Beta
×

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!

Sony's OEL Thinner And Better Than Today's LCDs?

CmdrTaco posted more than 13 years ago | from the smaller-screens-are-better dept.

Technology 131

Matrium writes: "MSNBC is running an article about Sony's new Slim TV is thinner, brighter, and has a better picture then current LCD screens. The organic electroluminescent (OEL) display is a little thicker then a credit card was showed Wednesday. These screens offer a faster responce then LCD becuase the are self-luminous (no back-lighting required) and allow a wider viewing angle. Sony hopes to have these screens in mass production by 2003." Someday we'll lose our laptops in between pages of books just like we lose plane tickets/notes/phone numbers today.

cancel ×

131 comments

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

Diaramas (1)

robbway (200983) | more than 13 years ago | (#446360)

The article implies the image is semi-transparent. You could create some very nice psuedo-3D diaramas with layering. As for cost, no initial demand will keep it high for three or more years after production begins. At the very least, we can watch the price of LCDs go down.

----------------------

Re:OEL or OLED? (5)

SubtleNuance (184325) | more than 13 years ago | (#446361)

However, I don't think Sony should be changing the acronymn to sound like their own technology. It is exactly the same thing.

OH MY GOD! sony is trying to confuse the marketplace in order to foster the appearance of them having significant technology when none exist! This is so *NOT* like sony at all!

Ever heard of Beta, MemoryStick, SuperDisk or MiniDisk? sony is the most notorious anti-comeptitive technology hording whore in the tech world. Doesnt anyone remember that a$$hole loudmouth VP "we'll block them at their HD, we'll block them at the monitor, we'll block them at the ISP" nonsense?

Remeber: sony is a member of the RIAA and MPAA and is leading the pack in fighting for the control of our general artistic culture. They dont even like CDRs for god sakes because they can be used to copy audio CDs.

I NEVER BUY ANYTHING MADE BY SONY! I tell people (because I am often asked about such things) to NEVER BUY ANYTHING MADE BY SONY! I dont care how 'cool' sonys products are (frankly I find them rather low quality and crappy for the most part (on the individual electronics end)) I will never buy a piece of sony kit. Ever. I suggest *YOU ALL* do the same.

Re:Spelling and grammar: 3 out of 10 [OT] (1)

LuckyLuke58 (207964) | more than 13 years ago | (#446362)

There is, of course, a difference between "writing style" and "spelling and grammar errors". I notice you could only find problems with the former in my post. You must have been pretty desperate.

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

mojo-raisin (223411) | more than 13 years ago | (#446363)

Dude. We already know you aren't gay. You wrote that story about a month ago about how you got all loaded, then wrote a sexually explicit proposal to a female coworker. Then you said you were fired the following Monday.

If anything, when you're drunk your true sexuality comes through. This episode clearly shows you had an attraction to this woman.

So are you trolling with the gay comments or are you confused?

Re:OEL or OLED? (1)

sh00z (206503) | more than 13 years ago | (#446364)

Yep. We may have a de facto standard. Sony's almost the same 500-lb gorilla that Micros~1 is.

Three years ago, the only acronym in use was LEP for light-emitting polymer. That one has almost completely vanished

Do a search on "Slim TV" (1)

pmancini (20121) | more than 13 years ago | (#446365)

I wanted to find more information on the web about this so called slim TV and all I found was a bunch of men who are thin and dress in womens clothing looking for dates!!! I think Sony should rethink the name of this thing!!!

Re:Sounds like softscreens ;) (2)

Teferi (16171) | more than 13 years ago | (#446366)

Softscreens have actually featured in most of Baxter's (recent) work, from Titan onwards.

And yes, I'd cheerfully kill to get my hands on one. :P


"If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.

What's the difference between OEL and OLED (1)

no_such_user (196771) | more than 13 years ago | (#446367)

I've seen some "organic light-emitting diodes" (OLEDs), but not "organic electroluminescent" - or have I? Are these the same technologies?

The latest OLED sighting was IBM's linux-watch at LinuxWorldExpo - they had an astonishingly small display (certainly not more than 1"x1") running mono at 640x480. Very crisp! Though LCDs can surely do this resolution, (think LCD projectors) they were showing this on a WATCH. Cool stuff.

One last thing: How do these displays (OEL *or* OLED, if there's a difference) hold up under bright light, i.e. sunlight?

Re:Weight and power aren't important (2)

Shoeboy (16224) | more than 13 years ago | (#446368)

Actually it was a vaio joke.
I take a lot of flak from my gay friends about boring grey toshiba tecra and inwin full tower with missing cover.
On the downside, my tecra is 3 years old, but on the upside, it's been reliable for all 3 years while vaio's have to be serviced every few days.
If I'm going to service anything that often, it'd better buy me dinner first ;-)
--Shoeboy

Medical Field (1)

jjr (6873) | more than 13 years ago | (#446369)

I can see these being used there first. They always seem to have the cool stuff first.

Re:Weight and power aren't important (2)

jandrese (485) | more than 13 years ago | (#446370)

As a practicing homosexual
Where did this non sequitur come from?

