Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Engineers Invent Displays That Top LCDs For Efficiency

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the fewer-electrons-means-more-money-for-food dept.

Displays 283

MechEMark writes with this excerpt from a hope-inspiring article at the IEEE Spectrum, which says "Researchers from Microsoft say they've built a prototype of a display screen using a technology that essentially mimics the optics in a telescope but at the scale of individual display pixels. The result is a display that is faster and more energy efficient than a liquid crystal display, or LCD, according to research reported yesterday in Nature Photonics ... The design greatly increases the amount of backlight that reaches the screen. The researchers were able to get about 36 percent of the backlight out of a pixel, more than three times as much light as an LCD can deliver. But Microsoft senior research engineer Michael Sinclair says that through design improvements, he expects that number to go up — theoretically, as high as 75 percent."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Is this going to be vapor ware? (1, Funny)

mr_stinky_britches (926212) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330385) it?

Wi-Fizzle Blaahgish heap.. []

Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that !! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330469)

Linux, LINUX, linux, whateverisix, is never, ever going to "create". All 'ix ever does is COPY, COPY, and COPY what's already been done, and then half-ass if it ever GETS DONE !!

That's #23 in "what's wrong with linux", the continuing saga of malaise and crap in kommie software.

Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330513)

That's a post worthy of a -1, Troll, but I have to agree in any case. Invention is not compatible with open source schtuf, and I see the "communism" angle (a Chineses copy, etc.). Maybe a +1, Insightful, but the crowd here biased toward the negative side when the truth hurts. I'd give you a +1 but I'd have to kill myself after.

Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (0)

shoor (33382) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330777)

Why isn't invention compatible with open source 'schtuf'?

Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (2, Funny)

fluffman86 (1006119) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330813)

Damn, I've got mod points and there's no "-1, Wrong"

Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331433)

Yup, you got the -1 and so will I (even if I happen to be bumped up temporarily). Whatever... those who mod must not have a valid response. It's been said before, but for those who value free-speech so much, /.ers have a bad habit of silencing ideas they disagree with, rather than ignoring or (gasp!) retorting the argument. I happen to think a healthy disagreement is a lot more interesting and productive than people stroking each other.

The point is valid. Linux is a great, stable and solid system. But I see no evidence of it being an innovator like Windows is.

(for the mods) -1 I have no valid answer

One problem. (5, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330389)

The only colour plane that works right now is blue.

Re:One problem. (5, Funny)

justhatched (1291470) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330415)

The only colour plane that works right now is blue.

But how do you know whether to reboot the display or the PC?

Re:One problem. (1, Funny)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330435)

Perfect! BSOD of the!

Re:One problem. (0, Troll)

supernova_hq (1014429) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330929)

Or a red ring of fire... We all know how reliable Microsoft Hardware is!

Re:One problem. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330723)

The only colour plane that works right now is blue.

The blue is a feature. It has a calming effect while you contact tech support to ask why your computer was bricked by the new and exciting upgrade you just installed. The loud hum coming from the monitor is also supposed to be a relaxing sound and the smoke is supposed to remind you of a warm fireplace much like the smoke from an Xbox does.

ALERT! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331369)

Misuse of the term "brick"....

Re:One problem. (-1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330871)

Two's Microsoft.

I, for one, won't be getting one if it has their name on it.

Re:One problem. (3, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331283)

I dunno. It's hard to find good, solid paperweights these days.

Re:One problem. (2, Funny)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331355)

I get some good ones when I go to the toilet...sometimes.

You can have one of them, if you like. ...or perhaps you'd prefer to make some of your own. I recommend a diet with a lot of eggs.

I for one... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330403)

I for one welcome our new blindingly bright DRM-locked display overlords. I hope they only work with Genuine Windows Vista.

already posted (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330405)

this has already been posted :(

already posted (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330555)

this has already been posted :(

already posted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331377)

that has already been posted, twice :(

OS Agnostic? (2, Interesting)

jasonmanley (921037) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330407)

Every time I hear about the great research that MS does I think about how great it is that they are putting their money into these IT projects. Then I stop and think "wait a minute, will this only work on Windows?"
Well it seems obvious to me that a display technology should not be impacted by an OS but then my more synical nature takes over and asks if there is SOMEHOW a way that they could make this a Windows only thing.
Well is it possible?

