OLED has great potential, but right now the best LCD technology is far ahead. About the only current major advantage OLED has over LCDs is better blacks (and consequently a better contrast ratio). However, that advantage is more than offset by the significant disadvantage of a much less clear screen in sunlight. This, once again, is not as much of an issue with phones, since they are small enough, that you can shield the phone from sunlight with your body, but is a significant issue for tablets.
And the long-term color degradation issues are severe and real. Anyone selling OLED screens right now is basically hoping the good looking screen will attract you to it, and the fact that the color imbalance a year or so down the line is something you wont be aware of.
Your not familiar with the latest OLED's my friend.
1) Faster response rate 0.000001ms OLED vs 0.002 ms for the fastest LCD
2) Full 180 deg viewing angle. (the light source/colors filter is on the surface of the display not behind it)
3) Higher potential brightness. (again the there are far fewer layers in an OLED vs LCD and therefore is thinner AND lighter)
4) Color reproduction is OVER 100% NTSC broadcast standards color gamette vs only UP TO 72% for top of the line LCD's (although with latest nano-carbon tubes color reproduction has improved to slightly over 80%)
5) Complete individual pixel shut off vs partial light source block in the LCD using liquid crystalline polarization.
Watch as you'll eat your words when Apple adopts OLED in the near future. Its just inevitable. LCD has reached its maximum technology barrier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Which is the one thing I love about OLEDs. The comparably short life of their blue elements (and, well, the red and green, as well) turns me off them, however. Though I'd love to have strips of white (or a reserved blue) OLEDs as ambient room lighting in my house. Just have those on at night for visibility/security instead of power-hungry archaic light bulbs.
But no, (AM)OLED screens on any Apple product for quite a long time are about as likely as AMD processors in Macs.
Comparatively low blue life? That is only if you turn on the screen every day for 8 + hours for the next 3 years. We are talking about theoretical limits here, of which none are practical in the real world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
Sorry, but no.
The "real" issues with OLED remain:
- poor colour reproduction
- doesn't work in sunlight at all
... and both of those things are endemic to the very process which makes OLED so popular which is the fact that it uses organic dyes instead of light emitting elements. You can't easily "design them out."
OLED has been around for many years now and gets better all the time, but they haven't really made any progress at all on those two key flaws. The smart money at this point is on some future new technology coming along to replace both LCD's and OLED's.
"poor color reproduction"?
Are you kidding me? Its LCD who has poor color reproduction as it can only produce 72% of the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
OLED's can produce OVER 100% of the color gamatte on the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
"doesnt work in sunlight at all"
What?
Go to an At&t store and take a look at the latest 4.5" Super AMOLED + on the Samsung Infuse 4G and come back here.
"some future technology to replace LCD and OLED"
Right, there is always something better around the corner. But in the foreseeable future, there isnt.
OLED is the leading technology of the future.
E-ink with color and Samsung's Liquivista Electro wetting displays dont emit light and therefore wont be useable in the dark.
This leaves only OLED in the future roadmap.
The standard that OLED's has set will be extremely difficult to beat. (brightness, sharpness, color reproduction, scalability, cost effectiveness, mass production, patents, energy use, thiness, etc. )
The two big companies who are investing in OLED is Samsung and Sony.
Samsung right now has about 98% of the OLED market dominance.
If you still dont think OLED is the future, I recommend you take a look at a 40" AMOLED TV screen vs a 40" LCD TV screen right next to each other.
Mass production and cost effectiveness of the product is the ONLY barrier left to take AMOLED's into the mass market.
Your not familiar with the latest OLED's my friend.
1) Faster response rate 0.000001ms OLED vs 0.002 ms for the fastest LCD
2) Full 180 deg viewing angle. (the light source/colors filter is on the surface of the display not behind it)
3) Higher potential brightness. (again the there are far fewer layers in an OLED vs LCD and therefore is thinner AND lighter)
4) Color reproduction is OVER 100% NTSC broadcast standards color gamette vs only UP TO 72% for top of the line LCD's (although with latest nano-carbon tubes color reproduction has improved to slightly over 80%)
5) Complete individual pixel shut off vs partial light source block in the LCD using liquid crystalline polarization.
Watch as you'll eat your words when Apple adopts OLED in the near future. Its just inevitable. LCD has reached its maximum technology barrier.
Comparatively low blue life? That is only if you turn on the screen every day for 8 + hours for the next 3 years. We are talking about theoretical limits here, of which none are practical in the real world.
"poor color reproduction"?