Anyway, it's pretty common knowledge that some of the Viaos are built cheaply, especially the little half sized ones. If you are really breaking them left and right, perhaps you should look into a more sturdy laptop (perhaps even a ruggedized one).

Also, when you close the screen, push from the bottom of the LCD near the joints instead of near the top, where the stress of closing the laptop is spread across the whole screen.

Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.

Re:Thinner, Brighter, Faster - and more expensive? (2)

Caduceus1 (178942) | more than 13 years ago | (#446371)

I believe it was stated that the cost to produce would be 20% less than LCD - however, the expected lifetime of a unit at this point is only 33-50% of LCD. If the cost difference can match the lifetime, and make them user-replaceable on a laptop, then we can have disposable screens...

Re:Thinner, Brighter, Faster - and more expensive? (3)

mojo-raisin (223411) | more than 13 years ago | (#446372)

Actually, the did compare the costs. From the article:

Tetsuo Urabe, general manager of Sony's OEL development department, said the company would aim to produce OEL screens to match or exceed LCDs in size, price and longevity.

But what seemed strange to me was this comment:

Sony's Urabe set a target of a 10,000-hour life for the screens and expressed confidence that manufacturing processes would pose no insurmountable problems.

10,000 hours is just 417 days. So basically if you use your computer 8 hours a day, the monitor will be dead in 3 years. Most people don't want to fork out ~$1000 for a new monitor that often. I know I plan on keeping my CRT for a lot longer than that.

Re:What about power consumption? (1)

kwashiorkor (105138) | more than 13 years ago | (#446373)

It's also extremely similar to the Thick Film Transistor technology used by iFire [ifire.com] displays.

They're both extremely thin, low power consumption, EL material based displays.

The thing about iFire is that it's more likely to be cheaper to produce than OLED techs (and a lot cheaper than LCD) because of it's simple, fault tolerant construction. It's also advanced a lot further, faster than OLED in the last two years and seems capable of scaling to television sized screens with little difficulty.
-- kwashiorkor --
Leaps in Logic
should not be confused with

Wow, TV's get thinner (4)

typical geek (261980) | more than 13 years ago | (#446374)

and Americans get wider!

copy editing (1)

schtum (166052) | more than 13 years ago | (#446375)

As a journalism student at a major university, I feel obligated to inform you (the Slashdot editors) that it's okay to edit quotes for grammar in the interest of clarity. In fact, it's standard practice. Now I don't expect you to go through the message boards fixing everyone's spelling and grammar manglings, but the least you could do is give news submissions a once-over before you post them. If you need to create a copy editing position specifically for this task, please be aware that I am currently available for hire. Thank you.

Already on the market in the US (1)

ritalin (4861) | more than 13 years ago | (#446376)

Ok, the suject is a little misleading.

But it got you to read this, didn't it?

Its not completely false, this technology is in an american consumer device already. I can think of 2 of them.
There is a motorola timeport with a 3 color Organic Electro Luminescent display available now at http://commerce.motorola.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/Pr oductDisplay?prrfnbr=217948&prmenbr=126&phone_cgrf nbr=1&zipcode=


The other is a pioneer car stereo head unit. It does 3d and stuff. Check it out at their site. I prefer traditional stereo displays, which are dot matrix and just show Time, Track disc, etc...i don't need visualization.

Re:Books? (1)

cnkeller (181482) | more than 13 years ago | (#446377)

Right now it is just too hard to curl up in bed with your laptop. My palm is close, but is too small.

Pretty arrogrant aren't ya? Showing off how your palm is too small to curl up in bed with...

How much (1)

tattered_tux (240373) | more than 13 years ago | (#446378)

What is the cost compared to todays LCD's, yeah this is nice and all but i find $1300 bucks for LCD a bit expensive, also what is the Max size they can make? I want it to look like I have a windsail on my desk :-)

Clothing...? (1)

xkenny13 (309849) | more than 13 years ago | (#446379)

I'm thinking of making bikinis out of this stuff ... then all hackers have to do is find a way to make it suddenly transparent. :-)

Sounds like softscreens ;) (1)

Mordain (204988) | more than 13 years ago | (#446380)

Maybe A.C. Clark and Stephen Baxter were pretty close to reality in the Light of Other Days. Now just adapt this stuf to work on contact like eye enhancements ....

wouldn't it be cool if.... (1)

SGDarkKnight (253157) | more than 13 years ago | (#446381)

so when are we getting the technology to beam the information directly into our brains, you know, aside from using the technology found in UFO's to do it...

Re:Power, durability ? (1)

angelo (21182) | more than 13 years ago | (#446382)

Is your screen on the whole time? If so, you should consider APM support to at least turn the bugger off. 1.14 years of continuous use is a bit much, even for a laptop.