Re:OS Agnostic? (0)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330505)

It was done by a student with the help of a couple Microsoft engineers. If it got too big then Ballmer would scrap the project and allocate its resources toward futile attempts to dethrone Google.

"Regurgitate, not innovate." No, I'm not talking about EA.

Re:OS Agnostic? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330535)

If it got too big then Ballmer would scrap the project and allocate its resources toward futile attempts to dethrone Google.

I see what you did there. He has to take GOOG's chair before he can throw it at them!

obviously (5, Funny)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330699)

I can even think of two ways to block Linux.

If you can too, SHUT UP ABOUT IT!

Re:OS Agnostic? (2, Insightful)

davester666 (731373) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330729)

Yes, it is possible for this to be a Microsoft-only technology.

For example, they could just link it with their wacky 'Surface' [or whatever], so you have to buy the whole display/computer together, and since it'll be a proprietary, custom solution, sorry, but no Linux support. Or license it to companies making AllInOne computers [iMac knockoffs], but with the licensing restriction that Linux be prevented from running on it [what, more secret anti-competitive licensing terms].

Hell, they could mandate that the display only has say DisplayPort or HDMI connections, and requires some wacked version of these protocols [no, Microsoft would NEVER do that...] so that any device that wants to display using it would have to 'prove' that a license fee has been paid to Microsoft [via some complicated private/public key exchanges, along with an always-on network connection, that only occasionally doesn't work].

Re:OS Agnostic? (3, Insightful)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331007)

Nothing Linux cant adapt to.

Re:OS Agnostic? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330815)

Who cares? Insofar as Microsoft is in the hardware business, they don't seem to discriminate except by providing only Windows and Mac driversâ"but everyone does that, so no biggie. Lots of people use their Intellimouse or their Microsoft Natural Keyboard on their pet OS. I don't see what Microsoft would gain by doing more work to discriminate: they'd just give people a reason to buy some other excellent monitor. It's more of an Apple thing to do, and even *their* displays work fine on any OS.

Re:OS Agnostic? (1)

chammy (1096007) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331117)

Please. Just take a look at the case with ACPI: [] Microsoft has more than enough weight to throw around and make it hard to implement hardware standards.

Re:OS Agnostic? (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330825)

Probably they would rather sell it to everyone because they'd make more money. Also, there could be anti-trust implications of MS making displays that work only with Windows. And finally, if they did do that, it wouldn't be more than a week or two before some linux hackers got it working with their favorite OS.

Re:OS Agnostic? (3, Insightful)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330993)

Actually, all they need to do is follow the DRM laden specs that high end monitors on HDMI are supposed to use in Vista - and lock the monitors in that mode.

All Linux and other OS's need to do is enable DRM... MS isnt locking them out of anything... they arent implementing the right technology to use it, even though they "can" (or can't because the video card manufacturers wont release the specs needed to modify drivers under Linux).

This would have the same effect, and put the blame at someone else's feet (ie: not Microsoft's).

Note the sarcasm in the words... yet it is quite possible the truth will follow that path nonetheless... but it would be a stupid move. Especially with other technologies out there that would be competing against this.

Re:OS Agnostic? (4, Interesting)

Ahnteis (746045) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331027)

You mean require HDCP? Why would they do that? So that suddenly 75% (guess) of their customer base couldn't use their choice of monitor? For what possible gain?

HDCP is only required when you play blu-ray or hd-dvd discs. I suppose Microsoft could agree to require it on DRMed media -- but they've never even hinted that they would be stupid enough to require it for general purpose computing. What would be the point?!

Honestly, this train of thought looks like the paranoid rantings of a delusional conspiracy theorist.

Re:OS Agnostic? (3, Insightful)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330897)

I think you are being paranoid. MS didnt do that with any of their other hardware. (joysticks/keyboards/mouse/etc) Really, is there any practical way to keep someone from plugging a monitor into a linux box?

Re:OS Agnostic? (1)

scuba0 (950343) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331069)

Sure, just pull some closed DRM stuff on it like HDCP or similar solutions, I mean for the best experience of course ;)

Re:OS Agnostic? (2, Informative)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330977)

Your quite valid point aside, here's another one to throw into the mix...

Dont OLEDs obsolete this technology already? And I am pretty sure they get more than just blue out of an OLED display... :-)

Re:OS Agnostic? (2, Insightful)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331011)

Yeah OLEDs are superior by nature. No backlight thus no efficiency problems.
The light is generated on demand.