Are you kidding me? Its LCD who has poor color reproduction as it can only produce 72% of the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
OLED's can produce OVER 100% of the color gamatte on the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
"doesnt work in sunlight at all"
What?
Go to an At&t store and take a look at the latest 4.5" Super AMOLED + on the Samsung Infuse 4G and come back here.
"some future technology to replace LCD and OLED"
Right, there is always something better around the corner. But in the foreseeable future, there isnt.
OLED is the leading technology of the future.
E-ink with color and Samsung's Liquivista Electro wetting displays dont emit light and therefore wont be useable in the dark.
This leaves only OLED in the future roadmap.
The standard that OLED's has set will be extremely difficult to beat. (brightness, sharpness, color reproduction, scalability, cost effectiveness, mass production, patents, energy use, thiness, etc. )
The two big companies who are investing in OLED is Samsung and Sony.
Samsung right now has about 98% of the OLED market dominance.
If you still dont think OLED is the future, I recommend you take a look at a 40" AMOLED TV screen vs a 40" LCD TV screen right next to each other.
Mass production and cost effectiveness of the product is the ONLY barrier left to take AMOLED's into the mass market.
Your statements are not entirely true...
OLED are not higher brightness than backlit LCD. This is why vast majority of OLED need the ugly Pentile matrix arrangement to make fade blue and red pixels brighter.
Color reproduction of OLED is not accurate, they are not reproducing NTSC gamut well unlike calibrated IPS LCD and OLED colour temperature will shift over time because all OLED sub pixels degrade after time but not at the same rate, boosting OLED brightness or/and reducing sub pixels size to match the iPhone 4 IPS LCD @ 326 dpi will aggravate this problem.
OLED still and will be for ever worst than LCD at direct sunlight since LCD can be seen in transparency without need of it's backlight at direct sunlight. OLED can't do that, to see something on OLED screen, pixels brightness has to overcome ambient light.
For sure OLED got promising future, but have you wonder why we don't see any other product beside short lived product like phone and marginal MP3 player with OLED yet? Why Sony pull out it's OLED TV less than one year after being announce?.
We still are at first gen of OLED screen, and this technology have not passe the test of time yet and we already know about pixel degradation issue. Keep in mind about the Organic part of the technology, and like anything organic, it degrade after time.
Comments
9
OLED has great potential, but right now the best LCD technology is far ahead. About the only current major advantage OLED has over LCDs is better blacks (and consequently a better contrast ratio). However, that advantage is more than offset by the significant disadvantage of a much less clear screen in sunlight. This, once again, is not as much of an issue with phones, since they are small enough, that you can shield the phone from sunlight with your body, but is a significant issue for tablets.
And the long-term color degradation issues are severe and real. Anyone selling OLED screens right now is basically hoping the good looking screen will attract you to it, and the fact that the color imbalance a year or so down the line is something you wont be aware of.
Your not familiar with the latest OLED's my friend.
1) Faster response rate 0.000001ms OLED vs 0.002 ms for the fastest LCD
2) Full 180 deg viewing angle. (the light source/colors filter is on the surface of the display not behind it)
3) Higher potential brightness. (again the there are far fewer layers in an OLED vs LCD and therefore is thinner AND lighter)
4) Color reproduction is OVER 100% NTSC broadcast standards color gamette vs only UP TO 72% for top of the line LCD's (although with latest nano-carbon tubes color reproduction has improved to slightly over 80%)
5) Complete individual pixel shut off vs partial light source block in the LCD using liquid crystalline polarization.
Watch as you'll eat your words when Apple adopts OLED in the near future. Its just inevitable. LCD has reached its maximum technology barrier.
Which is the one thing I love about OLEDs. The comparably short life of their blue elements (and, well, the red and green, as well) turns me off them, however. Though I'd love to have strips of white (or a reserved blue) OLEDs as ambient room lighting in my house. Just have those on at night for visibility/security instead of power-hungry archaic light bulbs.
But no, (AM)OLED screens on any Apple product for quite a long time are about as likely as AMD processors in Macs.
Comparatively low blue life? That is only if you turn on the screen every day for 8 + hours for the next 3 years. We are talking about theoretical limits here, of which none are practical in the real world.
Sorry, but no.
The "real" issues with OLED remain:
- poor colour reproduction
- doesn't work in sunlight at all
... and both of those things are endemic to the very process which makes OLED so popular which is the fact that it uses organic dyes instead of light emitting elements. You can't easily "design them out."
OLED has been around for many years now and gets better all the time, but they haven't really made any progress at all on those two key flaws. The smart money at this point is on some future new technology coming along to replace both LCD's and OLED's.