You can watch world take-over on slashdot now! (1)

bortbox (77540) | more than 13 years ago | (#446383)

Just scanning through slashdot for mentions of Sony, lets see what the company is up to:

They control what we see (MPAA, Sony music and picture industries), what we see it on (newer, flatter, sharper displays), how it gets rendered (new graphics chip on the way). How long do you think it will be till they put a copy protection scheme in effect on both their monitors and the graphic subsystem? I know this sounds silly now, but then again, the whole content control system going into effect now would have seemed ridiculous as well a year ago.

Well, at least they haven't moved in on the simple pleasures of life: pets (oh, wait), human companions (uhhhhh)... oh forget it. Sony will be introducing a MIPs powered girlfriend next year, and somehow she will deter you from watching your movies over the Internet.

bort

Re:Power, durability ? (1)

mirko (198274) | more than 13 years ago | (#446384)

I'd like to put my APM onunder Linux but I have not been that lucky until now :-(

It is not even able to shut down properly.


--

Why? (2)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 13 years ago | (#446385)

Probably because you wouldn't have a choice.

What if this takes less power than an LCD? Then you really have no design choice if you want to create a powerful PDA that still happens to be miserly.

You may never see this on your desktop, replacing your CRT. But your next Palm, or Gameboy Advance, or handheld computing unit, may be built around the OEL for other properties; size, weight, power, etc.

Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

WuTangClanner (181082) | more than 13 years ago | (#446386)

"As a practicing homosexual
Where did this non sequitur come from?"

What he meant was that he purchased a vaio and in doing so allowed the salesman who sold it to him to, well.. as the saying goes, you know?

:)
(psst, he got reamed)

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

PD (9577) | more than 13 years ago | (#446387)

>As a practicing homosexual, I've had
>to replace my
>vaio 4 times already due to
>a cracked screen.

Just a hint... turn the dang thing sideways first. It might be easier. Heh heh.

Books? (2)

alteridem (46954) | more than 13 years ago | (#446388)

How are we going to loose our laptops between the pages of books? When my laptop gets that small, I won't have any need for books anymore. It is the best way of making digital books acceptable to more than just the geek few. Right now it is just too hard to curl up in bed with your laptop. My palm is close, but is too small.

Whatever happened to Sony's Plasmatron? (3)

dublin (31215) | more than 13 years ago | (#446389)

This sort of thing makes me wonder whatever happened to the Sony Plasmatron of a few years ago. It was based on a plasma switched LCD technology invented by Tektronix, and was supposed to be a way of building large screens using simple printing processes rather than the photolithigraphic semiconductor process used by LCDs, conventinal plasma screens, and thier ilk (including this OLED panel).

The real savings was supposed to be that the elimination of the clean room requirement and processing would allow screens to be almost arbitrarily large and *much* cheaper.

Sony even showed a working prototype at CES several years back (1996?), and said it would be available soon, but the technology has dropped completely out of sight since then.

Anybody know what happened? Inquiring minds want to know...

Check your facts (was Re: OEL or OLED?) (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#446390)

Sony is uspeakably evil, which is something most Slashdotters seem to miss when eyeing the latest Vaio laptop. I'm constantly amazed at how many times the word 'Vaio' appears on Slashdot; they're overpriced, underspecced, and (poorly) manufactured by a company that makes AOL Time Warner look benign by comparison. People, Microsoft is just a software vendor; Sony's the company that's going to make your Sony movies and Sony music play only on Sony media in authorized Sony hardware.

Superdisk is Imation's format. Sony did have an entry into the superfloppy market--the 200 MB HiFD disk--but it was too late, since by that point most people had a Zip or Superdisk drive. Since all the other superfloppy formats are equally proprietary, I'm not sure this is the best example of Sony's modus operandi.

Minidisc is a perfect example. Even back in 1992, data and audio MDs were purposely made incompatible. Today, it's impossible to find a portable Minidisc recorder with digital output. Sony, of course, claims this is to prevent people from making illegal copies without some generational degradation. True to form, however, Sony offers digital output on all their high-end home decks.

Of course, Minidisc utterly failed to take the world by storm, but that's poor consolation, because it's actually a good format--a cheap, rewriteable, magneto-optical disc in a 2.5" jacket with a write-protect tab. It could hold 140 MB back when that was a reasonable size for a hard drive, and 640 MB discs have appeared throughout the years. Why the hell am I paying several dollars for a 4" cartridge that holds only 100 MB and can only be write-protected using special software?

Re:Whatever happened to Sony's Plasmatron? (2)

maxume (22995) | more than 13 years ago | (#446391)

There's a couple huge ones in the Big House. You can see the damn thing from several hundred feet, even when under direct sunlight. Of course, they are also the only ones built by sony that do not have "sony" on them.

Re:Credit Cards (1)

vinnythenose (214595) | more than 13 years ago | (#446392)

Except when you replicate that DNA and use it at a bank terminal to pull money from the credit card.

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

rark (15224) | more than 13 years ago | (#446393)

You need geek-dyke friends. We'd never bug you about such things..hell, it sounds like it matches my no-name grey laptop (that is currently broken, 'cos I went in to fix the pcmcia slots and it doesn't boot now and I haven't had the time to troubleshoot what I did wrong this time) and my home-built tower (the cover is..erm..somewhere...I think in the back cupboard..)