Re:OS Agnostic? (2, Funny)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331391)

It comes from Microsoft Research so it isn't intended to ever be used anywhere.

DLP rainbows (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330409)

It says that it uses mirrors? Will these new LCDs suffer rainbows now like single-chip DLP projects?

Re:DLP rainbows (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330621)

No matter. The rainbow chips'll be installed on the next-gen Macs to drive the shallow homoerotic pseudo-intellectual empty shell of an overpriced hipster image. The users, that is...not the computers themselves :)

Not to rail on the real old-skool Apple users who loved the platform before it became a symbol of the chatty sex-in-the-city coffee-house faggotry of recent years.

Re:DLP rainbows (5, Informative)

originalTMAN (694813) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330761)

unlikey for three reasons 1.) rainbow effect only exists in ("slow") single chip DLP's because, only one color is on at any given time. 2.) the mirrors don't spin and reflect per say, they bend to focus. 3.) the switching time is fast- 600fps fast- so even if they're were rainbows which they're shouldn't be, you wouldn't be able to see them because it is so far above the flicker fusion threshhold.

OLED (3, Insightful)

Brain Damaged Bogan (1006835) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330411)

Aren't OLED displays already a lot more efficient?

Re:OLED (2, Informative)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330951)

Yeah but they're a pain to manufacture still (still stuck to small form factors,) expensive for the number of square inches you get, hard to get really awesome brightness out of and then there's still problems with one of the colors (blue, I believe) fading much faster than the others.

For that matter, aren't quantum dot based displays a lot more efficient? Well, yes. But.

Re:OLED (3, Interesting)

JLF65 (888379) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331437)

Where have you been? OLEDs are easy to make these days. There was even an article on PRINTING OLEDs on poster size paper some months back.

OLEDs? SEDs? (2, Informative)

renoX (11677) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330419)

OLEDs and SEDs have many advantages over LCD (the big disadvantage being that they're not mass-produced cheaply currently: OLEDs are produced but they're not cheap)..

So I'm not very excited about a technology which only cuts the power consumption of LCDs..

Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330485)

You're not excited about an advance that can improve the type of monitors that we actually use? You must not get excited about display technology advances very often.

Or is it that you don't get excited about advances in general unless they speak to any of the various orphaned technologies you have adopted, simply for the sake of safeguarding your delusion that your understanding of technology is wider and deeper when compared to other students of technology?

I'm guessing it's a combination of the two.

Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331079)

Did you actually read the last part of the article?

"but commercial production is at least five years away."

By which time OLEDs will quite likely have unseated LCDs in a fairly major fashion, approaching current LCD pricing in similar formats.

A technology which is quite simply superior to LCD in _every way_ that counts, making this 'innovation' utterly, utterly useless well before it will ever get to market.

Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (5, Insightful)

Nymz (905908) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330497)

But notebook and PDA users might be exicited their batteries will be lasting longer.

Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (3, Insightful)

renoX (11677) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331121)

Except that OLEDs and SEDs in theory also reduce the power consumption over normal LCD, as the pixels themselves emit light so there's no need of backlight.
Sure SEDs and OLEDs are not really mass produced currently, but neither is this new technology for LCDs.

And SEDs and OLEDs have many other advantage over LCDs: better refresh rate, contrast, viewing angle (reliability for SEDs).
So this new LCD technology isn't very exciting..

Profitless excercise (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330421)

Since the new-look TVs and monitors will only ever be manufactured by the Chinese, I don't see why Microsoft invested any money in this. They should have done the best they could and hired some more lawyers. Or poached some top managerial talent from China telecom or whatever tech companies there are over there.

We're doomed to poverty and servitude, my friends.

Re:Profitless excercise (3, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330549)

Anna Pyayt led the research as part of her Ph.D. thesis at the University of Washington in collaboration with two Microsoft engineers. Microsoft funded the work and has also applied for a patent on the technology.

See, they may not manufacture it themselves, but they'll certainly be getting license fees for each unit sold...

They need something to make up for their lack of Vista sales.

Who knows, maybe the display will incorporate a TCPA/Palladium chip, so a licensed OS will be required also.

e.g. For an OS to be able to display something on this type of the monitor, the OS vendor must license the patent and pay the fee

And support the TCPA specs.

What better way to push Vista than to make the hardware explicitly require it? XP doesn't support the advanced DRM required for the more modern lines of efficient displays (which will eventually be mandated by law, just like laws will eventually be passed banning traditional lightbulbs).

