Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!
Sony: 1,000,000:1 OLED TV on sale in 2007
engadget.com — Sony is finally ready to move an OLED TV into production sometime "within 2007." Sorry, it's not the 27-incher, yet, their first production unit will throw 1024 x 600 pixels across that wee 11-inch, 1M:1 contrast panel capable of 8-bit RGB color and covering more than 100% of the NTSC color gamut. Oh, and it's only 3-mm thick.
macbot- 823 diggs
- digg it
- DAGlasgow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+251m:1 contrast ratios...a fantastic step in the right direction...a baby step...but in a way a big leap too. I can not wait!
- ashwin100, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Holy guacamole that is ULTRA thin! This technology is perfect for PMP's, Laptops, in Car Headrest's... the only thing worrying me at the moment is the very short life of the unit, but I'm sure that will be fixed in due time.
- bigredgpk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13ppl where worried about Plasmas too but that has been a moot concern a year later, i'm sure the same will happen with OLEDs
- ScornForSega, on 10/12/2007, -25/+6lol @ 1st generation Sony product.
- TomPlansMedia, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2...but oled displays (bio?)degrade. the screen will look like ***** within five years. this was discussed on digg yesterday for *****'s sake.
- praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -5/+2Do OLEDs use a lot of power? If not...they should begin putting them in laptops.
- dattaway, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8OLED's use almost no power.....until the pixels are illuminated. The efficiency isn't very high and colors like blue will burn quickly. Expect annoying screensavers to combat this.
- NoHandle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33They are like LCD but better in every regard except one, life span. They die out after a measly 5,000 hours, with more degradation to the blue colors first.
They are thinner, cheaper to make, look better, use far less power and will be the future. They just need to fix the life span issues and I believe they have made some headway on this.
Four sentences all starting with "they"... - rune420, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Yeah 1M:1 is good, but 8-bit RGB? Doesn't that mean just 256 different colors?
- CDHarrisUSF, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3@ rune420:
8-bit LCD panels have 256 steps in each color... combining to form a total of 16.7 million colors. They have to drop down to 6-bit to get the really low response times, then use dithering to approximate 16.2 million colors.
Having not read the article, I would assume that's what they were talking about. - zcreem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+78 bit per colour, so 256 shades of red, 256 of blue, and you guessed it 256 of green.
24 bit in graphic card terms.
Edit, beat me to it! - retral, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4It'll be ridiculously expensive for quite a while.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@NoHandle: Yep. Just like they need to fix the not being able to build anti-gravity cars issues. It will all be patched up very soon by anonymous, faceless scientists.
- SomaSynth, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3"1m:1 contrast ratios...a fantastic step in the right direction...a baby step...but in a way a big leap too. I can not wait!"
My CRT had a one hundred thousand billion trillion quadrillion to 1 contrast ratio... so we still have to improve this thing a few billion trillion quadrillion times. Good progress though. - Blizaine, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3wow look at the picture quality and color saturation in the angled shot! talk about awesome off-axis viewing!
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You're forgetting that there's no standard way to measure contrast ratio. They basically just invent numbers.
- skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2***** Sony.
- Tuplex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@somasynth
wtf are you talking about man? contrast ratio for a CRT is perhaps slightly better than, but certainly comparable to any LCD on the market today. Those LCD's are listed, sometimes as high as 2000:1 contrast ratio... I don't know what the hell you're trying to say with that rediculous statement about your CRT's contrast ratio. - NoHandle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Osjpr:
It is a new technology and they are making headway on expanding how long the displays will last. Give it time and they will definitely be a very solid rival for LCD. The significantly lower production cost and energy consumption alone make it very promising for laptops and phone displays. Everyone is replacing those every 2-3 years anyways.
I am not familiar with the components in the OLED displays. Does anyone know if they are more toxic than what is currently in LCD (mercury), Plasma (xenon and neon gas) or CRT (you don't even want to know, let's just say don't ever break one open) - bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1But they are talking 11 inch screens. Who the fuhq cares?
Call me when they are making these in 40+ cheaper than current LCD's - SomaSynth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"wtf are you talking about man? contrast ratio for a CRT is perhaps slightly better than, but certainly comparable to any LCD on the market today."
I didn't expect many to understand my satire. Any display that can 'turn off' a black pixel has what is effectively an infinite contrast ratio. Suggesting that display is 1,000,000 : 1 is perhaps only slightly less correct than suggesting it is 1,000,000,000,000 : 1. The problem with a marketing tactic is, you have to stop somewhere. I can't imagine marketing the contrast ratio correctly as 1:0 would appeal to the consumer.
