, but it'll never happen. When this new technology comes out, they will gouge us for all they can, a

  • Rainbows with DLP and LCOS (Score:3, Informative)

    by adenied ( 120700 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @06:08PM (#7749229)
    One of the problems with both DLP and LCOS is that about 10% of people see rainbows when there are fast moving bright spots on the screen. If you can't see them, DLP and LCOS are pretty nice. But if you can see them (like me unfortunately) the experience is terrible.

    With DLP this has to do with the spinning color wheel that illuminates the DLP chip with the proper light color. I've read that if they could speed up the spinning by about 5x it wouldn't be noticeable. I guess the reason you see the rainbows is because the colors reach your eye at different times. Someone else can explain it better I'm sure.

    I was very excited about LCOS because there's no color wheel and the rainbow problems weren't supposed to be there. I was very disappointed when I went to look at Philips Cineos LCOS units however because I saw rainbows as well. Not as pronounced as DLP, but they were there. Not good.

    Luckily soon after that I came across Sony's Grand Wega LCD projection sets. These are beautiful and worth checking out if you want a TV now. I got the 50" one and am extremely happy with it.

  • Video windows? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2003 @07:37PM (#7749796) Homepage Journal
    LCDs use a passive, reflective backing behind the polarized crystals to produce an opaque display. How about a double layer, with a color LCD over a black LCD? Then we could have LCD windows with video displays, and controllable opacity. Like Tyrell's room in _Blade Runner_, but with movies playing on the inside.

Slashdot Top Deals

As the trials of life continue to take their toll, remember that there is always a future in Computer Maintenance. -- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"

Close