The other day I was at BestBuy looking at stereo equipment (not the
greatest selection but some decent deals that I wanted to consider)
and, as is customary, I started wandering around the store to look at
all of the goodies. One thing that caught my attention was
the Samsung LED TVs. I've seen them before, and read about
them, but never really took the time to look at them closely before.
These are the TVs that are 3mm thick, which is pretty
amazing. My last TV was a 60" backlight LED that was about a
foot deep. At the time it was pretty impressive comapred to
the tube TV I had before that. We wanted to wall mount the TV
so I ended up getting an LED TV that is about 3 inches deep.
Thinking about LED TVs got me thinking about OLED TVs as well.
About a year ago I did a teardown on the Sony OLED TV.
This had an 11" screen and was about 3mm thick. But
it also had a base that contained all of the devices for controlling
the system. With the LED TVs they are 3mm thick, including
all of the devices. Maybe if the Sony TV had been larger it
would have had mor space to contain these parts, but it did not.
OLED is one of the technologies that was touted to be the
next revolution in TVs but very little has been done with it in that
application (although it has found a home in other systems like MP3
players). And now it seems that LED TVs are taking over the
mantel of being the next solution.
Interestingly, prices have started coming down on these sets quickly
already and are starting to reah price parity with LED and plasma TVs.
For example, I just jumped over to the Samsung site and the
Series 8 55" LED TV is $4K while the Series 8 52" LED TV is $3.3K.
Not a huge difference given that this is a new technology.
Although the LED TV is only 1.9" deep so they are getting
thinner and thinner all of the time as well.
So my question to you is "Will LEDs replace plasma and LED TVs in the
near future, are they going to co-exist, or is something else going to
come in and take over the industry?".
I feel the same with LED TV's. I have not seen many people buying Plasma TV now a days. Pricing of Plasma Vs LCD is almost same, LED is still an upgrade.
The biggest problem I know with Plasma TV is screen burning which is not there in LCD or LED TV's.
In my humble opinion, we have to thank to the wide success of newest LED display brightness, viewing angle and refresh rates possible now a days (have you seen the latest 240 FPS? incredible image clarity!). I confess to always waiting for the second wave of technology, when the cost reaches a better value proposition as compared to legacy devices.
I never liked plasma TV set due to the higher power, screen burn-in. Although to be fair, these problems have been minimized with latest models, and yes, the response time is at least 2 orders of magnitude better than LED/LCD versions. So high motion content programming would be better in Plasma. However for my viewing profile, I prefer the video quality of LED panels, for the high contrast and awesome viewing angle.
Also, in my opinion the depth and weight of a TV set should be relevant to a user, there are documented cases of children getting hurt when the panel collapse forward towards the viewer if not properly fasten against a fix surface.
Have you noticed that most vendors are providing a stainless steel cable to fasten to a fix surface, but they are failing to provide all the hardware and/or accurate recommendations / instructions?
For all those DIY individuals that place a TV set too low on furniture, a large object with high center of gravity makes light units unstable and potentially harmful to toddlers.
So pass the word to household with young children, and be careful with your installation.
Yes, Samsung's "LED TV" marketing hype is just that, and misleading. The real question I have is whether TVs with red, green, and blue LED backlighting will undergo color shifts as the blue LEDs age faster than the red and green. As for TVs using white LED backlighs, I am not convinced that these have a significant advantage over CCFL given the inferior efficiency of production white LEDs compared to fluorescent today (20 to 50 lumens per watt vs. ~70 lumens per watt).
This is a technical publication read by "engineers"! As such the technical detail should be correct or its a waste of bytes.
The enlightened passed comment on the misinformation and confusion in the article. Maybe some could have been a bit more polite!?
You choose to ignore if you wish, please do not just add to the confusion around something you clearly understand little about.
The Samsung's are side-view and hence not locally dim able.
p.s. Real LED TV's will come along one day:-)
I get the article, some typo's in the article but I'm not a engineer like some of those posting a reply. I have been looking at flat screen TV technologies since I saw a plasma TV in Costco. I have two Sony Bravia LCD TV's in my house and am about to buy another one but this article made me think a little. I do what he did, browse Best Buy for current technologies, smart thing I think to do. LCD TV technology has been around consumer market since 2000 so we know that technology so what is the problem with understanding his bounce between OLED, LED and LCD. I say get your head out of the ground (metaphor) engineers and try to understand out of the box. You may understand the smallest detail about electronics but your not always right about everything. LED TV sounds and looks impressive but my question the resolution (pixel) and color spectrum. If Samsung who coined the term "LED TV" is improving then I may wait and check it out at Best Buy. People don't be rude give the author constructive criticism.
This article is a first-class example of what is wrong with 'blog-style' journalism where there is no copy editor involved in the loop. There are so many errors and typos' that the point of the article is lost.
As to the question 'will LED backlights' supplant CFL's - most certainly. No mercury, localized dimming and color generation options, more efficient, longer life (provided prime-source LED's are used) - the list of reasons goes on and on.
HAL..4: The auther wasn't saying the LED TV's are like the type you mentioned for big outdoor displays, he was saying that for normal LCD TV's that use a CCFL backlight being compared to a LCD TV with a LED backlight system. The big difference being the type (and control) of the backlight system for the main pixel display which is an LCD. Also, there are two types of LED backlight systems. One being a side-view type which is truly just a backlight system and the other being a local dimmable type that can increase contrast ratio depending on the displayed scene. NXP worked on such a system - pretty cool! Additionally, OLED technology is a totally different display type altogether. We do live in interesting times!
First, the author should proof this article - there are so many places where "LED" is written
but it has to be "LCD" to make any sense that the thrust of the article is lost.
Second, is he sure that the TVs he saw REALLY have LED pixels? If so, what is the native resolution?
Even a moderate 1280x720 is 921,600 pixels times 3 is 2.76 million LED chips. I think not. LED
displays are still for the sides of buildings unless the resolution is very low.
Organic LEDs have scaling problems which is why they haven't escaped hand-held devices yet. But
when that is solved, OLED will definitely be the next big thing in TV displays.
The current Samsung's are LED back lit LCD's as opposed to CCFL!
They are not real LED TV's, like the Sony O'LED's.
You have to dig deep to get past the marketing rubbish and into the real technical stuff to find this out.
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.