OLED or SED? Which technology you looking forward to more?

"Mata Hari" wrote in message
...
OLED has some promise, SED might have more but I haven't seen a good
description on how it works.

carbon buckytube emitters shoot electrons into phosphors on screen surface

a flat crt

"R Sweeney" wrote in message
. ..

"Mata Hari" wrote in message
...
OLED has some promise, SED might have more but I haven't seen a good
description on how it works.

carbon buckytube emitters shoot electrons into phosphors on screen surface

a flat crt

oops, forgot something

except no mask, each buckytube array shoots into its own single color
phosphor cell

so you get flatness of a PDP with the viewing angle and dynamic range/gamut
of a CRT (except better since there are no lost or diffracted/bounced
electrons from the mask), with the long lifetime of electron phosphors
instead of shorter lived UV phosphors.

In article Carlos Moreno writes:
Trey Rozsa wrote:

It [SED] will have superior viewing angles, black levels, and
pixel response time (inherent in CRTs), while having the slim feature
and high contrast ratio seen in plasma and LCD technologies.

Well, plasma is reporte to have pretty much the same pixel response time as
CRTs.


Errr.... Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but... What on earth
are you talking about???

High contrast ration seen in Plasma and LCD??? The contrast ratio
of Plasma is pretty close to an utterly intolerable for someone
with reasonably good eyesight and reasonable level of tolerance.

LCD is so unbelievably below the absolutely minimally tolerable
level in terms of contrast ratio.

Many we see on display seem poor, but the specs indicate they can be set
up to do better. Once in a while I have seen them doing quite well.

It seems that the best of the LCDs may nose out the plasma sets on this.


SEDs reportedly have excellent contrast ratio *UNLIKE* Plasma or
^^^^^^^^^^
LCD (and that unlike has such particular emphasis --- the contrast
ratio of SEDs reportedly is unbleievably good, whereas for Plasma
is particularly bad, and for LCDs is beyond unbelievably bad).

Reportedly -- not actually, because you haven't seen any in stores, and
are unlikely to for quite some time, as their introduction has been pushed
off another year from recent reports.

Again, someone corrects me if I'm wrong?

The contrast ratio of plasma and LCD seems to be a good deal better than
sets that cannot be found in the stores.


Alan

In article "R Sweeney" writes:

so you get flatness of a PDP with the viewing angle and dynamic range/gamut
of a CRT (except better since there are no lost or diffracted/bounced
electrons from the mask), with the long lifetime of electron phosphors
instead of shorter lived UV phosphors.

It was my understanding that the electrons hitting the phosphors degraded
them faster than stimulating them with UV.

Alan

Den 09.02.2007 kl. 16:40 skrev Carlos Moreno
:

Trey Rozsa wrote:

It [SED] will have superior viewing angles, black levels, and
pixel response time (inherent in CRTs), while having the slim feature
and high contrast ratio seen in plasma and LCD technologies.

Errr.... Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but... What on earth
are you talking about???

High contrast ration seen in Plasma and LCD??? The contrast ratio
of Plasma is pretty close to an utterly intolerable for someone
with reasonably good eyesight and reasonable level of tolerance.

LCD is so unbelievably below the absolutely minimally tolerable
level in terms of contrast ratio.

SEDs reportedly have excellent contrast ratio *UNLIKE* Plasma or
LCD (and that unlike has such particular emphasis --- the contrast
ratio of SEDs reportedly is unbleievably good, whereas for Plasma
is particularly bad, and for LCDs is beyond unbelievably bad).

Again, someone corrects me if I'm wrong?
++++++++++++++
"You cannot correct a warrior, only fight against him.";-))

You can have contrast ratios of 5000:1 or 10.000:1 in a plasma TV.
When i see the sets i must say that i prefer the 10.000:1 absolutely.

LCD's will get more and more expensive as the contrast ratio goes up.
So to my way of thinking:"Contrast ratio is good!";-)))

The pictures i have seen from screen shots of SED-TV, it looks like a more
natural color and light setting.
The technology should be based on the old CRT, but instead of 1 electron
beam for the whole TV, there will be a mini electron beam behind every
pixel on the screen.

Greets
jens

--
Sendt med Operas banebrydende postklient:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Alan wrote:

SEDs reportedly have excellent contrast ratio *UNLIKE* Plasma or
^^^^^^^^^^

Reportedly -- not actually, because you haven't seen any in stores

How does this have anything to do with it? Reportedly means, as
I understand it, "according to reports" --- it does not imply who
gives those reports.

In this case, actual SED tv sets have been produced (not mass
produced, and certainly not commercially produced), but prototype
units of this technology have been already shown to the public.


Carlos
--

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In article "R Sweeney"
writes:

so you get flatness of a PDP with the viewing angle and dynamic
range/gamut
of a CRT (except better since there are no lost or diffracted/bounced
electrons from the mask), with the long lifetime of electron phosphors
instead of shorter lived UV phosphors.

It was my understanding that the electrons hitting the phosphors degraded
them faster than stimulating them with UV.

Alan

according to a solid state physicist working in phosphors who used to work
for me, they are different phosphors,

UV phosphors have lower lifetimes than electron ones

Although, there has been an incredible amount of progress in narrowing the
gap.

"Carlos Moreno" wrote in

How does this have anything to do with it? Reportedly means, as
I understand it, "according to reports" --- it does not imply who
gives those reports.

In this case, actual SED tv sets have been produced (not mass
produced, and certainly not commercially produced), but prototype
units of this technology have been already shown to the public.


Carlos

I have seen SED's (and the similar micromachined FED's) at conferences, MUCH
superior to anything else, save OLED.

And the OLED displays were shockingly good - even though they were
destroying themselves at the output levels they were emitting.

As bright as the sun / as dark as the night.

james wrote:

I'm looking forward to the Star Trek holodeck - hitting the shelves this
Christmas, they say! lol

Dang, I missed that announcement!! Hope it's within my price range.
If not, I'll have to hang out at Circut City or Best Buy and check it out!
:-)

Just be careful when you go there --- check the approximate size
of the building as seen from the outside; you don't want to be
fooled by a square mile with lots of fancy electronic gadgets
that IS nothing more than a holodeck simulation!!!

;-)

Carlos
--

"Carlos Moreno" wrote in message
...
james wrote:

I'm looking forward to the Star Trek holodeck - hitting the shelves this
Christmas, they say! lol

Dang, I missed that announcement!! Hope it's within my price range.
If not, I'll have to hang out at Circut City or Best Buy and check it
out!
:-)

Just be careful when you go there --- check the approximate size
of the building as seen from the outside; you don't want to be
fooled by a square mile with lots of fancy electronic gadgets
that IS nothing more than a holodeck simulation!!!

;-)

Carlos
--

Oh man, I forgot about that!!! Now, I won't be sure if what I'm seeing
is real or not. Some of those building sure seem big inside already.
Maybe, they are testing the holodeck without us knowing!!
I bet that the day after my 100th birthday and I drop dead, holodeck
technology will show up!
james