And no, CRT contrast ratio isn't 'perhaps slightly better' than LCD contrast ratio. - themastersb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1The best product since the PS2.
- sinembarg0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This 1M:1 contrast ratio is *****. It's just a number. With OLED, any panel has an undefined contrast ratio (divide by zero). OLED needs no backlight, and since contrast ratio is defined as brightest white over darkest black, ah ***** it: "Infinite contrast ratios can be achieved by devices capable of emitting no light at all as their darkest color."
"One of the great benefits of an OLED display over the traditional LCD displays is that OLEDs do not require a backlight to function."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_ratio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED
- domokunt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Hey buying this makes complete sense... its still counts as 40 inch if i press my face against it right? mmm saliva covered oleds
- RetroRufio, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8and thanks to the 1M:1 contrast ratio, that saliva will look so realistic!
- okaroleo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6no it won't, not at 1024x600 resolution.
- wageslaven, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6Can I get one of those Free if I promise to buy a PS3? Or will it be the other-way-around? Free PS3 with OLED TV!
- trer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Imagine your car dashboard displaying your speed, tachometer, fuel, etc. information on an OLED screen. Talk about cool.
- oracleofmist, on 10/12/2007, -11/+20Imagine telling the officer, sorry officer i don't know how fast i was going, my oled screen is burned out.
- betterth, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15@oracle
Clearly they would fix the lifespan issues before it went into something that required that kind of longevity and reliability.
But, attacking new technologies weak points is cool too. Everyone loves bashing the next greatest thing because it hasn't gone through a couple years of revision, right? - CDHarrisUSF, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9For the sake of the argument, let's assume the following:
1) You probably don't drive more than two hours per day.
2) The screen doesn't need to be blue.
3) Even if it IS blue, the lifetime's have been drastically improved:
"Cambridge Display Technology and Sumation announce rapid progress in the development of longer lifetime blue light emitting polymers suitable for full color, video capable P-OLED displays. The latest data show a lifetime of 20,000 hours from an initial luminance of 400cd/m², equivalent to over 320,000 hours from 100cd/m². This represents a three-fold improvement over the lifetime announced a year ago, and demonstrates the fruits of the collaboration by the development teams and the strong focus on this area. It is believed that there is great potential to make further dramatic improvements."
At that lifespan (20,000 hours of use) running for two hours per day, even a blue display could last for over 25 years before going from 400cd/m^2 down to 200cd/m^2 (which might even be uncomfortably bright while driving at night). If you don't need blue, it would probably be in the 100+ year period at the same brightness levels. - pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I would die a terrible death.
- bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Imagine the nightblindness and slamming into a deer from it.
- Ub3rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Sure it will be. I think they've been saying this about SED for the last 5 years.
Who the hell is going to shell out big bucks for an 11", non-HD TV that will only reasonably last 4-5 years?- rcjdamaca, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2the people who buy it will i think.
- Bardak, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2an OLED tv won't last much longer than a year
as for the non-HD part it's_11_inches - betterth, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7It's 1024x600
"Non HD" = "SD" which is 480x360
1024x600 = is 720p HDTV with a nonstandard resolution (in between 16:9 and 16:10)
What I mean is, it sure as hell is HD - Ub3rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Sorry betterth, you are incorrect.
NTSC (SD) is technically 525 lines of resolution in a 4:3 format. It effectively translates out to 640x480 for most people. The arguement could be made that its 720x480 if you're talking about a full D1. I have no clue where the hell you pulled 480x360 from.
HD is defined in the US as having AT LEAST 700 lines of resolution and a 16:9 format ratio. This TV meets neither requirement. Anything less can only legally be called EDTV at best. - betterth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ub3r
My bad. It is 525, but the last 45 or so aren't used in the image, they're used for various other aspects of picture quality. If you hook an SDTV to a computer via S-Video, the resolution is very close, or identical to 480x360. My mistake.
- CitizenBane, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4But will it contain a rootkit?
Of course it will!- Sofocore, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7what the ***** is wrong with you dude we are talking about a new advancement in T.V. technology and you make a comment about this? why? because its Sony? Sony believe or not makes great technology and you should at least appreciate what they are trying to do for the future of T.V. screens and monitors
- DollaDollaBill, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Sony BMG, the music division, is vastly different than any other part of the company, troll.
