Home Theater/HDTV/et al...

Started by arnel98 · 30 Dec 2006 · 1,679 replies

General Discussion Page 53 of 84

14 Mar 2008, 23:53 #1041
bmwracer wrote:http://www.electronichouse.com/article/blu_ray_prices_staying_high/

[image]

Blu-ray Prices Staying High

According to a recent peek at Pricegrabber.com, high-def players are still selling at last year's prices.

Being the winner of the format war has its advantages. Aside from gloating and lighting poo on fire outside of the Toshiba offices, many in the Blu-ray camp have decide to\you guessed it\raise prices.

According to Pricegrabber.com (via Gizmodo), player prices are at an average of $400 for the year. This is actually up a bit from recent numbers. The report includes top high-def hardware manufacturers Sony, Samsung, Panasonic and LG.


Components always start out big and clunky...why don't these b*tches just bring out a slimmed down player and save the money on materials.

I'm going back to LaserDisc in protest.
15 Mar 2008, 00:08 #1042
Tu_triky wrote:Components always start out big and clunky...why don't these b*tches just bring out a slimmed down player and save the money on materials.

That's the typical progression of engineering designs: there's POD (Proof-Of-Design), then the various generations afterwards...

It would take too much time (relatively) to come out with a working product AND have it be slim and trim... And have the risk of missing the market.

I'm going back to LaserDisc in protest.

I still have my LD player. :mrgreen:
15 Mar 2008, 00:10 #1043
http://www.electronichouse.com/article/shedding_light_on_oled_displays/C1

[image]

Shedding Light on OLED Displays
What exactly are "organic light-emitting diodes," who's making them, and what challenges does this new technology face?

Mar. 11, 2008 \ by Scott Wasser

Crowds are as common at the annual Consumer Electronics Show (CES) as dirty faces are at an elementary school ice cream party. The same goes for shoving and line-cutting. But the elbowing and jockeying for prime position that took place at Sonyfs massive display during the 2007 show exceeded the norm.

All of the jostling at a show that for several consecutive years had championed a gbigger-is-betterh approach was to get a glimpse of a tiny Sony television. But this one was special. It was a TV whose 11-inch display used OLED (organic light-emitting diode) technology; a set that wound up being a prototype of a model whose sales launch Sony announced a year later at CES 2008.

The excitement over Sonyfs OLED TV, now officially called the XEL-1, makes sense once you see it. The display is a marvel – both for its diminutive physical dimensions and the picture it displays. Ignoring its elegant and appropriately futuristic stand, the display itself is just 3 mm (just over one-tenth inch) thick. By contrast, Viziofs recently discontinued 13-inch LCD TV is 2.5 inches thick. The difference between the Sony XEL-1fs picture quality and conventional LCD displays is equally dramatic, thanks to its 1million:1 contrast ratio, extensive color spectrum, and nearly limitless viewing angle.

Sony deserves kudos for being the first to market with an OLED TV. But the inherent advantages of OLED technology ensure it wonft be the last. Samsung already has demonstrated a 40-inch OLED TV. And although they havenft publicly announced it, you can be sure other manufacturers are working feverishly to get OLED televisions into production.

Thatfs because the advantages of OLED compared to other commonly used television technology – particularly the most popular one, LCD – can be striking. But like any new technology, manufacturers face a formidable challenge of making OLED technology affordable for it to become commonplace. For example, Samsung, generally considered the largest TV maker in the world, is on record as saying it wonft put OLED sets into production until they can be sold for around the same price as TVs based on other technologies. Sony, on the other hand, obviously believes that there are at least some consumers willing to pay a premium\$2,500 for its 11-incher, which is more than the street price of some very good 55-inch plasma models – to have the latest and greatest TV technology.

And therefs little doubt that OLED is the latest and greatest current display technology available. So much so that if production costs become competitive and no other viable technology emerges, every TV made a few years from now could be OLED. Herefs why:

Better Picture
OLED displays offer higher contrast, brighter images, wider color spectrum, and better viewing angles than LCD displays. Other than that, theyfre nothing special. Kidding aside, the OLED technology edge comes from its design technology (see sidebar). Unlike LCD displays, which require an always-on backlight and create black by partially obscuring that light, the pixels that make up an OLED display are naturally black. That leads to remarkable contrast by todayfs TV standards. The brighter images and broader color spectrum (around 16 million colors versus 260,000 for a typical LCD, according to Kodak) are characteristics of the technology. So is OLEDfs 178-degree viewing angle, which means its picture looks great from anywhere in front of the display. And OLEDs will be unbeatable when it comes to reproducing rapid motion because their pixel response time is virtually instantaneous. By contrast, the fastest LCD TV refresh rates are typically around six milliseconds.

Less Costly
Although OLED production costs are high now, economies of scale and the development of production facilities should ultimately bring it down to prices that LCDs wonft be able to match. Thatfs because the materials and manufacturing requirements of OLED displays are inherently less expensive than those of LCD or plasma flat panels. Operating costs will also be significantly lower for OLEDs because they use less electricity. They require absolutely no backlight, which is where most of an LCDfs power consumption goes.

More Versatile Form Factors
In addition to being substantially thinner and lighter than plasma and LCD flat panels, OLEDs displays can be delivered in an almost unimaginable variety of form factors. Because they can be manufactured on flexible substrates and donft require the hard glass panels of LCDs or plasmas, they can be turned screens that can be rolled up like the morning newspaper, applied to clothing, and even turned into semi-transparent heads-up displays. The flexibility of their substrates also make them inherently more durable than current display technologies. Finally, once manufacturers begin producing OLED displays in great quantities, there will be no practical or economical limit to screen size.