Re:Whatever happened to Sony's Plasmatron? (2)

dublin (31215) | more than 13 years ago | (#446394)

No, they may have used the Plasmatron name for the stadum displays (seems like they did), but this was something completely different. Most of the monster daylight-capable displays are ripoffs of Mitsubishi's DiamondVision, which actually uses three small CRTs for every pixel (or at least did in its original incarnation - I have no idea what they're using these days, but it has to put out a LOT of light...)

Re:Thinner, Brighter, Faster - and more expensive? (2)

hattig (47930) | more than 13 years ago | (#446395)

Most people don't want to fork out ~$1000 for a new monitor that often. I know I plan on keeping my CRT for a lot longer than that.
Well, in three years time these things will have come down in price significantly. If a 1280x1024 18" one of these displays costs $2000 this time next year, then it will cost $800 three years afterwards, and have a resolution of 1600x1200 or more....

Still, I am more excited about the use of these displays in PDAs and mobile phones. This story was on ZDNet.co.uk a lot earlier today, and they mentioned that mobile phone displays using this technology had already been produced, in full colour. Anything make makes a monochrome low-contrast crappy screen like a mobile phone is good in my books. Imagine an Ericsson R380 with one of these screens. *** Drool *** (like the blubbering eedeeot that I am).

Cnet article ^^ (2)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 13 years ago | (#446397)

Here [cnet.com]

Mentions '20% cheaper' and uses less power than LCD...

Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

Anonymous._.Coward (119202) | more than 13 years ago | (#446398)

I thought ShoeBoy was referring to all the goatse.cx links on slashdot. Everytime he gets duped into clicking the link and the image loads up he just *has* to drop his pants and have a go!

"Oops, I've put my knob through the fscking screen again!!!"

Eugh!

Re:Books? (3)

Capt_Troy (60831) | more than 13 years ago | (#446399)

Besides, who would use a laptop as a bookmark anyway?

Don't trust Sony (2)

Blind RMS Groupie (218389) | more than 13 years ago | (#446400)

Sure, by the time they get the technology perfected it might be a really nice screen but by then it will only accept Sony/MPAA-encrypted [sony.com] input.

--

Like any emerging technology... (2)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 13 years ago | (#446401)

It's only beta!

Since it uses similar techniques to LCD manufacturing, expect similar sizes and pixel densities. Supposedly 20% cheaper because one doesn't need a backlight any more.

However, that still means $1000 for a similar OEL disply. Or would that OED?



Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]

Re:Credit Cards (1)

sxpert (139117) | more than 13 years ago | (#446402)

nope, the credit card will be your DNA... no more fakes...

Sigh (1)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 13 years ago | (#446403)

Poor you, you'd have been enlightened if you had followed that link!

Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

Stormie (708) | more than 13 years ago | (#446411)

Where did this non sequitur come from?

Try this exchange [slashdot.org] from a previous thread..

marketing strikes again (3)

jafuser (112236) | more than 13 years ago | (#446412)

"This display is extremely well-suited for broadband applications,"

Why the hell is it always absolutely necessary to throw in some completely unreleated technology or buzzword when introducing a new technology? I'm just baffled that they didn't find a way to fit wireless or XML in there somehow...

--
EFF Member #11254

Re:Wow, TV's get thinner (1)

Bob McCown (8411) | more than 13 years ago | (#446413)

I thought that was Leon [wavlist.com] ?

HEY! (2)

Raymond Luxury Yacht (112037) | more than 13 years ago | (#446414)

I ... errr... I *looking down at gut hanging over belt and pile of empty cans of Mountain Dew [mountaindew.com] , bottles of Bawls [thinkgeek.com] , and desicated Twinkies [twinkiesproject.com] ...*

I resemble that comment...

But wait... (1)

proxima (165692) | more than 13 years ago | (#446415)

Someday we'll lose our laptops in between pages of books just like we lose plane tickets/notes/phone numbers today.

Isn't the purpose of (hopefully) cheaper, extremely thin and bright computer screens to replace such things as books and papers? Then again, our society (myself included) is having a hard time giving up our beloved books that come in the dead-tree variety.

In bed... (1)

LafinJack (9054) | more than 13 years ago | (#446416)

...I curl up with my Palm all the time.

Take it as you will. ;)

the bulb will burn out (1)

mozkill (58658) | more than 13 years ago | (#446417)

10,000 hours of life in one of these is not enough for me. i put about 8000 hours a year into my monitors...

they will have to do much better than that to get me to buy one...

Re:10,000 hour life (1)

Timmy1138 (247577) | more than 13 years ago | (#446418)

But how are they going to keep making money if you only have to buy it one time?

As you wow people with your K-Rad flat screen you can sneak in a healthy dose of planned obsolescence while you're at it.

$ finger #timmy

Re:marketing strikes again (1)

LafinJack (9054) | more than 13 years ago | (#446419)

You missed the part of the article that said it's a wireless display (both input and power) and that it's XML optimized.

