2010: The Year OLED TV Makes Contact?

[pixelthis]

I'd already mentioned the size limitation. But, on all the other performance parameters, CRTs performed better than any of the flat panel techs. Unless you're trying to use your TV as a tanning salon, maximum light output is irrelevant if the calibrated levels on a CRT already exceed the reference levels.

The usual doublespeak. If the thing is so dim you can't see it it is not a viable option.
CRT was around for decades and the best it got was a huge 42" console that weighed hundreds of pounds.
Its not that the thousands of engineers working on CRT over the decades were stupid,
the tech itself was limited, and used only out of nessesity

Behind Sony only because they never bothered to rush out an 11" model to the market, which BTW still costs $2,500 and has a screen life less than half that of a typical LCD or plasma TV. Sony supposedly only has a 20" OLED TV in the works, while Samsung, LG, and Panny are looking to get larger models onto the market beginning late this year and into next year. (try reading the original post in this thread)

Sure its a novelty item, but at least its something

Have you actually read all 5,800+ of my posts? Obviously not.

My bad, almost all of your posts mention PANASONIC

And OLED has the promise of an even better picture, without all the inherent drawbacks and bandaids of LCD.

GREAT PROPAGANDA, mention the "baindaids" of LCD, which are actually just the cost of doing buisiness, and fail to mention the massive amout of "bandaids" required
just to keep a picture from burning in on a plasma, the format of choice from your buddies at Panasonic, who are one of the two or three makers of this defunct format
that is heading for its rightfull place in the tech boneyard.

[Woochifer]

The usual doublespeak. If the thing is so dim you can't see it it is not a viable option.
CRT was around for decades and the best it got was a huge 42" console that weighed hundreds of pounds.
Its not that the thousands of engineers working on CRT over the decades were stupid,
the tech itself was limited, and used only out of nessesity

Yeah, and that bulk is why consumers didn't buy them at that size. Performance of flat panel TVs are only now even getting close to what CRTs offered up. That's why professional studios still use CRTs. And even now, fixed-pixel flat panels generally do a piss poor job of rescaling SD sources, which is what many channels still use.

My bad, almost all of your posts mention PANASONIC

Wow, you actually corrected yourself! (See that wasn't so bad! ) But, you'd still be wrong if you actually bother to read my posts. Nice try though.

GREAT PROPAGANDA, mention the "baindaids" of LCD, which are actually just the cost of doing buisiness, and fail to mention the massive amout of "bandaids" required
just to keep a picture from burning in on a plasma, the format of choice from your buddies at Panasonic, who are one of the two or three makers of this defunct format
that is heading for its rightfull place in the tech boneyard.

More wishful thinking on your part.

Cost of doing business? Actually, bandaids like motion interpolation and scanning backlights were put into high end LCD TVs just so their motion resolution and contrast performance could come close to what entry level plasma TVs already delivered at half the price. Burn in on plasmas is a nonissue with newer models because of improvements to the panel design itself.

Are you saying that an LCD's picture quality is so good that OLED's no longer needed?

[pixelthis]

Yeah, and that bulk is why consumers didn't buy them at that size. Performance of flat panel TVs are only now even getting close to what CRTs offered up. That's why professional studios still use CRTs. And even now, fixed-pixel flat panels generally do a piss poor job of rescaling SD sources, which is what many channels still use.

I get so tired of you CRT worshipers.
Like a stone ax was all a caveman had, so was CRT the only thing we had.
Lead lined to keep from killing the users with X-RAYS, bulky, short lived.
GOOD RIDDANCE

Wow, you actually corrected yourself! (See that wasn't so bad! ) But, you'd still be wrong if you actually bother to read my posts. Nice try though.

GIVE UP, practically anybody who reads this site on a regular basis knows you're a Panny shill

Cost of doing business? Actually, bandaids like motion interpolation and scanning backlights were put into high end LCD TVs just so their motion resolution and contrast performance could come close to what entry level plasma TVs already delivered at half the price. Burn in on plasmas is a nonissue with newer models because of improvements to the panel design itself.

Inprovements in the PANEL design?
Special circuits that have the picture jumping around like a grasshopper, the picture cycles on and off, and while you can't see it, it cuts visible brightness by fifty percent.
AND A HOST OF OTHER "BANDAIDS" that try to fix an inherently flawed design

Are you saying that an LCD's picture quality is so good that OLED's no longer needed?