If it sounds as though OLED technology makes for the ideal TV, youfre close. But there are a few shortcomings, although two of them should be fairly easy to resolve. The first is that OLEDs are extremely susceptible to water damage, which might limit their applications until unbreechable sealing techniques are developed. That will probably happen when CE companies overcome the second problem of developing the manufacturing infrastructure to mass produce OLED displays cost effectively.

The third problem is more serious and more challenging: Although the red and green OLED elements have lifespans comparable to LCD and plasma TVs, the blue elements currently last a maximum of about 14,000 hours in flat panel display applications. LCD and plasma displays have lifespans nearly five times that. But 14,000 hours is also three times as long as blue OLED elements lasted just a couple of years ago, so progress definitely is being made. Unless an even newer, cheaper, and better technology emerges in the very near term – and right now that doesnft seem likely – the next big-screen TV you buy may very well be a stunning OLED display.
15 Mar 2008, 00:24 #1044
bmwracer wrote:That's the typical progression of engineering designs: there's POD (Proof-Of-Design), then the various generations afterwards...

It would take too much time (relatively) to come out with a working product AND have it be slim and trim... And have the risk of missing the market.


That's the reason this guy gave me concerning him dating large women.
15 Mar 2008, 00:28 #1045
bmwracer wrote:http://www.electronichouse.com/article/shedding_light_on_oled_displays/C1


Good article.

I bought one. An OLED. Just one diode. It's blue. :hehe: Great picture and resoultion tho'.
15 Mar 2008, 00:58 #1046
Tu_triky wrote:That's the reason this guy gave me concerning him dating large women.

Ya gotta start somewhere... :beaten:
15 Mar 2008, 01:01 #1047
Tu_triky wrote:I bought one. An OLED. Just one diode. It's blue. :hehe: Great picture and resoultion tho'.

That must've set you back at bit. :sweat:

Another 2,073,599 more and you'll have your 1920x1080 screen. :beaten:
15 Mar 2008, 01:07 #1048
bmwracer wrote:
That must've set you back at bit. :sweat:

Another 2,073,599 more and you'll have your 1920x1080 screen. :beaten:


:hehe:

Haha...seriously. The pictures that I've seen of OLEDs look fabulous....but I'm sure an OLED set must be seen in order to really appreciate the technology.
15 Mar 2008, 01:07 #1049
bmwracer wrote:
Ya gotta start somewhere... :beaten:


...but don't get stuck on "LaserDisc" proportions.
15 Mar 2008, 02:52 #1050
Tu_triky wrote:Haha...seriously. The pictures that I've seen of OLEDs look fabulous....but I'm sure an OLED set must be seen in order to really appreciate the technology.

So I guess they'll be the ones pushing out the LCDs into obsolesence in the future, like what the LCDs are doing to CRTs...

And apparently, plasmas. :beaten:
15 Mar 2008, 02:53 #1051
Tu_triky wrote:...but don't get stuck on "LaserDisc" proportions.

But there's more quality than the VHS size. :beaten:
15 Mar 2008, 03:15 #1052
bmwracer wrote:
So I guess they'll be the ones pushing out the LCDs into obsolesence in the future, like what the LCDs are doing to CRTs...


Yeah, it seems so...unless somebody offers up something else....


And apparently, plasmas. :beaten:


Yeah aside from TV sets what other apps use plasma....none that I can think of.
15 Mar 2008, 03:27 #1053
bmwracer wrote:
But there's more quality than the VHS size. :beaten:


Haha...it'll be great when blank Blu-ray Media and Players get less expensive....it sucks when you want to burn a dorama on disc and it doesn't fit on one blank DVD...
15 Mar 2008, 03:40 #1054
Tu_triky wrote:Haha...it'll be great when blank Blu-ray Media and Players get less expensive....it sucks when you want to burn a dorama on disc and it doesn't fit on one blank DVD...

You can buy a PC-based Blu-Ray player for about $150... :)
15 Mar 2008, 03:45 #1055
bmwracer wrote:
You can buy a PC-based Blu-Ray player for about $150... :)


That's a reasonable price...my only concern is that the current crop of Blu-ray drives are still slow....correct me if I'm wrong.
15 Mar 2008, 04:27 #1056
Tu_triky wrote:
That's a reasonable price...my only concern is that the current crop of Blu-ray drives are still slow....correct me if I'm wrong.

That's just a player. A blu-ray burner costs slightly more.
15 Mar 2008, 04:37 #1057
dochira wrote:
That's just a player. A blu-ray burner costs slightly more.


Oh, I see...but my initial concern still stands...the burner is still slow, right?

2x or something of that order.
15 Mar 2008, 05:02 #1058
Yes. You have DVD burner with Blu-ray player for ~250$. Blu-ray burner should be around $500.

Blanks are $20+ for one... :bleh: It's like DVD 8 years ago. It should go down soon tho. (When someone chip the PS3 :hehe: )
15 Mar 2008, 05:05 #1059
tabana wrote:Yes. You have DVD burner with Blu-ray player for ~250$. Blu-ray burner should be around $500.

Blanks are $20+ for one... :bleh: It's like DVD 8 years ago. It should go down soon tho. (When someone chip the PS3 :hehe: )


Yeah, you've confirmed my assertions...it's still a too expensive to be practical at this point :sweat:
15 Mar 2008, 06:41 #1060
tabana wrote:Yes. You have DVD burner with Blu-ray player for ~250$. Blu-ray burner should be around $500.

Blanks are $20+ for one... :bleh: It's like DVD 8 years ago. It should go down soon tho. (When someone chip the PS3 :hehe: )

I've mentioned this before, but VHS tapes used to be $20 a pop...

And the VHS VCRs were around $800-$1000... 20-30 pound behemoths, to boot. :sweat:

Replying needs an account. Registration opens soon.