Re:Spelling and grammar: 3 out of 10 (1)

LuckyLuke58 (207964) | more than 13 years ago | (#446420)

Hey, I'm just trying to help these guys out a little, they obviously need it, spelling is actually a very useful and important skill in the workplace - most of us will at one time or another be involved in producing supposedly professional documentation. And really, it doesn't take that much effort to learn the absolute basics for 6 year olds (e.g. then vs. than). And it really doesn't take that much effort to quickly scan something before you post it, just to catch at least some of the huge, obvious, gaping grammar and spelling errors. Come on.

Re:10,000 hour life (1)

david duncan scott (206421) | more than 13 years ago | (#446421)

No, it's just that my daughter is boosting the average.

Re:Credit Cards (2)

nomadic (141991) | more than 13 years ago | (#446422)

So if the monitor is only a little thicker than a credit card, then how thick are credit cards going to become!?!?!

They'll have monomolecular edges. Everyone will go around lopping off their fingers every time they try to pick up the tab at a restaurant...
--

Re:10,000 hour life (1)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 13 years ago | (#446432)

I mean 50hrs per week average TV viewing * 52 weeks says these puppies croak in four years of average use.
Yeah, but replacing them should be a snap, and wouldn cost that much. (in 4 years the price of these screens will surely haved dropped somewhat)
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org [hackerheaven.org] will!

Re:10,000 hour life (2)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 13 years ago | (#446433)

Is the average American really vieweing their TV 50 hours per week? Got a reference on that?

Sony mass production, eh? (1)

tuffy (10202) | more than 13 years ago | (#446434)

That means they'll have 100 in the initial shipment, but promise to have lots more Real Soon.

Lesser lifespan (2)

Fervent (178271) | more than 13 years ago | (#446435)

Considering the lesser lifespan of the OEL's, I'll take my normal laptop.

I own an older laptop in addition to a new one, and while the display is getting on, it displays Linux just fine.

Cheap, Low-res, monochrome... (2)

Brand X (162556) | more than 13 years ago | (#446436)

You can buy such a beastie. It'll run PalmOS or one of the similar OSs (Psion, fer ex) and let you read a book, compose a letter or a book (they sell fold-up keyboards, and the handwriting input isn't that bad) ... it's just that they've shrunk it a little (not much, looking at those early laptops... at least, not the display) and made it cheaper, and are calling it a PDA instead.

Re:Like any emerging technology... (2)

ibpooks (127372) | more than 13 years ago | (#446437)

Okay $1,000 for the screen and $2,300 for the little plastic molded "Sony" tag on the front. We now have a grand-total of $3,300 which is about right for an introductrory "cool" piece of equipment from Sony.

Re:How much (2)

Dr. Evil (3501) | more than 13 years ago | (#446438)

But it should push down the demand and price of LCDs.

Re:Books? (2)

AugstWest (79042) | more than 13 years ago | (#446439)

...and if it's fitting into a plane seat pocket or between the pages of a book, it isn't exactly a laptop, is it?

"god, what an annoying, nitpicking post" he thought, as he hit the submit button....

Re:Spelling and grammar: 3 out of 10 (1)

david duncan scott (206421) | more than 13 years ago | (#446440)

I think I'd prefer:
The organic electroluminescent (OEL) display, little thicker than a credit card, was shown Wednesday.

Smaller is better. (2)

toybuilder (161045) | more than 13 years ago | (#446441)

My sister is currently going to shool in Japan. Her apartment is essentially a mini studio. The bathroom is so small and compactly designed that there is one faucet shared between the sink and the bath/shower. Space *is* a premium in Japan. (Although, I must say it's the same with places like New York City and San Francisco.) This is why consumer electronics from Japan focuses on being small. "Executive stereos"? Heck, it's only call that way to add "prestige" to a product that would be overlooked by most U.S. consumers... In the U.S., most Americans want big-big-big! You think Honda Civic's are small? Hah - most middle-class family would be rather pleased if they can own such a decent sized car. (It's not the money -- it's where to park it.) They think we're weird for buying 24 rolls of paper towel at a time... That would take up half of the total closet space at home!

Weight and power aren't important (3)

Shoeboy (16224) | more than 13 years ago | (#446442)

What I want is an lcd that isn't more fragile than a ming vase. As a practicing homosexual, I've had to replace my vaio 4 times already due to a cracked screen.
That's unacceptable. I've never dropped or even slammed it shut.
With light weight lcd matrices and plastics technology, surely they can build a laptop screen that lasts more than a week.
--Shoeboy

Mmmmm... paper computers! (1)

Halloween Jack (182035) | more than 13 years ago | (#446443)

Seems like we've heard/seen/read of approximately umpteen-thousand-and-one proposals/patents/product announcements for these "will replace dead trees" thingys. Hey, how about a thin, wall-mountable widescreen TV/monitor/touchscreen-like-Star-Trek thingy? That is, one that I can afford?

