# Panasonic and Sony to Offer OLED TVs by 2014



## mechman (Feb 8, 2007)

Source: FlatPanelsHD


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

Granted the OLED models will be expensive like anything (similar to the current 4K tv's), but if you had the money, would you rather get an OLED or a 4K TV?


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

tripplej said:


> Granted the OLED models will be expensive like anything (similar to the current 4K tv's), but if you had the money, would you rather get an OLED or a 4K TV?


For me it would be OLED. I've been enthralled by the technology since 2007, so much so that I bought stock back then in the company that holds most of the patents (Universal Display). My research leads me to believe this is one of the few advancements that has virtually no downside. With a multitude of phones already using OLED displays it seems like only a matter of time before it becomes mainstream.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

theJman said:


> For me it would be OLED. I've been enthralled by the technology since 2007, so much so that I bought stock back then in the company that holds most of the patents (Universal Display). My research leads me to believe this is one of the few advancements that has virtually no downside. With a multitude of phones already using OLED displays it seems like only a matter of time before it becomes mainstream.


Wow. Buying stock in the company as well. Impressive. 

My only concern is the longevity of OLED on such as huge screen - say 55 inch or higher.

On the smaller sizes (tablet/phone's), OLED is good but what about the big screens??


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

tripplej said:


> On the smaller sizes (tablet/phone's), OLED is good but what about the big screens??


It's difficult to gauge longevity at this point in the product lifecycle, but so far it doesn't appear to be an issue.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

From what I have seen with new technology, it would be best to get the second generation OLED displays.. The first roll out will have lot of issues that will be worked out and perfected by the time the second generation is rolled out. But of course, if you have to have it then you have to get it bugs and all.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Actually, what's shipping now is the 2nd generation consumer products. The original devices were available a few years ago, so it's time to buy!


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

theJman said:


> Actually, what's shipping now is the 2nd generation consumer products. The original devices were available a few years ago, so it's time to buy!


I am game as long as the price is right! 

To me for OLED to be successful, it has to be priced right.. No point making it high dollar and nobody can afford it.


----------



## Chester (Feb 19, 2007)

I am a little concerned about the burnin and/or uneven wear characteristics that OLED's can have... has this been improved upon at all?


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Chester said:


> I am a little concerned about the burnin and/or uneven wear characteristics that OLED's can have... has this been improved upon at all?


I've never hear that OLED's had either of those problems. I'd be interested in reading whatever it is that gave you that impression.


----------



## Chester (Feb 19, 2007)

http://eetimes.com/electronics-news/4199291/DuPont-claims-OLED-record-fit-for-TV-apps
"Printed devices using the DuPont process have reliably achieved lifetimes to 50 percent of initial luminance of 29,000 hours for red, 110,000 hours for green and 34,000 hours for blue at typical television brightness levels."

-the red, green and blue organic compounds have differing wear characteristics
--because of the differing wear characteristics, and also since there IS a wear characteristic for the organic compounds used, the sum of the history of each pixel will affect its brightness (at least that seems reasonable to me...)
-while on a large scale this can be compensated, I am doubtful it can be compensated on an individual pixel basis

also check here for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED#Disadvantages


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

I did some searching on the web and found a bunch of writeup in regards to burn in issues for OLED when a stationary object is seen such as logo, color, etc.. 

I wonder if the OLED displays will have moving screens like some plasma's have to help reduce burn in?


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Chester said:


> http://eetimes.com/electronics-news/4199291/DuPont-claims-OLED-record-fit-for-TV-apps
> 
> "Printed devices using the DuPont process have reliably achieved lifetimes to 50 percent of initial luminance of 29,000 hours for red, 110,000 hours for green and 34,000 hours for blue at typical television brightness levels."


That particular article -- which is 2.5 years old, meaning that version of OLED has been around for a while -- mentions a duty cycle of 15 years when run 8 hours a day, far more then anyone is likely to use a TV. It's a perfect example of what I meant about the 2nd generation of products not having any practical issues to be concerned about.




Chester said:


> also check here for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED#Disadvantages


For the most part, I've given up on wikipedia. It was a nice idea, but it's implementation proved flawed. I trust very little of what's printed on their webpages, so I didn't spend more then a few minutes reading that article.

At this point in time OLED has been primarily been relegated to small devices, because of the manufacturing yield and cost. I can definitely see it becoming huge in the hand-held space in things like phones, tablets, even laptops. It takes almost no power to light up, making batteries last far longer, and the colors are beautiful. TV's? I guess time will tell, but if they can iron out the manufacturing part I'd love to own one.


----------



## Chester (Feb 19, 2007)

I don't know if they have fixed the uneven wear problems with OLED - that is why I was asking about it in the first place... I consider colors not wearing evenly a problem. And yes, in most tv viewing situations, there should not be burn-in issues; however, I intend on running a computer on my tv too, so the ability to display a static image and not affect how the panel looks is important to me. Yes, the article that I cited is 2.5 years old, however I have not heard that those challenges have been overcome, which is what I want to know about.

The wiki article, specifically the 'disadvantages' section, had many citations - the claims made are backed up by evidence and other articles/academic papers - so to disregard what is on there does not make much sense to me...