- wush, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2if (article contains "Sony")
post("LOL ROOTKIT LOL")
- nalgae, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3"more than 100% of the NTSC color gamut"
Looks like they put in a 110% effort into this one. - TheDiggPig, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0the 11inch is coming this year NOT the 27inch! still years away before it can compete with lcd and plasma's.
- TheDiggPig, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Laser tv's is what on the horizon,cheap too!
http://www.about-electronics.eu/2007/04/05/laser-tv-here-soon-watch-out-plasma-lcd/ - wiirdo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5No price is listed. I'm afraid to ask.
Can I get this display on a t-shirt? - niradg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8if you haven't seen OLED in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EmB1wGdPK4- timlopez, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4Wow - but, I'm still viewing the video on my LCD monitor. So, what are you trying to show me? I guessed it would have moving pictures.
- JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1it's so thin.
- wompninja, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8a wiimote will sail right through this, good-bye twenty grand!
- Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Due to the way OLED displays are manufactured, they're supposed to be insanely cheap. A fraction the cost of comparable LCDs. Of course, to pay off R&D costs, they'll probably be pretty expensive at the start.
- Crazymaniacc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Who needs OLED when there's laser tv coming up?
- Ub3rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You mean GLV? You understand that Sony bought out all the patents on that a while back and realized that it wasn't financially feasible to bring to market. The red and green lasers were reasonable, but the blue lasers were far too expensive. This was bad news since they apparently paid a lot for all the patents. Two or three years later, they started selling PDD drives and manufacturing blue laser diodes. PDD eventually became Blu-Ray. Sony has been using this format to subsidize the cost of blue lasers so that they can make money on GLV. If you thought you needed Blu-Ray or even digital satellite/cable to watch HD, you are wrong. They've been doing it since the mid 80's in Japan using MUSE broadcasts (that's an analog scheme).
- inotocracy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Anyone notice it had two power plugs running into it? I thought OLEDs had low power consumption?
- zcreem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The first is the normal mains power lead, the second is the Eco low energy power cord for people with Ethanol sockets.
- inotocracy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Ah, gotcha. Wasn't aware of that. Good stuff.
- zcreem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+85000 at 5 hour per day is 1000 days, which is about 3 years, might not seem long but at the speed of todays developments, I am sure we will want a new one before then.
- mywhitenoise, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1I sure as hell don't watch 5 hours a day. What a way to waste your life.
- frednofr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@mywhitenoise
what are you doing on digg? - norashers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0i disagree with digging down mywhitenoise.
5 hours a day of watching a tv screen (for entertainment of course) is excessive. There's a whole world outside your home, and an awful lot of more worthwhile things to see and do. I should know, I'm stuck with ME, but I still make myself go outside and enjoy the world (traveling, cycling, swimming etc)
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Way to totally blow the point of thin displays by putting it on a stupid ziggety-zaggety base that makes it neither portable nor wall-mountable.
- fivestarsoul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think.... they really need to start implementing that wireless power I've been reading about. The wire supplying the power to the screen is wider than the screen... it's two big black wires coming out of the back of something 3mm thick; it just doesn't look right.
- aa90digg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'll take two.
- SnuKs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Then I guess your wallet will take two in the head =P
- getliquified, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4sweet jesus
i just got a hard on
that picture is beautiful...fugly stand though - Loudtyper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Finally, sony is stepping up!
- neutralmind, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0*readies stapler and shirt -- drool*
- musntSurfatWork, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Back-Lit LCD is coming, apparently sporting 110% of the NTSC color gamut. Samsung already announced productin for this year. Read it on Anandtech yesterday. I hate waiting forever for my LCD TV purchase, I know I will regret paying $1500 for anything right now that I will kick myself for in 6 months. I've burned enough money on computers doing just that.
- BearlyLegal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Check out the real size of Sony's TV
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20070411/dis1_06.jpg - ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13mm thick.... and the base is 1 foot large.
- i4mt3hwin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1PS3 $1000 edition or w/e the hell multimedia version they are coming out with should have one of these slapped onto the top it. Just because.
- richid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Pretty slick. Now I really hope to see some SED units soon....
- jaundiced, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1What a terrible design, it looks like its about to eat me.
- jazstaR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0all these idiots... if you dont want an 11inch THEN DONT BUY ONE ffs, i love this ***** so i'll wait for a bigger size and im sure they will fix the lifespan issues.
hopefully these things could one day be like the ancient displays on stargate. - TheBigDI(K, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i think i'm in love. ...
- dunstdunst, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://sonyoled.net
- wisestrap, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.oled-tv.blogspot.com
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