Thinner, Brighter, Faster - and more expensive? (3)

JWhitlock (201845) | more than 13 years ago | (#446445)

Reading over the article, I saw no mention of comparative cost. Usually, if this is a selling point, it shows up in the press release, which means it may be a technology for high end users, at least for the next 10 years or so.

It still isn't cost effective to throw out my 21" (3 ft deep) monitor for the LCD replacement (maybe a $1500 difference?), so why would this new, possibly more expensive option even cross my radar?

Wait and see, wait and see...

I agree (1)

tenman (247215) | more than 13 years ago | (#446448)

No Comment.....

Re:What about power consumption? (4)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 13 years ago | (#446452)

Some info:

from an article at dpreview.com [dpreview.com] (examining a different OEL being produced by Sanyo and Kodak:)

The new 5.5-inch panel has a quarter-VGA resolution (240 x 320 pixels) with a brightness of 200 candela per square meter. It consumes 2 watts running at 10 volts. Yoneda claimed that the power consumption is lower than comparably-sized LCDs, which eat 2.5 W on average. The pixel transistors are optimized to maintain uniform brightness over the surface of the panel. The aperture ratio is about 50 percent, an improvement over the 30 percent ratio of the earlier 2.4-inch panel.

and this, from the University of Arizona's Optical Sciences Center [arizona.edu] (discussing Organic LEDs, full authors' credits on page:)

Recently, organic light emitting diodes (OLEDs) have attracted a lot of attention, mainly due to their simplicity of fabrication, low operating voltage and power consumption, large view angle, high brightness and efficiency, ultra-thin structure, mechanical flexibility, and light weight.1 Their potential use in display applications, such as ultra-thin flat panel, roll-up, and head-mounted displays is being seriously considered by numerous companies.

So to answer your question, it looks like the technology as it currently stands performs roughly as well as backlit LCDs, with perhaps even a slight advantage. This technology takes the middleman of backlighting out of the equation by using electroluminescent materials in the first place. Thus, the above claims make some sense, as you are only pumping power to the pixels themselves, and not the pixels and the backlight.

On a bit of a tangent, this looks to be similar to the LEP technology Slashdot reported about some time ago (see Cambridge Display's homepage [cdtltd.co.uk] for more info.)

First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.

Re:Weight and power aren't important (2)

Bearpaw (13080) | more than 13 years ago | (#446453)

As a practicing homosexual ...

And remember what they say: "practice makes perfect".

Spelling and grammar: 3 out of 10 (2)

LuckyLuke58 (207964) | more than 13 years ago | (#446454)

MSNBC is running an article about Sony's new Slim TV is thinner, brighter, and has a better picture then current LCD screens.

MSNBC is running an article about Sony's new Slim TV, which is thinner, brighter, and has a better picture than current LCD screens

The organic electroluminescent (OEL) display is a little thicker then a credit card was showed Wednesday.

The organic electroluminescent (OEL) display, which is a little thicker than a credit card, was shown Wednesday.

These screens offer a faster responce then LCD becuase the are self-luminous (no back-lighting required) and allow a wider viewing angle. Sony hopes to have these screens in mass production by 2003

These screens offer a faster response than LCD because they are self-luminous (no back-lighting required) and allow a wider viewing angle. Sony hopes to have these screens in mass production by 2003

Re:Interesting.. (1)

Jedi Alec (258881) | more than 13 years ago | (#446455)

I recently read an article on building callcenters which confirms what you said about Japanese working conditions and being cramped and all. As a side note, the same article also mentioned big plasma screens being cheaper in the long run than regular monitors due to the taking up of less space and less heat coming off which saves airco costs.

Yeah, that sounds nice... (1)

AFCArchvile (221494) | more than 13 years ago | (#446456)

...but does it have a brighter and better picture in pitch black?

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

Kujako (313468) | more than 13 years ago | (#446457)

While I cant comment on what you use your Viao for, mine has been running like a champ for going on two years. I even once submerged it in cranberry juice while it was running with no lasting effect other then a nice cran smell when it gets too warm.

Re:Power, durability ? (1)

Ubergeek26 (249594) | more than 13 years ago | (#446458)

I actually read another report that that was the maximum. It was more like 5,000 to 10,000. I say give it a few more years after production (2003 is the goal for production) and the damn things will have a longer lifespan.

Remember the candle that burns brightest burns out twice as fast.

Screen Life? (1)

Julius X (14690) | more than 13 years ago | (#446459)

The article states that they are striving for a 10,000 hour screen life for the display.. Doesn't this seem a little short to anyone? Unless they are going for a disposable product, a 10,000 hour life would barely last 2 years, depending on how much you use the screen. (If you use it 24/7 it will last a little over a year with that life)

For a product that is to be most certainly more expensive than LCDs when they come out, you'd think they would be a little more long lasting. I really don't feel like spending $5000 on a product that I will have to scrap in a year, we already have enough of those(e.g., the box sitting under my desk).

-Julius X

Mushed-up sheets of dead tree? (3)

SamIIs (65268) | more than 13 years ago | (#446460)

Someday we'll lose our laptops in between pages of books

Oh, come on Taco. How long do you think we'll have these cute little bound piles of wood? I can't wait till I start losing my book inside my laptop. :)

Sam

Preview, please. (1)

torgosan (141603) | more than 13 years ago | (#446461)

Matrium...preview is your friend.