"poor color reproduction"?
Are you kidding me? Its LCD who has poor color reproduction as it can only produce 72% of the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
OLED's can produce OVER 100% of the color gamatte on the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
"doesnt work in sunlight at all"
What?
Go to an At&t store and take a look at the latest 4.5" Super AMOLED + on the Samsung Infuse 4G and come back here.
"some future technology to replace LCD and OLED"
Right, there is always something better around the corner. But in the foreseeable future, there isnt.
OLED is the leading technology of the future.
E-ink with color and Samsung's Liquivista Electro wetting displays dont emit light and therefore wont be useable in the dark.
This leaves only OLED in the future roadmap.
The standard that OLED's has set will be extremely difficult to beat. (brightness, sharpness, color reproduction, scalability, cost effectiveness, mass production, patents, energy use, thiness, etc. )
The two big companies who are investing in OLED is Samsung and Sony.
Samsung right now has about 98% of the OLED market dominance.
If you still dont think OLED is the future, I recommend you take a look at a 40" AMOLED TV screen vs a 40" LCD TV screen right next to each other.
Mass production and cost effectiveness of the product is the ONLY barrier left to take AMOLED's into the mass market.
Your not familiar with the latest OLED's my friend.
1) Faster response rate 0.000001ms OLED vs 0.002 ms for the fastest LCD
2) Full 180 deg viewing angle. (the light source/colors filter is on the surface of the display not behind it)
3) Higher potential brightness. (again the there are far fewer layers in an OLED vs LCD and therefore is thinner AND lighter)
4) Color reproduction is OVER 100% NTSC broadcast standards color gamette vs only UP TO 72% for top of the line LCD's (although with latest nano-carbon tubes color reproduction has improved to slightly over 80%)
5) Complete individual pixel shut off vs partial light source block in the LCD using liquid crystalline polarization.
Watch as you'll eat your words when Apple adopts OLED in the near future. Its just inevitable. LCD has reached its maximum technology barrier.
Comparatively low blue life? That is only if you turn on the screen every day for 8 + hours for the next 3 years. We are talking about theoretical limits here, of which none are practical in the real world.
"poor color reproduction"?
Are you kidding me? Its LCD who has poor color reproduction as it can only produce 72% of the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
OLED's can produce OVER 100% of the color gamatte on the NTSC broadcast standard color gamette.
"doesnt work in sunlight at all"
What?
Go to an At&t store and take a look at the latest 4.5" Super AMOLED + on the Samsung Infuse 4G and come back here.
"some future technology to replace LCD and OLED"
Right, there is always something better around the corner. But in the foreseeable future, there isnt.
OLED is the leading technology of the future.
E-ink with color and Samsung's Liquivista Electro wetting displays dont emit light and therefore wont be useable in the dark.
This leaves only OLED in the future roadmap.
The standard that OLED's has set will be extremely difficult to beat. (brightness, sharpness, color reproduction, scalability, cost effectiveness, mass production, patents, energy use, thiness, etc. )
The two big companies who are investing in OLED is Samsung and Sony.
Samsung right now has about 98% of the OLED market dominance.
If you still dont think OLED is the future, I recommend you take a look at a 40" AMOLED TV screen vs a 40" LCD TV screen right next to each other.
Mass production and cost effectiveness of the product is the ONLY barrier left to take AMOLED's into the mass market.
Your statements are not entirely true...
OLED are not higher brightness than backlit LCD. This is why vast majority of OLED need the ugly Pentile matrix arrangement to make fade blue and red pixels brighter.
Color reproduction of OLED is not accurate, they are not reproducing NTSC gamut well unlike calibrated IPS LCD and OLED colour temperature will shift over time because all OLED sub pixels degrade after time but not at the same rate, boosting OLED brightness or/and reducing sub pixels size to match the iPhone 4 IPS LCD @ 326 dpi will aggravate this problem.
OLED still and will be for ever worst than LCD at direct sunlight since LCD can be seen in transparency without need of it's backlight at direct sunlight. OLED can't do that, to see something on OLED screen, pixels brightness has to overcome ambient light.
For sure OLED got promising future, but have you wonder why we don't see any other product beside short lived product like phone and marginal MP3 player with OLED yet? Why Sony pull out it's OLED TV less than one year after being announce?.
We still are at first gen of OLED screen, and this technology have not passe the test of time yet and we already know about pixel degradation issue. Keep in mind about the Organic part of the technology, and like anything organic, it degrade after time.