Motorola Debuts Nano-Emissive Flat Screen 285
brain1 writes "PhysOrg is reporting that Motorola has developed a 5" flat-screen prototype display that uses carbon nanotubes. The display appears to promise lower costs for a full 40" HDTV screen bringing the price down to $400. The technology uses standard color TV phosphors, has a response time equaling CRTs', all in a package 1/8" thick. The display characteristics meet or exceed CRTs', such as fast response time, wide viewing angle, and wide operation temperature. All these are areas that LCDs are weak in. Is this the breakthrough we needed to finally make HDTV and flat-panel computer displays *really* affordable?"
Re:Very NICE press release! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Color palatte? (Score:1, Informative)
Still digitally driven. Ok, uses phosphors, which in the old CRT's were fired from 'color guns' and directed by electromagents (yoke) at the phosphors, exciting them and tossing off photons at desired wavelengths, in combinations of 3 phosphors (one red, one blue, one green) to form the particular color desired. As I understand it the LED is backlit and and filters the wavelength of light via layers of R, G and B (or suchlike) and due to the availibility of materials, quality of materials speed of electronics doing the switching, etc, it may or may not have better color resolution. Analog is a very difficult thing to simulate from digital. Will they make it work better than what we already have?
Re:At $400 a pop... (Score:4, Informative)
For 40"???
I upgraded my TV last year, to a 540p-capable model (DAMN I wish I'd waited another year), for just about a grand... at 32" widescreen. Absolutely beautiful for progressive DVDs, but still, now I regret not having a 720p (though, at least 1080i doesn't require scaling...)
$400 for a 40" TV does not suck, at all.
However, I consider this important for a totally different reason...
This doesn't sound like an LCD. It sounds like a CRT with each pixel having its own electron gun, in an eighth of an inch thick. Think about that for a minute, and then just try to stop drooling. The thought certainly impresses me, and I only watch about an hour of TV per week.
Near-infinite brightness, perfect contrast (even "real" CRTs can't do that), pixel-addressable (ie, infinite sharpness?), lightweight and low depth, presumeably low power consumption display costing less than either a comparable CRT or LCD having all the shortcomings of either of those technologies as they exist today.
Perhaps I read more into this than I should, but if it delivers half of that, time to invest in their stock...
Re:At $400 a pop... (Score:3, Informative)
For all intents and purposes we're talking about $400 for a 40" television which is cheaper than it is now for a 40". Your opinion about nothing worth watching in HDTV is just that, opinion. I have a 65" Mitsubishi RPTV and HDTV makes SDTV look like ass, doesn't matter what I am watching.
You fail to grasp the concept of everything HDTV offers, it's not just higher resolution, it's colour information as well. No more "rainbows" when you are looking at any image where the contrast changes dramatically (such as a checkerboard or black and white stripes). I can see the wood grain on Discovery HD when they are doing Trading Spaces. I can see the film grain when they show movies on TNTHD, I can see the fabric weave on Conan O'Brien's tie on Late Night.
The sooner everything goes HD the better. I just think they should have done more than increase the resolution by 2.25.
Re:plasma? (Score:5, Informative)
Comparison of Each Type (Score:4, Informative)
Very Fast Response Time
Perfect Viewing Angles
Massive and Heavy
LCD:
Lower Resolutions
Bad Viewing Angles
Bad Response Times (though recent 8ms panels reduce this immensely)
Expensive
Very Nice Colors
Thin and Light
Doesn't hurt the eye
Plasma:
Dies in 5 years due to gas leakage
Rear-projector:
Yea these suck from the sides or close-up so let's not even mention these
Carbon-nanotube (CNT) based Motorola Display:
Because it uses phosphors like in CRTs, good brightness
Fast response time
Good viewing angle
Thin and light
Cheap
DOESNT NEED BACKLIGHT (no more washed-out colors in sunlight)
Longevity compared to plasmas
Though this is a 5" prototype, it is a 5" section of a larger 42" CNT grid for a large HD display, so stop bitching about this being 5 inches
Other notes: Since CNTs are small and the phosphor technology is the same as in CRTs (excite phosphor atoms to give off photons by making appropriate electrical connections using switches...in this case, CNT's) I am assuming that we can actually get large high-resolution monitors (this one is 1280 x 720) perhaps just like the crazy CRTs with 2XXX by 1XXX resolution.
LCD Gamut (Score:5, Informative)
When an LCD screen tries to show "black" a large portion of the backlight is still showing through. Moreover, this varies across the screen.
This is an emissive technology using the same phosphors as a CRT. Banding might be a problem, but it's insignificant compared to the color range problems on LCDs. Banding is tolerable in many applications. Shimmering and lack of contrast is not. Most LCD manufacturers don't push to avoid banding because the contrast problem makes the LCD unsuitable for color sensitive work anyway.
In fact, this should get *better* range than a CRT, because any cell can turn completely off. Any but the highest quality CRT has a problem with rise time and such. The brightness level of parts of the image affect other parts.
Re:Not a troll (Score:4, Informative)
You don't need a digital TV to display a digital TV signal. You need a digital TV set top box. It will plug in to any display you want: LCD, plasma, rear screen, HDLP or 15 year old CRT.
http://www.dba.org.au/index.asp?sectionID=18&so=7& sd=asc [dba.org.au]
Lest we get overly excited. . . (Score:3, Informative)
Another thing that concerns me is the use of CRT-style phosphors. That means it will be subject to burn-in. Many people seem unaware of burn-in, but I expect it to become a big issue in a few years -- after the first generation of widescreen CRT and plasma sets start showing bars at either side when viewing full-screen content.
At my house we recently got a large Mitsubishi LCD panel. LCDs of course are not subject to burn-in. The wide viewing angle is impressive to me. Also, I was surprised by the default factory settings. There was no "red push" or "torch mode" or other typical kinds of programmed-in distortion to make it stand out in the showroom. I checked black level, contrast, sharpness, tint and color balance, etc. . . And I hardly changed anything from the factory settings. I just wish I had some actual HD test patterns to try on it, instead of a test DVD.
P.S. link to photos... (Score:3, Informative)
http://i4u.com/article3233.html [i4u.com]
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?date Publish=2005/04/21&pages=A8&seq=42 [digitimes.com]
Re:Killer App for HDTV (Score:3, Informative)
There was already a provision that if less than 85% of a specific market isn't able to receive a digital transmission, then the analog transmissions in that market are not required to go dark:
(from a FCC info page from 1997 [fcc.gov].Samsung has one too... Call it a FED (Score:4, Informative)
-Me
Re:Comparison of Each Type (Score:3, Informative)
Projection TVs don't have the huge viewing angles that CRTs do, but in practice it's not likely a problem as long as you have a decent place for the set in your room. The display appearance will dim rapidly as you move away from the optimal viewing angle vertically, but horizontally its perfect up to about 45 degrees from center (about the same as a modern LCD), with gradual falloff after that. Not many people would choose to watch from outside this angle anyways, so not really a problem in practice.
As far as the picture sucking up close, how is this different from any other TV? A big screen means big pixels up close, even at HDTV resolutions. I'm not sure how this is different for rear projection than for any other type of set.
If you were going to bring up a knock on projection sets it probably should have been convergence. My TV has 9 different convergences that must be individually adjusted to get the best picture (center, 4 sides, 4 corners). It's a bit tedious, and the crosshairs used to determine convergence don't always give the best indication of convergence (this likely varies between models and manufacturers). Not a big issue, but something that you don't need to worry about with any other type of display.
Re:Toshiba has similar in production this month... (Score:2, Informative)