A
akotlar
Guest
I don't think OLED is the future at all.
Consider the past of lcd. We've gone from really awful displays with extreme blur, horrible refresh rates, and horrible contrast (If they even had color), and you had to be right in front of the lcd to see it in the late 80's/early 90's. Today, you have lcds with easyto see displays in all angles, good refresh rates, high contrast, and are actually competiting against plasma and oled. Considering how little it cost to make an lcd display, I'd bet you'd see an lcd of the exact or comparable quality for less then the same sized oled before oleds are affordable.
You mean...right now? Because that last line is today, except "comparable" is extremely vague. The highest end local dimming sets certainly are comparable, but also at the same time rediculously inferior in every measure (it's a conundrum, explainable by referencing the limits of the average consumer's perception). Here's a good article on actual LCD response times: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2356393,00.asp
Response times haven't improved since the advent of S-IPS. One reason being that liquid crystal viscosity has not changed. You still have the same physical limitation. The only thing that has been improved is the abolishment of sample&hold time with strobing backgrounds, and overdrive voltages to help speed up liquid crystal state changes (albeit only mildly successfully).
OLED is clearly the way forward, as anyone who has used, or seen, an OLED display will tell you. LCD is like the Tower of Babel at this point. It is trying to reach for a performance level its foundation cannot sustain, and this is why you see huge processing requirements to get good quality (dynamic blacklights, strobing backlights, local dimming, overdrive, frame insertion including interpolation and black frame insertion, specially designed 120hz sets, 240hz sets, displays specially designed for gaming with TN matrix, displays designed for color work with VA matrixes, etc) at massive latency costs (up to ~100ms for the highest quality processing). Have you seen what most of these displays look like in Game mode (or any 33ms or lower latency mode?). They look like the displays from 2002. Because outside of extra processing, the are. The LCD industry is selling people this great white lie. Its the pink elephant in the room. Everyone knows the basic tech isn't improving, but no one really talks about it.
As for why other technology didn't work out. Well who knows. The performance & image quality of SED and OLED is very similar. In fact the technology is thematically similar. Both use quickly reacting luminescent physically independent pixels, except the infrastructure needed for one pixel on a SED display is far greater. They are both like expanded versions of plasma displays, except OLED tech seems to have fewer issues [than SED], and you get the additional sex appeal of thinness, which for some reason every sheeple in the world seems to believe is the holy grail of TV's.
Last edited by a moderator: