Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Coming Soon(ish) From LG: Transparent, Rollup Display

Unknown Lamer posted about two weeks ago | from the animated-wall-paper dept.

Displays 64

jfruh (300774) writes Korean electronics manufacturer LG has shown off experimental, see-through, roll-up displays, paper thin and flexible and capable of letting through about 30% of the light that strikes it. The company is eager to sell the concept and promises it'll be arriving soon, though they've shown of similar (though less capable) technology over the past few years and have yet to bring any products to market.

cancel ×

64 comments

Could this be the year (1)

by (1706743) (1706744) | about two weeks ago | (#47452229)

of the flexible semitransparent display?

Re:Could this be the year (2)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about two weeks ago | (#47452393)

What year did Earth: Final Conflict come out?

Re:Could this be the year (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452491)

What year did Earth: Final Conflict come out?

It seemed pretty gay from the start.

Re:Could this be the year (4, Insightful)

JMJimmy (2036122) | about two weeks ago | (#47452673)

1997 and I so want a Global Communicator.

Re:Could this be the year (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about two weeks ago | (#47453197)

The writing on that show was awful, but the technologies portrayed were nice.

Re:Could this be the year (1)

davester666 (731373) | about two weeks ago | (#47454433)

These fabulous screens have been used on CSI Miami for years. Who doesn't like to pick out fine details of an image that are crucial to a criminal case displayed on a semi-transparent display?

Re: Could this be the year (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47453997)

Unlikely. I've been hearing about flexible displays made materials as exotic as jellyfish skin for 7 years or more now... Yet to actually see one though.

Re: Could this be the year (2)

demonrob (1001871) | about two weeks ago | (#47454605)

that's cos you're looking right through it. You are part of the 30 percent!

The Weather Channel (1)

MindPrison (864299) | about two weeks ago | (#47452231)

...broadcasting beautiful scenery 24 hours a day, on a window near you.

Re:The Weather Channel (5, Funny)

JMJimmy (2036122) | about two weeks ago | (#47452727)

...broadcasting beautiful ads 24 hours a day, on a window near you.

Fixed

Re:The Weather Channel (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about two weeks ago | (#47454431)

Or the news from Mars.

Electronic gaming mats (1)

geekoid (135745) | about two weeks ago | (#47452245)

soon. please?

Almost a million megapixels! (3, Funny)

by (1706743) (1706744) | about two weeks ago | (#47452249)

From TFA, so it must be true:

The rollable display sports a 1200x810 resolution with nearly 1 million megapixels.

I just wish my bank did that sort of math...

Re:Almost a million megapixels! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452441)

True, reporters can't do maths. They can't even speel rite.

Since they can be controlled independantly, if you count the individual OLEDs as pixels then you get 2,916,000 pixels. So it's almost a 3 megapixel display.

Re:Almost a million megapixels! (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about two weeks ago | (#47452647)

Sssh! Don't give them ideas!

"Your monthly fee is $1000 cents."

Re:Almost a million megapixels! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452947)

I just wish my bank did that sort of math...

They do, all the time. Never in way that benefits you.

Re:Almost a million megapixels! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a week ago | (#47457379)

The article has another funny error:

to achieve the maximum curvature radius.

Wouldn't a straight plank of wood have the maximum curvature radius? I think they should aim for the minimum instead.

Promises... (1)

Greyfox (87712) | about two weeks ago | (#47452265)

Scuttlebutt's there's a transparent roll-up display coming soon since, what? Around 2004? Maybe even a bit earlier. OLEDs were supposed to deliver them back in the day. And yet here we are 10 years later, still no transparent roll-up display. Doesn't seem like this should be as hard as a flying car, and yet they both share the same status. I'm sure this one will be different though...

Promises... (1)

default luser (529332) | about a week ago | (#47457491)

Also, there's the unavoidable problem you have with display clarity. Right now screens are on a flat substrate, and so each pixel is aligned with the next one, which reproduces an image accurately. But what happens when you have an unrolled display sitting on your desk, or held in your hand? It will inevitably be have varying levels of curve along it's length and possibly more complex crumples, resulting in poor image accuracy. Fixing that will require some clever sensors embedded in the display along with some expensive signal processing, and that fix will STILL cost you resolution.

Then when you consider that LG's current flexible displays have poor color rendition and contrast, along with piss-poor resolution [arstechnica.com] , you realize how much of a lost cause this is. I cannot see myself giving up the best qualities of modern displays so that they break a little less often, and can fit in a smaller pocket.

Pixels (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452317)

The rollable display sports a 1200x810 resolution with nearly 1 million megapixels.