Re:Profitless excercise (1)

caitsith01 (606117) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331017)

Yes, how dare someone who has invested money and effort, not to mention talent, into innovating be rewarded for that investment with exclusive rights for a limited period of time via a patent?

Of course by patenting it, the details of how it works become public and once the patent expires the technology is up for grabs for whoever wants to use it, too.

But it doesn't work for Linux. (-1, Troll)

Sticky Wicker Man (1330083) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330429)


Re:But it doesn't work for Linux. (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330571)

Microsoft has said that, the MPAA has said that, many many hardware vendors have stated that it just "doesn't work for Linux." Give open source hackers 2 months, and I promise you that hardware will be working with the kernel, and ready to get ported to other OS kernels.

Re:But it doesn't work for Linux. (1)

supernova_hq (1014429) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330953)

Ummmm..... Have you ever seen an old ATI Video Card or any Broadcom Wifi Card?!?

I've been waiting YEARS for that crap to work properly (wifi just started working recently and ati works with half the features)

contrast ratio: 20:1 (3, Informative)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330433)

And that's uselessly low.

It's easy to make an LCD more efficient, just block less light. The problem is that the contrast ratio is the difference between the least amount of light you can block and the most you can block. They've just basically made a system that isn't capable of blocking much light and so it's brighter. But at the expense of the contrast ratio.

Re:contrast ratio: 20:1 (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330489)

>And that's uselessly low.

I dunno, I think it'd be good enough for EGA... :-D

Re:contrast ratio: 20:1 (2, Interesting)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330541)

Do you have a source for this number? It wasn't in the TFA that I could see.

Re:contrast ratio: 20:1 (5, Informative)

scrib (1277042) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330631)

Since you didn't include a reference, it took a bit of searching to find a good source [] . This source also has some good graphics about how the display works.

"The first prototype's contrast ratio was 20:1, mainly due to the use of non-collimated back light. This was a limitation of the current prototype, not of the technology. This is supported by simulations ... which show that a ratio of at least 800:1 is possible."

20:1 may not be particularly useful, but 800:1 is certainly usable, and modified with "at least" makes this a technology "at least" worthy watching for future development. It's not reasonable to judge a technology by its first prototype.

Re:contrast ratio: 20:1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330703)

why would you comment on the contrast ratio of a prototype, if you bothered to look up the information on the current contrast ratios then you would also know that you are not limited to only 20:1, just another Anti MS bigot maybe?

With OLEDs almost here... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330479)

These guys are rushing late to market with a massively inferior product and a lot of meaningless talk.

You could almost call them the Microsoft of displays...

Microsoft's niche (3, Interesting)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330495)

I always said that Microsoft was pretty good as a hardware company.

Re:Microsoft's niche (1)

supernova_hq (1014429) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330971)

Yes because you automatically get a high quality award when you produce the only game system in history to have 4 LED's who's sole purpose is to tell you that it is is DEAD!

Re:Microsoft's niche (2, Insightful)

FrostedWheat (172733) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331105)

I'm not so sure. Didn't they invent the F-lock key?

Re:Microsoft's niche (1)

vandoravp (709954) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331225)

You have to give them credit for popularizing Control, Alt, and Delete. Without Microsoft, those keys might have languished in obscurity.

Microsoft invented? (-1, Troll)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330499)

I'm still having trouble with the article title. Microsoft invented something? Are you sure?

Re:Microsoft invented? (2, Funny)

bursch-X (458146) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330593)

It was done by a student, the Microsoft engineers were probably taking notes ;-) business as usual.

Re:Microsoft invented? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331243)

Troll!? Where has my /. gone?

The OLPC screen already does this (5, Interesting)

NixieBunny (859050) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330503)

That's one reason it gets such good battery life. It uses the magic of diffraction gratings to use nearly all the light that it receives. I read that the creator of the screen is in the process of commercializing it, and I can't wait for it to get into the world of readily-available products.

Re:The OLPC screen already does this (2)

originalTMAN (694813) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330801)

A diffraction grating is not at all the same as a reflecting telescope. But how do the gratings help? I thought the problem was the polarization of light? Wouldn't the gratings be extremely narrow band filters?

