FINALLY! OLED Might actually arrive!

LG Display Reveals an 18-inch Flexiblem OLED Panel

"We are confident that by 2017, we will successfully develop an Ultra HD flexible and transparent OLED panel of more than 60 inches, which will have transmittance of more than 40 percent and a curvature radius of 100R, thereby leading the future display market," said In-Byung Kang, Senior Vice President and Head of the R&D Center at LG Display.

 

Meanwhile they can always fit me that 18" into my GS, if ever they feel inclined to it... I'm willing to sacrifice as "beta tester"...

 

OLED is the one where each pixle is or has it's own backlight right? paired with really good controller it might be as good as a solid CRT.

 

More or less yes. No backlight required. This of course, results in much lower power, and only consume as much power as pixels that are lit on the screen too. The advantage for laptops of course is the fact that it is more durable and flexible, no backlight bleed. You can lighten up a laptop considerably just by going with OLED alone.

 

The new Samsung Galaxy Tab S has na 8.4" or an 10.5" Amoled Display , it`s a pity Samsung is getting out of the Windows Notebook buisness.

John.

 

And that's not saying the best... OLED image quality and depth... it's just so gorgeous! 4K and OLED getting available on the market is why plasma is out of the game... and soon to be out of production forever. And of course it should also result in better battery runtime, once it gets to laptops...

 

Not very happy about the resolution:

 

I'm just happy to see a new technology that has th ability to have proper colors and blacks and darks. I guess when we finally see monitors and TVs that are 120hz adaptive sync 2k/4k OLEDs we will know it's time to buy.

 

Well what about the quote I posted = UltraHD resolution (i.e. 4k) by 2017.

Yeah, I'm curious what the response time they will be shooting for with these displays?

Just browsing Wikipedia, not sure how current or accurate this is, but it looks like response times can pretty much be infinite (up to 100,000 Hz). But other issues like easily water damaged (so good seal is needed, affecting flexibility), and power consumption can actually be MORE than and LCD.

" While an OLED will consume around 40% of the power of an LCD displaying an image that is primarily black, for the majority of images it will consume 60–80% of the power of an LCD. However, an OLED can use more than three times as much power to display an image with a white background, such as a document or web site.[81] This can lead to reduced battery life in mobile devices, when white backgrounds are used."

 

I foresee the return of good ol' acid-green-on-black design trend! =)

 

But have they resolved the burn-in problem with OLED? "Here's one they didn't tell you about: OLED is subject to burn-in. Like plasma and CRT before it, OLED can retain images on the screen temporarily, and perhaps even permanently, if it's left static for too long. While the degree to which it is susceptible is as yet unknown....."

That's why the OLED camera view finder screens shut off after minutes of use on some cameras.

 

What about response time, Samsung has to keep the oled pixels partly powered or they have reponse time problems with video ghosting a the like, so there is no perfect black but still a lot better than lcd, and no light bleeding.

John.

 

PLASMA and CRT have the best color reproduction... performance is a game of trade offs. Besides screens savers were invented well over 10 years ago. when the device sits idle, it plays a moving animation to prevent burn in or it just shuts the screen off.

Obvious response time is key but, i guess only time will tell. i'm taking this all with a grain of alt so far.all we can do is speculate to pass the time.

 

OLED have been here awhile, it was just ungodly expensive.

 

Oled has a few problems right now. Yields of larger screens drop down very quickly as its easier for a larger screen to have 1 pixel defective. that is why you are just now seeing 10 inch oled tablet screens. Yields are still too poor for a 15.6 inch laptop screen, the price would be tremendous to make up for defective panels.

The blue sub pixel ages much faster than the green and red causing color accuracy issues to arise fairly quickly.

Its currently the most susceptible screen technology for burn in. Until the screens become more burn in resistant the taskbar area on a pc can easily become burned in with the way pc's are used. As screen tech ages the burn in problem is usually solved just as it was for plasma but more time and money is needed still.

these are the 3 main reasons oled has not exploded in popularity.

 

They already make 10.5" oled screens for tablets 15.6" cannot be far off.

John.

 

DAMN! CRTs really the internal combustion engine of displays... no matter how old the engine gets electric and steam never could keep up. except that every one traded image quality for compactness and energy savings almost kin to reduced rang on electric cards versus engines... except every one traded out for electric cars because they never leave town.

It's shame i'm not billion air, i'd have Sony start the old FW900 fabs and churn out some new monitors with 1440p or higher @ 85+ hz.

 

I know what you mean. When you see a HD crt next to an LCD the LCD looks greyish and cloudy all over. Colors are dull and washed out. The HD CRT a high quality one like the sony look clean and clear its like comparing the night sky full of clouds (lcd) or a night sky on a cloudless totally clear night (crt). this clear almost translucent base the crt starts off with makes every other aspect of the picture better. Colors are vibrant and crystal clear no haziness or dullness that is present on LCD specially when you have both side by side and can directly compare, the lcd sticks out like a sore thumb. Even so after I admit all that if you get a top end expensive lcd monitor, I have the Dell ultrasharp u3014 2560x1600 monitor. Even tho this top of the line monitor still does not have the clarity of the crt it is close enough that the space and weight savings makes it the way to go ( it also helps to find ridiculous good deals in craigslist negotiated my monitor for 480 dollars off a guy asking for 650 and this was when the retail was like 1200 or 1300). There is about a 2.5 inch noticeable scuff on the top left bezel but the actual screen has no scratches or dead pixels so hell yea i'll pay 700 dollars less because of a purely cosmetic scratch that has 0 effect on the picture quality. Also moving from 16:9 to 16:10 was a surprising benefit. Browsing websites look better, writing in office feels better. A lot of activities on the PC just feel better in 16:10 the added vertical space lets you see more and since most of the time the added horizontal space in 16:9 is just wasted anyways 16:10 is actually the perfect width and height.