I AM SAYING THAT the best aspect of picture is having a picture.
Which LCD will have long after the last plasma has bitten the dust.
You and a host of other Panny shills are just trying to keep sales up so they can recoup
some of the cash they spent on that shiny new plasma tv factory.
As for LCD THE ANSWER USED TO BE no it probably can't reach OLED standards,
but with new LED backlights it can get a lot closer than plasma ever will.

[Woochifer]

I get so tired of you CRT worshipers.
Like a stone ax was all a caveman had, so was CRT the only thing we had.
Lead lined to keep from killing the users with X-RAYS, bulky, short lived.
GOOD RIDDANCE

Yet, CRTs are still used in high end applications where performance matters and WAF doesn't.

GIVE UP, practically anybody who reads this site on a regular basis knows you're a Panny shill

Actually, the regulars on this site can see that when facts aren't on your side, out come Pixie's baseless accusations and personal attacks. Case in point.

Inprovements in the PANEL design?
Special circuits that have the picture jumping around like a grasshopper, the picture cycles on and off, and while you can't see it, it cuts visible brightness by fifty percent.
AND A HOST OF OTHER "BANDAIDS" that try to fix an inherently flawed design

Uh, yeah ... check the calendar, it's 2009 y'know? Plasma panels have gone through many improvements over the last few years. The so-called bandaids that you talk about aren't even relevant to the newest plasma models. Try citing some updated info before going to the burn-in card for the umpteenth time, and try actually watching a plasma TV up close rather than through a security camera feed. At least this time you're not talking about metal shipping containers.

I AM SAYING THAT the best aspect of picture is having a picture.

That explains why the Panny plasmas have had a better reliability record than all of the LCD brands?

And boy are you a poster child to talk about reliability, since all you ever do is switch out your TV every few months!

You and a host of other Panny shills are just trying to keep sales up so they can recoup
some of the cash they spent on that shiny new plasma tv factory.

Why would I care what they spent on their plants? I already bought my TV, and everybody else on this board who bought a Panny plasma within the last couple of years seems quite content. You're the only one here that obsesses about where Panasonic invests their money, and the only one that seems to have a problem with people who are happy with their TVs.

As for LCD THE ANSWER USED TO BE no it probably can't reach OLED standards,
but with new LED backlights it can get a lot closer than plasma ever will.

Even with LED backlighting, LCDs still cannot match the contrast of high end plasmas. And as pointed out in reviews of the high end Sonys and Samsungs, scanning LED-backlighting has the side effect of further narrowing an LCD's already narrow viewing angle. I doubt that's "closer" to OLED.

[pixelthis]

Yet, CRTs are still used in high end applications where performance matters and WAF doesn't.

This is more a matter of economics rather than anything else.
Most businesses use stuff till it breaks.
I knew several that were still using 286 computers in the ninties.
These CRT's will be replaced as they break, and as HD becomes more common

Actually, the regulars on this site can see that when facts aren't on your side, out come Pixie's baseless accusations and personal attacks. Case in point.

Truth is its not a "personal" attack to sttate the facts, and tehefact is that you are a Panny shill.
You even have mentioned them quite a bit on this thread, quite a bit of gall to state that something is untrue and be openly doing it at the same time

Uh, yeah ... check the calendar, it's 2009 y'know? Plasma panels have gone through many improvements over the last few years. The so-called bandaids that you talk about aren't even relevant to the newest plasma models. Try citing some updated info before going to the burn-in card for the umpteenth time, and try actually watching a plasma TV up close rather than through a security camera feed. At least this time you're not talking about metal shipping containers.

Not "relevant"?
Try running one without the anti-burn in circuits on and see how relevant they are.
And there are a few things even bandaids wont fix, like phosper fade after a few years
and gas leakage.
Just like CRT you will have to adjust brightness up as the phosper fades, because as it shines it is used.
When you can't do that anymore the set will be dead

That explains why the Panny plasmas have had a better reliability record than all of the LCD brands?

Panny has a better record than any brand as far as qc goes, BUT IN A FEW YEARS TO A DECADE YOU WILL FIND OUT THAT EVEN THEY HAVE LIMITATIONS
(hey, I thought you didnt mention these guys)

And boy are you a poster child to talk about reliability, since all you ever do is switch out your TV every few months!

Reliability is very important to me, since relatives and friends usually get my older gear,
be hard to face them if I SOLD THEM JUNK.

Why would I care what they spent on their plants? I already bought my TV, and everybody else on this board who bought a Panny plasma within the last couple of years seems quite content. You're the only one here that obsesses about where Panasonic invests their money, and the only one that seems to have a problem with people who are happy with their TVs.

JUST STATING THEIR MOTIVATIONS FOR PLANTING SHILLS LIKE YOU ALL OVER THE NET TO talk about the non-existent "inferiority" of LCD and supposed
"superiority" of plasma, main one of which seems to be a slightly better black level,
and even that is overtaken by new LED models.
And with a bunch of skewed "facts", either untrue or irrelevant.
Not that it matters, most like their TV in a lit family room, they like their TV brighter than a plasma can deliver without serious burn-in.
Thats why there are only a few makers of plasma left, Panny wouldn't be making them if they didn't have a new factory to amorartize.
Which is why plasma is DEAD

Even with LED backlighting, LCDs still cannot match the contrast of high end plasmas. And as pointed out in reviews of the high end Sonys and Samsungs, scanning LED-backlighting has the side effect of further narrowing an LCD's already narrow viewing angle. I doubt that's "closer" to OLED.

[

178 DEGREES IS HARDLY "NARROW", and that is a rare application of LED AND YOU KNOW IT.
Intelligent backlighting beats the pants off of plasma without sacrificing brightness,
and is going to be the final nail in plasmas coffin

[Woochifer]

This is more a matter of economics rather than anything else.
Most businesses use stuff till it breaks.
I knew several that were still using 286 computers in the ninties.
These CRT's will be replaced as they break, and as HD becomes more common

How would it be a matter of economics when I was referring to high end applications where performance matters above all? The reason why so many mastering studios and broadcast facilities have not switched out their CRTs is because the flat panel alternatives are still a step down in picture quality.

Truth is its not a "personal" attack to sttate the facts, and tehefact is that you are a Panny shill.
You even have mentioned them quite a bit on this thread, quite a bit of gall to state that something is untrue and be openly doing it at the same time

The fact is that you resort to the usual name calling when you don't have anything constructive to add to a discussion. Calling someone a shill is not fact because it's nothing more than your slanted opinion.

BTW, I mention Panny in this thread because their OLED plans are relevant to the original topic. And just in case your reading comprehension has taken a turn for the worse, you notice that the OLED plans for other manufacturers were mentioned as well?

Not "relevant"?
Try running one without the anti-burn in circuits on and see how relevant they are.
And there are a few things even bandaids wont fix, like phosper fade after a few years
and gas leakage.
Just like CRT you will have to adjust brightness up as the phosper fades, because as it shines it is used.
When you can't do that anymore the set will be dead

Again, check the calendar. The date might surprise you. Time moves on, but apparently the info you cite doesn't.

Panny has a better record than any brand as far as qc goes, BUT IN A FEW YEARS TO A DECADE YOU WILL FIND OUT THAT EVEN THEY HAVE LIMITATIONS

And for consumers like you who throw out their TVs before the warranty even expires, why is this important to you?

Reliability is very important to me, since relatives and friends usually get my older gear,
be hard to face them if I SOLD THEM JUNK.

But, not important enough to keep it for yourself.

JUST STATING THEIR MOTIVATIONS FOR PLANTING SHILLS LIKE YOU ALL OVER THE NET TO talk about the non-existent "inferiority" of LCD and supposed
"superiority" of plasma, main one of which seems to be a slightly better black level,
and even that is overtaken by new LED models.

The performance advantage of plasma has been bourne out in test after test. LED models have merely matched the contrast levels of plasma sets that cost half as much. Claiming that Panny is "planting shills ... all over the net" is nothing more than sour grapes. Heaven forbid if a happy customer has to keep quiet about their purchase because some conspiracy-spouting LCD/Vizio fanboy will accuse them of shilling!

And with a bunch of skewed "facts", either untrue or irrelevant.

Untruth is something you know quite a bit about, given how often you state it.

Not that it matters, most like their TV in a lit family room, they like their TV brighter than a plasma can deliver without serious burn-in.

And in a typical lit family room, the plasma picture will still look better.

Thats why there are only a few makers of plasma left, Panny wouldn't be making them if they didn't have a new factory to amorartize.

There never were a lot of plasma manufacturers to begin with. Panasonic wouldn't be making plasma TVs if they didn't also sell millions of them every year.