LG. Just say no. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452337)

Will it be like their TV sets and spy on you? Will it quit working if you don't agree to the latest version of their EULA? Never, ever buy LG. They suck pretty bad.

As one semi famous football player (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | about two weeks ago | (#47452345)

As one semi famous football player once said. For Who? For What? BTW Can any sports fan guess who said it?

Re: As one semi famous football player (2)

genotype (653050) | about two weeks ago | (#47452511)

Ricky Watters, Eagles

Re: As one semi famous football player (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | about two weeks ago | (#47452699)

Bingo you win. :)

Can someone explain... (2)

brantondaveperson (1023687) | about two weeks ago | (#47452359)

..the appeal of a transparent display?

So I can see what's behind the display? As if we don't have enough issues with sunlight reflecting from display surfaces, now we're going to let the light coming from *behind* the display further reduce its readability?

Re:Can someone explain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452523)

Heads-up displays in cars, trucks, trains, planes, etc.? Monitors built into wall mirrors, windows and oven view ports? Yeah, you're right, can't be of any use whatsoever.

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

Jason Goatcher (3498937) | about two weeks ago | (#47454375)

Upgraded laser tag that actually works properly?

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452661)

Can someone explain the appeal of a transparent display?

You can see through it. That's very helpful for augmented reality. Being flexible makes it easier to attach to things and being transparent means that you only obscure as much of what's underneath (or beyond if the substrate is also transparent) as you absolutely need to.

Re:Can someone explain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452667)

The really nice thing about transparent displays is that they look cool. The useful thing about transparent displays is that they can be trivially backed by an opaque film.

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about two weeks ago | (#47453477)

Potentially both - imagine a transparent display with an additional switchable opacity layer integrated into it - essentially making a full RGBA display where opacity can be specified on a per-pixel basis. At the most trivial level you could have opaque application windows floating on a transparent pane that obstructs your view as much or little as necessary, sort of like having a bank of adjustable-sized monitors. Laminate it onto a north-facing picture window with a great view and I'd be sold.

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about two weeks ago | (#47452733)

There's lots of potential uses, although pretty much zero of them are on your desktop.

On the other hand, flexible displays will be useful as soon as we get decent flexible batteries and circuits, just helping us not destroy electronics. Of course, the batteries are only halfway there, and the circuits will be completely throwaway and even more integrated than now. At least some repair is possible today...

Re:Can someone explain... (2)

tralfaz2001 (652552) | about two weeks ago | (#47453317)

Duh. Just think how easy it will be to change your desktop background. With one of these all you would need to do is change the poster you placed behind your display with a different poster.

Re:Can someone explain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47453485)

Whats the focus point of the family room? That big honking monolithic, if now thin, TV.

Design the spot so the background doesn't bleed through the display and you can have different focal point when you don't want the tv on.

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

kuzb (724081) | about two weeks ago | (#47454809)

Car HUD

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

El Puerco Loco (31491) | about two weeks ago | (#47454841)

Worse than useless as a HUD. Downright dangerous. A proper HUD is features a collimated display, so you don't have to take focus off your environment to look at it.

Re:Can someone explain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a week ago | (#47455393)

When it's off it's not as ugly as an opague display. I wish my TV at home was transparent when off. TV's are ugly.

Re:Can someone explain... (1)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about a week ago | (#47456623)

Augmented reality?

wait a minute (0)

slashmydots (2189826) | about two weeks ago | (#47452473)

Didn't their market research branch let them know that this has no widespread practical use and nobody wants this? What is the motivation to replace my monitor with this? For an ultra-thin cell phone, it has major piercing damage risk issues. I just don't see this taking off. It's like making a smart watch just because you can but conveniently forgetting that nobody wants one.

Re:wait a minute (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47453141)

I think their market research branch must have forgotten to consult you, and may have accidentally focused on companies that have been waiting for this stuff for ages and will give them pots of money for it.

Sunglasses, windows, motorcycle visors, car HUDs, "open plan" office cubicles (though that'd be a mistake, it would be a mistake enough people would make to justify putting it on the market).

Re:wait a minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a week ago | (#47455407)

I want one. I want a transparent TV a hell of a lot more than I want a 3D TV, or even and HD TV.

Uses: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452495)

- Real head's up displays...cars, motorcycle helmets, etc.
- Leela's arm-puter.
- Entire glass walls that double as giant displays...like Tony Stark's house.

and on and on...

Do what.

Re:Uses: (2)

fizzer06 (1500649) | about two weeks ago | (#47452907)

I'm thinking the display could roll up inside of an ink pen like a spring loaded window roller shade. Some enterprising genius could also implement sensors to reproduce script written on paper by the pen to the screen. I'm dreaming of a lot of possibilities.