Re:10,000 hour life (1)

WinPimp2K (301497) | more than 13 years ago | (#446462)

My bad, was considering how long TV might be left on per week - based on admittedly small and possibly biased samples. I know of people who leave TVs on just for the extra sound etc.. the way some folks use radios for background "noise"
I did try some search engine and found studies that put TV time by adolescents at 20+ hours per week (plus whatever their parents, other family member watch as well).
So I won't stand by 50 hours per week as watching time, but folks that leave em on a lot can rack up that many hours pretty easily.

Re:Cheap, Low-res, monochrome... (2)

jandrese (485) | more than 13 years ago | (#446463)

Problem is, PDAs are TOO small for a lot of things. For instance, as a mobile terminal (great for plugging into the serial port of a machine with a messed up network config). Currently we use an ancient Winbook 386 for this, but it's battery life is for shame and the whole thing is starting to die mechanically. Plus it can't run Netscape and is quite slow by today's standards.

Finally, monochrome != Low-res, in fact I'd like to see a fairly high resolution (200 dpi or better). This would make reading a book off the laptop quite comfortable, especially if you are on a plane and have the backlight turned off. Reading off the Palm is ok, but you have to more or less continually page down while reading because the screen just doesn't hold that much character data.

Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.

Interesting.. (1)

cmowire (254489) | more than 13 years ago | (#446464)

You know, it never occured to me in that article that, while American offices and homes are generally slightly roomy, the Japanese offices are probably infinitely more squished and that might be who's buying a lot of the LCD screens.

Anyways..

We won't be loosing our laptops like pieces of paper anytime soon because of all of the other hardware -- the CPU, the disk drive, etc.

And, there's always the warnings about vaporware. They have been promising something to beat the LCD for portable usage for years and years and have been promising something to beat the CRT for desktop usage, but people keep coming back.

I suspect that it will be similar to LCD screens in that there are a lot of dud screens to push the price up. This is extrapolation, so somebody might want to correct me if I'm wrong. But IIRC, the main thing that's preventing LCD screens from really taking over is that there is such a high likelyhood for a completed display to not work.

But a thinner, self-luminescent display would probably be a good thing for cell-phones, which have been moving strongly into the realm of style, which a OEL screen should help with, even if it isn't a quantom leap above LCD screens.

When we start losing our laptops in books... (2)

oh shoot (79863) | more than 13 years ago | (#446465)

...I'll finally have a reason to go to the library.

Cool (2)

sharkticon (312992) | more than 13 years ago | (#446466)

This means that now everywhere can be covered in wonderful moving adverts! Just think, rather than having those boring old billboards everywhere around town, they can slap up a roll of this stuff and actually play stuff for you to admire! Yay!

We do seem to be moving towards "active" materials which rather than just being lumps of solid stuff in fact contain their own processors, memories and so on. Sooner or later we'll get to the stage where absolutely everything it made from computing material, and every brick and tile has its own IP address and can become part of a distributed computer running your house, doing SETA@home and so on.

Heh, just imagine your toilet patiently searching for alien life whilst you're sitting on it :)

Power, durability ? (2)

mirko (198274) | more than 13 years ago | (#446467)

What about its power consumption ?
Will it be suitable in a normal 14" screened laptop ?
Also, a 10000-hour life means approx 2-3 years for my Linux laptop. Isn't this a bit short compared to the price ?
--

Credit Cards (1)

vinnythenose (214595) | more than 13 years ago | (#446468)

So if the monitor is only a little thicker than a credit card, then how thick are credit cards going to become!?!?!? Are they just going to slip between our molecules. Now wouldn't that be neat to see in a magic show :)

"Skin" your car and home (3)

Miss Pereira (307824) | more than 13 years ago | (#446469)

I hope I'll be around in the future when you can download a new skin for your car or wallpapers just like you can do with Winamp or Gnome/KDE. The paint on cars, homes and wallpapers will not be regular paint. It made up of some crystal or organic goo that can be altered electronically by an in built chip. To bad your car got hacked the other day. Now it's bright pink with neon green dots and you cannot change it. ;-)

What about power consumption? (4)

jandrese (485) | more than 13 years ago | (#446470)

The article states that these displays will be self luminious, but it never mentions how much power they will draw. They aren't going to be very useful for laptops if they draw even more power than todays color LCD displays, which are already power hogs. Sometimes I wish I could buy a monocrome passive matrix laptop (they'd be *cheap* in comparision) that let you turn off the backlite (remember when this was possible) and could be used in bright(er) lighting conditions than todays laptops. Who needs 24bit color to read email, compose a letter or a book, read a book, or even surf the web (if you can surf in Lynx, missing color support in Galeon is a small problem). The biggest feature of all would be the increased battery life. Imagine a Transmeta laptop with a low power LCD (passive matrix monochrome backlit optional) laptop with the same batteries as todays power hogs? It'd run for hours on end.

Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.

Get your free OEL display (3)

toybuilder (161045) | more than 13 years ago | (#446474)

I imagine a day when everyone will get a free OEL-wall in their living room... The catch? You'll have to sign up for MSN/WebTV. When you're not using the WebTV, the OEL wall will display targeted advertising.

Re:Wow, TV's get thinner (1)

baglunch (11210) | more than 13 years ago | (#446476)

No. Leon from Airplane! (the movie).

Me Jon. Big tree.

Expected longevity of the screen... (1)

ZipperBongBoyy (314153) | more than 13 years ago | (#446478)

As I was reading, I came over an interesting fact that would most likely be especially noteworthy for /. readers..

"Sony's Urabe set a target of a 10,000-hour life for the screens and expressed confidence that manufacturing processes would pose no insurmountable problems."

10,000 hours is not a long time at all. In fact, it is only 417 days of consecutive running, or, 3.4 years of running the screen 8 hours a day. I know that my Sony G200 monitor stays on at least 12 hours a day, and I would perfer not to spend $1k+ on a monitor that dies only 2.28 years. Sounds like a rip-off to me.

ZBB
"Yes, this wonderful flat screen display has 1600x1200 resolution, no need for back-lighting, and is as thin as a credit card. It only comes with a 400 day warrentee."

The Future of Small Computers (3)

CokeBear (16811) | more than 13 years ago | (#446480)

Laptops keep getting smaller, but the traditional laptop has a limit to how small it can get. A full sized keyboard and a nice 15" screen can be paper thin, and only a few ounces, but will still be 8.5x11". The real future is in the headset/eyepeice screen, with a fold up Palm Style keyboard, and an air mouse pointing device (maybe a tiny device worn on one finger like a ring?) that all communicate wirelessly (and of course are connected to the internet with 802.11 or its descendant.

I have seen the future... and it looks kinda cool, but only if we take some drastic steps to fix this fsck'd up planet.

Re:marketing strikes again (2)

DeepDarkSky (111382) | more than 13 years ago | (#446482)

Hello? Did you read the next paragraph?

For Sony, "broadband applications" means being able to present moving pictures well, which requires a screen that responds quickly enough, for example, to faithfully recreate the flash of a fireworks display.
Yeah, so it's a buzzword...but all it really means is video. It's better for video than LCDs because it (supposedly) doesn't leave ghost images like LCDs do because of the speed.

Re:"Skin" your car and home (1)

Lord_Breetai (66113) | more than 13 years ago | (#446483)

Hehe. Thank you, William Gibson. ^_^

Did they solve the blue problem? (1)

Jason Pollock (45537) | more than 13 years ago | (#446485)

The last time I read about this technology, they were talking about using it for cell-phone displays. The only problem was that the dye that displays blue wore out very quickly, on the order of 2-3 years. However, this is fine for a cell phone because the average life span of a phone is 1-2 years. For a TV/laptop though?

So, anyone know if they've sorted out the blue?

Jason Pollock

OEL or OLED? (5)

malachid69 (306291) | more than 13 years ago | (#446486)

They just changed the acronymn. Do a search for OLED and you will find lots of other places doing the same thing -- examples: This technology has a lot of potential. In my previous post about designing VR hardware, I was thinking the OLEDs would be a good way to do the screens. However, I don't think Sony should be changing the acronymn to sound like their own technology. It is exactly the same thing.

10,000 hour life (1)

WinPimp2K (301497) | more than 13 years ago | (#446487)

That might work for a monitor... But SONY is talking television applications. What is the expected lifespan for current CRT / LCD projection TVs.

I mean 50hrs per week average TV viewing * 52 weeks says these puppies croak in four years of average use.
I'm still using the same TV's I bought in the mid-80s (my sole indication of Scottish heritage). I sure wouldn't want to be replacing a big screen every four or five years.

Re:How much (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 13 years ago | (#446488)

What is the cost compared to todays LCD's, yeah this is nice and all but i find $1300 bucks for LCD a bit expensive, also what is the Max size they can make? I want it to look like I have a windsail on my desk :-)

Well, it's Sony, so I assume it will have an extremely reasonable price, and on top of that be durable and of high quality too.

Must...keep...straight...face.....

--

Oh, this would be so cool (1)

banuaba (308937) | more than 13 years ago | (#446489)

I'd get a whole goddamn suit made out of this stuff. I'd walk around broadcasting DVD p0rn to the masses. I'd get a panel surgically implanted in my arm along with a WAP phone so I could /. and launch dDOS' from the metro. I dunno what else, but that would be really cool.

Ooh, ooh. Take and put that over your windshield so that you could have fullscreen nightvision instead of my stupid eyeballs.

Brant
In the final words of Jim Henson, "anybody got any asprin? I think I've got a cold."

Brant

Re:Weight and power aren't important (1)

CodeMonky (10675) | more than 13 years ago | (#446490)

Maybe i'm just lame, but what does being a practicing homosexual have to do with a cracked vaio screen?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>