+1. I'm in the same position for an eyefinity setup.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Samsung intros IPS competitor: PLS
- Thread starter Snowdog
- Start date
+1. I'm in the same position for an eyefinity setup.
Do you have a source to back that up ?
Rumors I'd say
Suicidal Insanity
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 335
And the fact is has been delayed 2 or 3 times, it was supposed to come out in march or april originally.
C
Ceporom
Guest
The new Samsung tabs use them - and they are out and about from what I understand. Supposed to be a nice screen too. So I don't think the production issues are something that will doom the monitor in the long term. I think we will see them in September..
dowant120hz
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 632
That's what people call "new" - because, to be honest, all panels out there are "just" modified LCD panels. Some suck more and some suck less, and if PLS is as good as it looks, I'd call it revolutionary.
Revolutionary? As good as it looks? Have we read the same preview?
From what I have seen it is IPS with all the warts. It was lower contrast than shipping IPS, it had more uniformity issues than shipping IPS, and it has similar IPS glow with shipping IPS.
Where exactly is the revolution?? To my eyes it has yet to demonstrate anything better than IPS.
the revolution is the SEMI-GLARE COATING
( the only one really disadvantage of IPS panels ) that means vibrant colors not dull, very much sharper, no grainy and sparkle look and less eyestrain.the contrast is low like the other H-IPS and P-IPS around 650 / 700:1.
dowant120hz
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 632
since they panel is letting more light thru they can use even cheaper components for the backlighting
The cynic in me says the revolution is calling it PLS to avoid having to pay royalties to Hitachi, if that is actually the case.
People forget that it takes time to refine design and manufacturing when they are late to the party. LG has a big lead on them in everything to do with this technology.
If anti-glare is the only reason people will buy this stuff, I'll take my chances with LG based monitors for the time being.
Samsung is only claiming 10% increase in brightness, that is hardly revolutionary.
I can't say I understand the infatuation some people have with LG. LG is by far one of the worst panel manufacturers in the display industry. The only thing they have going for them is they currently have no competition in the 2560x1440/1600 market. If Samsung has actually found a way to manufacture durable WQHD panels without coating the surface with sand, LG is dead in the water. PLS won't just be an alternative to IPS, it will be a game changing technology. For well over 5+ years, we've been stuck with 1080p matte panels which are crystal clear, and 1440p/1600p matte panels which are heavily "frosted". In the Fall of 2011, Samsung is about to shatter this paradigm with the SA850, featuring the world's first crystal clear 2560x1440 matte panel.
it's also hard to say that mass production PLS will be anywhere near the pre-production sample that was sent for reviewers. I would imagine any sample would have been screened and tested at length to ensure a positive result.
In terms of the PLS / IPS war about to happen it can only be a good thing which may see LGD bring out new better tech faster.
In terms of the PLS / IPS war about to happen it can only be a good thing which may see LGD bring out new better tech faster.
No infatuation with LG. I just like IPS and since no one else sells IPS there isn't much choice. I am happy to see Samsung enter IPS, but from what I have seen so far, it seems to have inherited the same defects as well, so no revolution there.
You make it sound like cloning IPS while working around the patents is easier than changing the final coating. Clearly there are glossy LG IPS screens from Apple/Hazro that prove the sand is not in IPS, just in LG's current coating. Which if LG really faces losses over, they can change with much more ease than reinventing the whole IPS technology.
In most pixel pitches LG coating only bothers a vocal minority. In the 109 DPI screens it does seem like it annoys enough people to be a legitimate issue. But LG likely sells most of these screens in glossy form to Apple so they are unlikely to take a major hit from a lower AG version from Samsung.
AG haters do a poor job of communicating the issue with LG. Instead they pout on forums about how terrible Dell is, return them to Dell without making clear what the issue is. If you want change communicate better.
I expect LG/Apple next stop will be 27" 3840x2160 (glossy for Apple of course) and if the coating again gets more annoying with the smaller pixel pitch they really must do something.
There is no war about to happen. LG is likely halfway done on its next generation of super high resolution screens, while Samsung seems to be struggling mightily to get out a workable e-ips competitor. Its not like Samsung hasn't failed before with high end monitors, remember their XL line?
Nonsense.
LG produces panels with different coating (with or without "sand").
The best consumer monitor ever produced (NEC 2490WUXi) was built aroung LG panel.
PLS is IPS produced by Samsung with possibly more or possibly less "sand"(LOL) than some of LG panels.
PLS+IPS=*PS (same as PVA+MVA=*VA)
The more competition the better.
Last edited:
Exactly.
if u have any porblem with your ips coating, good for u, but there's some users that dont like the ips harsh coating.
pass to semi glare coating( the lighest ) from harsh coating ( the hardest ) is a bigger difference, is very similar to a glossy panel but without reflections.
pass to semi glare coating( the lighest ) from harsh coating ( the hardest ) is a bigger difference, is very similar to a glossy panel but without reflections.
i also see this difference passing from my glare laptop to my ips PC monitor
is a giant difference.
contrast in a pictures whit coating theres less difference, but in glare is better, and if your monitor have a low deep black that seems grey, with glossy panels the black is covered by the glares and appair very black.
is a giant difference.
contrast in a pictures whit coating theres less difference, but in glare is better, and if your monitor have a low deep black that seems grey, with glossy panels the black is covered by the glares and appair very black.
I won't argue that glossy screens can show color and contrast better (I notice this on my lowly TN laptop). But I don't understand all the heated arguments because it's 100% up to the individual which looks better. Like matte? Buy a matte screen. Like glossy? Buy a glossy screen. If you think a company should offer a particular monitor with a different coating, let them know.
Personally, I prefer a semi-matte because I can't stand to see my own reflection in the screen.
Personally, I prefer a semi-matte because I can't stand to see my own reflection in the screen.
sblantipodi
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2010
- Messages
- 3,765
can't understand why people who don't compared IPS and PVA in the same time talks.
compare them and than you will have no doubt that IPS coating is too aggressive, at least if you aren't a professionist that needs a CG monitor and you are ready to live with the problem.
compare them and than you will have no doubt that IPS coating is too aggressive, at least if you aren't a professionist that needs a CG monitor and you are ready to live with the problem.
You need to stop engaging in transference. Just because you have a problem with it, doesn't mean it is a problem for everyone or even a majority.
There are quite a few of us here with experience with all types of LCD and we don't have a problem with IPS matte screens. This issue is largely blown out of proportion by a vocal minority.
Snowdog,
Matte isn't the issue here. It's the simple fact that most matte panels (minus LG IPS panels) typically have a semi-glossy crystal clear appearance and have no reflections. LG IPS panels have a very grainy, sandy "crystalline" appearance. There is absolutely no reason for this appearance, aside from the fact that LG cut serious corners with their IPS manufacturing. Fanboyism aside, LG has a wide margin of needed improvement. The only reason most people don't complain about coatings is because most people buy TN panels which don't have this problem.
sblantipodi
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2010
- Messages
- 3,765
No need to argue about taste but AG coating is a de facto problem, grainy images is a de facto problem. So no need to argue on fact.
If you are not bothered from this problem this does not means that this isn't a problem.
You don't see the problem until you compare two monitors side by side and you probably haven't done this comparison, if you made it with what monitors?
WickedWeasel
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 444
delete
Last edited:
Did you miss the part where I said there are many of who have no problem with IPS matte monitors , we have the same cadre of AG zealots in every thread trying to scare people away from IPS matte monitors. Go read the U2412 thread. Lots of happy people, with no complaints about grainy appearance and outside of a minority of complainers that is the reality.
Then again, perhaps I shouldn't point that out, or you will go there and tell people they should like their monitors because they are grainy/sandy, blah, blah, blah....
What's wrong with the XL line of Samsungs? I have a XL2370 and it's amazing, in fact both professional and consumer reviews for this monitor have been very high.
Snowdog,
No one here is trying to "flame" LG. The fact is, unlike other manufacturers, LG does use an aggressive coating on their panels that does create a "grain" effect. This is a fact. I have used several MATTE displays such as the U2711 and the Hans-G HW191APB. Sitting side by side, both monitors had no reflections. None. Doing a side by side comparison, the U2711 was very grainy and text had a very aggressive "crystalline" appearance. This is a fact. The HW191APB on the other hand was crystal clear. Text on the HW191 was much clearer than text on the U2711. This is a fact. LG IPS panels do create higher than typical visual image distortion due to LG's specific surface treatment processes. This is a fact. There is nothing wrong with anyone buying product X or Y, but that isn't the issue of discussion. The issue is the fact that in terms of balancing AR with image fidelity, LG is behind the curve and does currently lag behind their competition (such as Samsung). Avoiding an LG IPS panel due to fidelity loss doesn't make one a "zealot" any more than avoiding a display due to back light bleed, reflections, poor color uniformity, bad viewing angles, low refresh rate, low native resolution, input lag, lack of inputs, etc. No one here is trying to "troll" LG --- but there are areas where LG does have room for improvement. And being a display forum, one would hope that buyers would be objective enough to give honest feedback on ALL aspects of their displays, whether it be positive or negative.
You continue to ignore the critical element.
This doesn't bother everyone who tries an IPS screen, it doesn't even bother the majority. As I said there is thread about the latest Dell U2412. No one is complaining about this.
Just because it is a problem for you, doesn't mean it is a problem for everyone.
Unlike my case where I can't stand glossy reflective displays, but I understand that some have no problem.
You really need to realize that not everyone is the same as you and other preferences are just as valid as yours.
This doesn't bother everyone who tries an IPS screen, it doesn't even bother the majority. As I said there is thread about the latest Dell U2412. No one is complaining about this.
Just because it is a problem for you, doesn't mean it is a problem for everyone.
Unlike my case where I can't stand glossy reflective displays, but I understand that some have no problem.
You really need to realize that not everyone is the same as you and other preferences are just as valid as yours.
Last edited:
XL was an attempt to produce expensive "high end" RGB LED monitors (20", 24", 30"). Resulted in total failure.
"XL" is now related to their regular low end (TN) screens.