"with nearly 1 million megapixels" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452685)

Holy mother of God!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:"with nearly 1 million megapixels" (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about two weeks ago | (#47453503)

Hah! Nobody expects the Terapixel Revolution.

Porn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47452955)

How does this make porn better?

Re:Porn? (2)

freeze128 (544774) | about two weeks ago | (#47453157)

You can roll it up into a cylinder and then... Well, you get the idea.

But why? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47453011)

Apart from looking cool, is there a reason to have translucent displays?

Sunglasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47453339)

I can see this as the next Google Glass as sunglasses or at least a wearable monitor.

Gyricon (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about two weeks ago | (#47453367)

Coming from, where else? Hint: not Apple, but close...

maximum curvature radius... (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about two weeks ago | (#47453407)

Does that mean something like, minimum radius?

Re:maximum curvature radius... (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a week ago | (#47455377)

Yeah, normally you'd quote a radius of curvature as an actual unit of length - the radius of the smallest curve the material can take without failing. I'm not sure what "100R" means except something like a translation or transcription error.

Transparent displays? (0)

Jason Goatcher (3498937) | about two weeks ago | (#47454359)

I don't understand the appeal of transparent displays. Sure, it looks great in scifi shows and movies, but what happens when you want to do something without people seeing what you're doing? Now, instead of just worrying about shoulder-surfers, you've got the additional problem of people simply reading backwards print.

Re:Transparent displays? (1)

kwbauer (1677400) | about two weeks ago | (#47454397)

Oh, maybe hang it on a wall if you desire privacy? Maybe even have a wall built that is almost exactly the same size as the monitor sheet and have some sort of lighting in it.

Wearable clothing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47454751)

The fashion industry will be gaga over this. Consider being able to claim "my bra has been hacked" when exploiting indecent exposure for publicity.

So sell it already. (0)

kuzb (724081) | about two weeks ago | (#47454797)

It's been "coming soon" for nearly 5 years now. They talk about these sorts of displays every year, offer all kinds of compelling demos and then never do anything with it.

Re:So sell it already. (1)

SB2020 (1814172) | about a week ago | (#47455357)

In college my tech Professor asked when we would expect to abandon paper as a reading device, I said when the resolution is indistinguishable and I can roll it up and put it in my pocket, this was around 1992. He offered the opinion it was only 10 years out - there were reports of flexible lcd's even back then. e-Ink screens made me nervous for a while but I'm still clinging to my dead tree novels for now.

Re:So sell it already. (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a week ago | (#47455389)

This is a good sign. If someone's showing you technology every year and it's gradually getting bigger and better and eventually starts showing up in products (like LG's TVs) then it's a science and engineering problem that's being advanced. If someone's showing you a technology that never existed before and it's suddenly a whole product, it often means it's so premature it's going to fail and better products will climb over its still-warm corpse towards success, or that it's a scam.

Eye contact (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about a week ago | (#47455809)

...capable of letting through about 30% of the light that strikes it.

Does this mean I can finally see my office mate, who is sitting opposite to my desk?

Hope for the Toronto Maple Leafs? (1)

fygment (444210) | about a week ago | (#47456003)

This year we get flexible displays ... and with equal probability the Toronto Maple Leafs win the Stanley Cup.

Promises ... promises

That sentence... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a week ago | (#47458023)

LG Display used high molecular substance-based polyimide film as the backplane of the flexible panel instead of conventional plastic to achieve the maximum curvature radius.

As somebody who studies polymers, that sentence is a failure by the author to understand the science, on so many levels...

I don't know where to begin but I should start by pointing out that those polyimides are probably plastics below some temperature. Also spoiler alert, they will have problems making it any thinner, and problems with overheating, and problems if you try to use it in the Antartic (Also possibly Canada). Also the manufacturing techniques will be problematic as well. Normal nano imprint lithography will probably have a very high defect rate due to confinement effects. And if they aren't in the region of problems with confinement yet they will be soon enough.

forget transparency, it's the rollup (1)

cellocgw (617879) | about a week ago | (#47458137)

If I could only get a 7 or 8-inch tablet with a screen that could be unrolled (and maybe unfolded) to say 16 by 10 inches, I'd be in techietoy heaven. No more squinting at tiny webpage displays, no more squinting at 6-point font displays of books,... you get the idea.

Sexism at work (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about a week ago | (#47458723)

Why is it women who are showing off the product?
Surely they were not involved in the design of this technology.

Re:Sexism at work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a week ago | (#47465909)

Why is it women who are showing off the product?
Surely they were not involved in the design of this technology.

Oh, the irony...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...