The Magic of Black and White (1)

Nymz (905908) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330877)

That's one reason it gets such good battery life. It uses the magic of diffraction gratings...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the diffraction grating 'helps' by replacing the color filter. The color filter absorbs a portion of light, so when there is no color filter, then there is less light lost. Less light lost translates into less light you have to generate, and a power savings.

I believe the OLPC screen [] has 2 modes. Mode 1 is for backlit color like a normal screen, and mode 2 is for reflective black and white for use on a sunny day.

Re:The OLPC screen already does this (1)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331197)

Wouldn't you prefer an OLED display though?

Not to be ignored... (5, Interesting)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330529) the faster switching speed. Considering this prototype has a ~1ms switching time, and LED backlights are already popular, it may be feasible to create, in effect, a flat panel DLP display by rapidly cycling the backlight color.

Current flat panel displays have three sub-pixels in every pixel. One only allows red light, one blue, and one green. It's very inefficient: You need three LCD elements to display each pixel, and two-thirds of the backlight is blocked outright by the color filters.

With a color-cycling display, every element displays every color in turn, so (all else being equal) you triple the resolution *and* the efficiency.

The only downside is a possible rainbow effect if the display does not cycle colors quickly enough.

Re:Not to be ignored... (1) (843637) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330685)

The only downside is a possible rainbow effect if the display does not cycle colors quickly enough.

Yeah, I think LCD projectors do this. Wave your hand quickly while watching, and you'll see red, green, and blue...kinda neat, how quickly it cycles and totally fools one's brain/eyes into thinking that one is seeing white, yellow, magenta, cyan etc etc.

I tell ya though, it's hard to watch the screen for extended amounts of time...eye strain is terrible compared to an LCD screen...especially at 90" across.

And to the poster below that says that LCDs aren't cheap...a 22" Samsung wide is $ is that not cheap?

Re:Not to be ignored... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331123)

The other downside is the loss of ClearType.

Then again, they may cram much more pixels on the same space as there are no subpixels needed (a 2x2 grid where we have a 3x1 grid now).

Full - HD on the EEE.. *smile*

anyways. new technology => nice.

Different point of view (4, Insightful)

kmac06 (608921) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330531)

I guess I'm looking at this from a different point of view from most of the comments so far. I read the article, and I'm thinking "Wow! What a cool new way of attacking an old problem!" It's a brand new technology, I don't expect it to be immediately better than decades old technology overnight. I just like the new technique and the micro-scale optics. Then again, I am studying optics in graduate school so I might be a bit biased...

Does it run in Linux? (-1, Redundant)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330591)

(sorry - couldn't resist)

Re:Does it run in Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330627)


Re:Does it run in Linux? (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330745)

No. I know of very few screens that run an OS (isn't there one that will play media from a flash drive?). Now whether Linux can run it is another story. If it can accept VGA/DVI input (CRT and LCD are two very different technologies, but they use the same interface), sure. But if it needs a new interface (or uses one whether it needs it or not), it could be a few weeks.

One down, way more to go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330633)

Way to go. They addressed one of the issues of LCD screens.
Samsung if I remember correctly works on the color problem: they have already 10BPP, too bad more bits per pixel would require 3 or more DVI connectors...
There also was a demo for "real" black lcd screen somewhere.

Now the remaining problems of response time, native resolution and viewing angle need to be solved. There are some solutions but they are at the expense of other qualities. For example response time decrease is usually achieved by lowering the color depth.

The price of LCDs isn't too great either.

640 (0, Troll)

PacketShaper (917017) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330647)

Pixels should be enough for anyone. /Ducks

Microsoft makes LCD's (-1, Troll)

lsldesign (921351) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330653)

Ohh yeah i just cant wait for this, Since M$ has such a good reputation for improving other peoples work, let alone there own. I mean if you consider how much more efficent and effective Vista is. These new displays should be fantastic..... NOT!

Not a complete loss... (1)

BountyX (1227176) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330695)

Sounds like the same concept can be applied to OLED screens. Quick create a company in eastern texas and patent it!

I'm not sure if it's insulting, but... (-1, Redundant)

21mhz (443080) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330715)

I always say that Microsoft is a damn good hardware manufacturer.

Re:I'm not sure if it's insulting, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330759)

rrod much?

Free Monitor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330791)

Wasn't Billy said that the hardware will be free?.