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Chester said:


> I don't know if they have fixed the uneven wear problems with OLED - that is why I was asking about it in the first place... I consider colors not wearing evenly a problem. And yes, in most tv viewing situations, there should not be burn-in issues; however, I intend on running a computer on my tv too, so the ability to display a static image and not affect how the panel looks is important to me. Yes, the article that I cited is 2.5 years old, however I have not heard that those challenges have been overcome, which is what I want to know about.


I wasn't refuting your claims, nor was my reply meant to be argumentative, which it seems as though you may have thought was the case. My apologies for the confusion.

The article you linked was 2.5 years old and it said, in essence, that the problem no longer exists for all practical purposes (8 hours of usage daily for 15 straight years means there's no longer a realistic problem with display artifacts). I was just highlighting that fact to allay your fears. One can logically assume nothing but progress has been made since then, so the situation today is probably much better then it was even then.

Uneven color wear is not an issue provided the first color to wear out does so in a ridiculously long time frame. Red is often cited as the first color to weaken, but if it's not perceptible for over a dozen years then I don't personally think there's anything to be concerned with. The lifecycle of the TV itself is not that long, so you'll have upgraded it long before any discernible color deterioration is potentially evident.




Chester said:


> The wiki article, specifically the 'disadvantages' section, had many citations - the claims made are backed up by evidence and other articles/academic papers - so to disregard what is on there does not make much sense to me...


Citations are great, but of little value unless the validity of the citations can be confirmed. I'm not in the position to do that when there are so many being named. Please don't misconstrue what I'm saying about wikipedia; that article may or may not be legitimate, I don't know. My comments were directed at wikipedia in general, not the OLED piece in specific.

I have several areas of interest and knowledge and have found wikipedia had many and obvious errors associated to those things I know well. In that case it was easy for me to pick through the useless and filter it down to just the relevant and accurate. But for something I don't know inside and out I'm at a disadvantage. However, because of my past (bad) experience with the accuracy of the open-to-be-edited-by-anyone documents I've lost faith in them.


----------



## Chester (Feb 19, 2007)

At first it seemed argumentative - as is the nature of text, I had to guess your 'tone' - I understand now: thank you for clearing that up! 

I can see your point as far as the lifecycle of the device is concerned, most people will have a new one by the time that there is any appreciable wear. I realize I am a bit different than the average consumer - how many people that you know have a 6 year old blackberry curve (I do), for most people, they get a new phone every time their contract is up 

I found on this site (which has tons of good OLED info) that the new 55" LG tv is supposed to have 30,000 hours lifespan. If you do a search for "hours" on the site search, it pulls up a lot of relevant news articles. Blue specifically is where there are issues with longevity, red and green appear to be able to reliably last over 100k hours (some companies are pushing over a million hours in either red, or green, can't remember which one right now).

The problem with blue, is that the efficiency is no where near as good as with red and green - this results in having to drive the pixel with more energy to achieve the same brightness. OLED screens are *typically* (industry standard) measured at 1,000 cd/m^2 initial brightness, and then the 'hours of life' are given to where 50% brightness occurs.

Apparently there is also a technology that exists that can monitor the oled pixels on an individual per-pixel basis and correct for any burn-in: I don't think it is actually implemented in any commercial devices yet though.

Sorry I did not cite my sources here: all of the info I have been talking about is on the oled-info.com site. Overall, I am a little more convinced that OLED can work well, I would probably wait a few generations for things to be perfected, however it appears that while burn-in CAN be an issue, it is not as great as I perceived it to be.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

Not sure if you guys caught the article in regards to manufacturers closing OLED production in favor of Ultra HD. Check it out here.


> "Deterred By Low OLED Yields, LG & Samsung Switch Focus To 4K TV"


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

tripplej said:


> Not sure if you guys caught the article in regards to manufacturers closing OLED production in favor of Ultra HD.


Ugh, no I hadn't heard about it - that's terrible news. Maybe it's time I dump the stock... :sad2:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Im not really sure that its fully correct as OLED TVs will almost certainly be Ultra HD.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> Im not really sure that its fully correct as OLED TVs will almost certainly be Ultra HD.


According to the article, I see the below statement in regards to the future of tv..



> "Hsieh suggested that Samsung and LG have already realigned their priorities in light of these developments, putting UHD TV at the forefront of their plans for the next year, while OLED sits on the backburner for the time being. Both brands are expected to unveil their own big-screen 4K TV offerings at the CES 2013 in Las Vegas next month."



So, the end result is that there will be 4K Ultra HD tv's but not OLED at least for 2013 ....

Mostly due to the issues OLED is having per the article..



> "LG and Samsung have been beset with low yield problems in their efforts to make OLED television production a commercially viable enterprise, forcing the Korean firms to announce several delays despite previous promises that OLED TVs would be available to buy on the consumer market by the end of 2012.
> 
> Now, for the first time, DisplaySearch has revealed just how shockingly bad these problems are, and how much work there is to be done. Recent pilot production runs of 55-inch AMOLED panels showed astonishingly low yield rates, owing to the fragility of large-sized backplanes. Straight yield (i.e. prior to repair) came in at less than 10%, meaning that at least 9 out of 10 panels were damaged in some form or another. Mending the defective panels (either physically or electronically) merely improved yield rates to under 30% – to put it another way, more than 70% of all panels had to be discarded. Even those that do make the grade are reported to have their lifespan cut short by the bonding process which causes further instability to the organic compounds."


----------