Which is why plasma is DEAD

178 DEGREES IS HARDLY "NARROW", and that is a rare application of LED AND YOU KNOW IT.

Multiple reviews of the Samsung and Sony LED TVs have noted the color shifts that occur when sitting off-angle. 178 degrees is a spec for where a visible picture occurs, but the picture quality begins to decline well before that and even sooner on the scanning LED-lit TVs.

Intelligent backlighting beats the pants off of plasma without sacrificing brightness,
and is going to be the final nail in plasmas coffin

Not if the TVs themselves cost twice as much.

[pixelthis]

]

How would it be a matter of economics when I was referring to high end applications where performance matters above all? The reason why so many mastering studios and broadcast facilities have not switched out their CRTs is because the flat panel alternatives are still a step down in picture quality.

The "reason" most havent switched over from CRT is money, there are several flat panels that are better, but most such businesses are just that... business.
They dont get rid of anything unless its usuless or broken.
At the hospital where I work the CRT is a distant memory.
Doctors need an accurate display when doing endoscophy, etc.
And teh IS guy I talk to has told me that the doctors and techs love the new flat screens

The fact is that you resort to the usual name calling when you don't have anything constructive to add to a discussion. Calling someone a shill is not fact because it's nothing more than your slanted opinion.

I'll let the "facts" speak for themselves.
And teh fact is that you are a panny shill

BTW, I mention Panny in this thread because their OLED plans are relevant to the original topic. And just in case your reading comprehension has taken a turn for the worse, you notice that the OLED plans for other manufacturers were mentioned as well?

Go back through the thread and count how many times you mentioned Panny as opposed to other brands

Again, check the calendar. The date might surprise you. Time moves on, but apparently the info you cite doesn't.

As opposed to the "info" you cite, which is either wrong or misleading.
You keep talking about picture res dropping during motion on a progressive screen,
this doesnt happen

And for consumers like you who throw out their TVs before the warranty even expires, why is this important to you?

I have already answered this, besides a well built Tv is usually designed well in other areas

The performance advantage of plasma has been bourne out in test after test. LED models have merely matched the contrast levels of plasma sets that cost half as much. Claiming that Panny is "planting shills ... all over the net" is nothing more than sour grapes. Heaven forbid if a happy customer has to keep quiet about their purchase because some conspiracy-spouting LCD/Vizio fanboy will accuse them of shilling!

Sour grapes?
In case you haven't noticed my side is winning.
There are only like two plasma manufacturers left, and they are getting harder and harder to find.
The vote is in, and LCD is the winner.
And as LED backlights become more prevalent plasma is going to continue to lose ground

And in a typical lit family room, the plasma picture will still look better.

SO WHERE ARE ALL OF THOSE PLASMA BUYERS?

There never were a lot of plasma manufacturers to begin with. Panasonic wouldn't be making plasma TVs if they didn't also sell millions of them every year.

I WILL MAKE YOU THIS GUARENTEE, as soon as Panny can get out of plasma without losing face...THEY WILL

Multiple reviews of the Samsung and Sony LED TVs have noted the color shifts that occur when sitting off-angle. 178 degrees is a spec for where a visible picture occurs, but the picture quality begins to decline well before that and even sooner on the scanning LED-lit TVs.

I JUST SAW ONE OF THOSE, and since you insist on sitting 90 defrees to the side of a picture I checked this.
The picture looked just as good almost to the point of not being able to see it

[pixelthis]

How would it be a matter of economics when I was referring to high end applications where performance matters above all? The reason why so many mastering studios and broadcast facilities have not switched out their CRTs is because the flat panel alternatives are still a step down in picture quality.

Its a matter of economics.
They would love to dump their old CRT stuff, but in czase you havent noticed its a
recession going on, and business is tight fisted anyway.
THEY ARE NOT HANGING ONTO THESE OBSOLETE DINOS
out of some misguided "love", and teh "better" PQ is your opinion.
Its the opinion of someone who has watched phosper based video devices his whole life and think he knows how video is supposed to look.
Trust me, pros' arent that misguided

The fact is that you resort to the usual name calling when you don't have anything constructive to add to a discussion. Calling someone a shill is not fact because it's nothing more than your slanted opinion.

No, its a fact.
No one was around when the asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs, but its pretty easy to figure out whats what when the facts are presented.
And the fact is that you worship at the feet of all things panny.
Calling BERNIE madeoff one of the biggest con artists ever is not name calling,
its a fact

BTW, I mention Panny in this thread because their OLED plans are relevant to the original topic. And just in case your reading comprehension has taken a turn for the worse, you notice that the OLED plans for other manufacturers were mentioned as well?