Name change in order? (1)

suck_burners_rice (1258684) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330819)

If Microsoft is making hardware now, shouldn't they change the name of the company to Microhard? Or perhaps they should keep the name and in 50 years, when they come to the conclusion that there is no more money to be made in computer hardware or software, and they become an ice cream company, Microsoft will be an excellent name to market their popular soft serve.

Software to Hardware (1)

jadedoto (1242580) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330845)

Is the mammoth losing the front on software, realizing the recent futilities in software patents... and moving on to challenge the hardware market? :O

If this is 100% right. (2, Funny)

AftanGustur (7715) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330857)

That means that Microsoft has, for the very first time, invented something useful.

No, please, I'm dead serious about this !

Re:If this is 100% right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331417)

Luckily this is HW so we're still right when saying that MS never wrote a good piece of software :-)

W-what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24330879)

Microsoft is innovating? But slashdot has taught me that such an event is unconceivable... my world is destroyed!

Engineers (0, Redundant)

Whiteox (919863) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330895)

Microsoft have engineers? Shit! What next!!!
I mean I know that they design software and they outsource everything else, but inhouse hardware engineers?
Is this new? Have they had them for long? R&D???
I'm gobsmacked!

Re:Engineers (0, Troll)

lsldesign (921351) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330961)

I donâ(TM)t think Microsoft really "design" software! they do make or develop it.... but I think design is just taking it a bit far. Design would infer they think out the process carefully. Which I think history has proven otherwise. But hey, if they can create something useful for all OS's to use... they may actual start doing well again!

it's microsoft... (5, Funny)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330909)

... quickly bash them, before they do anything good.

Microsoft doing something worthwhile (1, Redundant)

maroberts (15852) | more than 6 years ago | (#24330959)

reported on Slashdot.

Error - does not compute

I think I just BSOD'd myself.

Viewable angle (4, Interesting)

dangitman (862676) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331045)

If this really works like a telescope, then wouldn't that mean the display would have a very low viewable angle? After all, a telescope is just a telephoto lens. And telephoto lenses have a narrow field-of-view.

So, you'd probably have to look directly at the display from a perpendicular angle. Move a little to the side, and you're going to lose the image altogether, or have it severely degraded. LCDs are already bad enough in this respect.

Re:Viewable angle (1)

Arimus (198136) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331379)

Actually low-viewing angle screens can be useful...

Everywhere: prevents shoulder surfing....

Work: prevents the boss knowing you are now on the 200th round of solitare...

Still waiting for color reflective displays.... (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331109)

I'm still waiting for a decent resolution full color display that doesn't require a backlight at all, but is instead illuminated by front lighting just like other objects that don't emit their own light.

Uh... (0, Redundant)

Artuir (1226648) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331203)

Microsoft has engineers? And they invented something useful??


Scary thought.... (1)

Bazman (4849) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331291)

Do you really want over a million Microsoft-constructed telescopes pointing at you while you *ahem* surf the web?

Why oh why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24331419)

did you made windows while you where able to be a decent hardware manufacturer.

Service Pack (2, Funny)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 6 years ago | (#24331439)

Red Colour Hue on MVLB Displays

Some users have noticed a slight rosy color hue on their new Microsoft(TM) MVLB (MakeVistaLookBetter) displays. This is a design feature, but users who have downgraded their computer systems to vastly inferior Operating Systems (Windows XP or Lin.. [MSKb Editor: REMOVED - Mention that and you're sacked]) may wish to obtain MVLB Service Pack 1 to re-balance the colors to a more natural 'look-and-feel'.

Article ID : 45888372
Last Review : July 25, 2008
Revision : 1.0

You look at your MVLB display and the world seems rosy.

MVLB display optics have been chromatically adjusted to emphasise the red end of the color spectrum to enhance the user experience with Windows(TM) Vista.

Users can obtain MVLB Service Pack 1, which comprises 3932160 (1280x1024x3) colour-corrected nano-dots. Using the supplied grid alignment device (ruler) and tweezers, one dot should be carefully applied to the surface of the MVLB immediately above each pixel. Note that each nano-dot is color-balanced for a specific pixel color (red, green and blue) and so must be applied above the correct display pixel - each nano-dot has an identifying letter ('R', 'G' and 'B') stamped on its edge. Users will require a tube of superglue and possibly a scanning electron microscope.

NOTE: Do not sneeze whilst applying the nano-dots.

MVLB V1.0 displays

KEYWORDS: MVLB, rosy, tinted, Vista

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?