In relation to Panasonic, and in comparison to panasonic.
You never mention anything without bringing up Panny or you bring up Panny
and then mention something else in passing.
If its not propaganda but delusional behaviour then its really pathetic

Again, check the calendar. The date might surprise you. Time moves on, but apparently the info you cite doesn't.

Looks who talking mr CRT worshiper

And for consumers like you who throw out their TVs before the warranty even expires, why is this important to you?

Why is it important to you that its important to me?
I might not keep a car two years but I dont want to have to do a valve job in that time

But, not important enough to keep it for yourself.

Video Q is actually important to me, not just a way to exercise my nurosis by
showing everyone how superiour I am by advocating something "trendy".
I took a three year course in electronics, mostly obsolete info but I did take it, and have read hundreds of hours info on the web, which is why I know you are full of beans when you talk about measuring resolution during movement, etc
My first HDTV had crts and component only.
And then they came out with DVI, then LCD got affordable in a hurry.
Then I saw how great BLU looked on a 1080p screen, had to have it,
and three HDMI inputs solved my obsolete receiver video switching prob,
so the 42" 1080p was a done deal at 900 bucks (700 now)

The performance advantage of plasma has been bourne out in test after test. LED models have merely matched the contrast levels of plasma sets that cost half as much. Claiming that Panny is "planting shills ... all over the net" is nothing more than sour grapes. Heaven forbid if a happy customer has to keep quiet about their purchase because some conspiracy-spouting LCD/Vizio fanboy will accuse them of shilling!

hEAVEN FORBID.
There is "happy" and fanatic.
I dont talk about Vizio all of the time because , while I LOVE IT, ITS STILL A VIDEO MONITOR.
I bought a TV, you act like you married one.

Untruth is something you know quite a bit about, given how often you state it.

You are the unqualifed expert on "untruth"(and quite a few other things)

And in a typical lit family room, the plasma picture will still look better.

your opinion for the last time.
Its not just me, LCD is the clear winner in the market for a simple reason, most prefer it.
You can talk till you're blue in the face but most will never prefer the dim fuzzy pic of a
plasma tv, ever, which is why they are disapearing from the market.
Like turntables they do give snobs a chance to look down their nose at the great unwashed, however.

There never were a lot of plasma manufacturers to begin with. Panasonic wouldn't be making plasma TVs if they didn't also sell millions of them every year.

They wouldn't be selling them at all if they could get out of it.
The fact that the sales figures seem "huge" to you speaks vollumes about what you know ,
about anything.
Three years and plasmas gone, if they last that long






Multiple reviews of the Samsung and Sony LED TVs have noted the color shifts that occur when sitting off-angle. 178 degrees is a spec for where a visible picture occurs, but the picture quality begins to decline well before that and even sooner on the scanning LED-lit TVs.



Not if the TVs themselves cost twice as much. [/QUOTE]

[Smokey]

Even with LED backlighting, LCDs still cannot match the contrast of high end plasmas.

I don't know Wooch, but that might be an over statement. With LED backlighting LCD that have localized dimming capabilty, their contrast does rival the best of Plasma TVs.

ConsumerReports did an evaluation of two LED LCD TVs, and I quote:

"The 55-inch Samsung LN55A950 and the 46-inch Sony Bravia KDL-46XBR8, rival plasma sets in their ability to display the deep, inky blacks that give images cinematic appeal."


http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/e..._OU=51&PK=yssp

[Woochifer]

I don't know Wooch, but that might be an over statement. With LED backlighting LCD that have localized dimming capabilty, their contrast does rival the best of Plasma TVs.

ConsumerReports did an evaluation of two LED LCD TVs, and I quote:

"The 55-inch Samsung LN55A950 and the 46-inch Sony Bravia KDL-46XBR8, rival plasma sets in their ability to display the deep, inky blacks that give images cinematic appeal."


http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/e..._OU=51&PK=yssp

Those TVs also cost about twice as much as a plasma set with roughly equal performance. CR does not base their rankings on any benchmark tests, and the tests I recall still showed these LED sets falling short of the top performing plasmas.

Unless you're talking about plasma tv's made 5 years ago burn in is a complete non-issue. I have seen no eveidence of burn in or image retention after gaming or watching tv with the black sidebars.

Actually, pix is typically talking about TVs from 10 years ago. He still resurrects the long defunct burn-in argument, but at least this time he refrained from talking about how plasma TVs have to come in metal containers!