Posted on 10/03/2006 4:21:47 AM PDT by AZRepublican
SED televisions are similar to traditional tube televisions. Electrons are fired at a screen to create images. However, instead of coming out of a large electron gun, the electrons are fired from several thousand nano particles. One advantage is that SED televisions are much thinner than tube televisions.
The performance and picture quality will also be far higher than LCDs or plasmas, he said. The contrast ratio is 50,000 to 1, far higher than LCD or plasma, he said. The response time is a millisecond, thus the image blur or ghosting that can occur with some LCDs doesn't occur.
SED televisions will also last for 30,000 hours, putting them on par with traditional tube TVs. Power consumption of SED televisions is about half that of plasma, Umezu said, and lower than LCD.
Toshiba and Canon will not license the technology to other manufacturers, but the companies may reconsider in the future.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com ...
You are right that nobody will care about the numbers.
BUT, these contrast numbers translate into a dramatically better defined picture under all sorts of photographic lighting conditions.
No more will night scenes be a washed out muddied black, but you will actually be able to see things on the screen.
I am dead certain that SED TVs will be the must have consumer electronic item in 2008.
The minute I think I know what I will look for another type hits the market.
Hi-tech electronic companies have always leaked new technologies at a snail's pace. Their marketing schemes insure profitability well into the future using technology that may be years old.
Your Betamax comparison is way off the mark. There is no compatibility or programming availability issue here.
This is a matter of buying a fantastic screen and hooking it up.
Oh, and being totally blown away.
For your very highend consumer. After a certain point you get to the point of diminishing returns. Yeah night scenes will look awesome. But most consumers will not compare night scenes. They will be looking at the ultra-bright scenes in a darkened corner of Best Buy.
Actually, they sold the machines to the Soviet Union.
Now that the Soviet Union has been dead and buried for more than 15 years, you might want to consider lightening up on this issue.
GREAT,
Cant wait for the SED Technology to come to mass production so i can buy a cheap DLP.
I have spent at least $5000 on LCD monitors and know what? I am still using a 19" NEC CRT full time because no LCD can match it.
Completely different situation. Betamax was incompatible with other media formats. Since that format did not become the standard, nobody produced their material on that format. In this case, this TV is not dependant on any format. It just displays signals that all TV's receive better. Toshiba would be dumb to give away this technology.
I've been holding out for the SED for almost two years now.
I have seen a couple PDP projection systems that look real good, though. I'm not completely familiar with the principle behind these units, but the result is really great looking, and not too bad on price either. They don't have a burn in problem, either.
Still, I won't get serious until I can put an SED in the mix of possibilities.
I haven't seen any 60" tubes. Shoot, 36" tubes already weight a ton. We are talking TV's more than CRT monitors. This new technology will make big TV's more CRT like.
Doesn't matter what the quality is ~ with 999 channels cable has pretty much turned it into something like a substitute for radio.
Don't you want to see Alan Colmes in HD 50,000:1 resolution???
:)
"Now that the Soviet Union has been dead and buried for more than 15 years, you might want to consider lightening up on this issue."
I find it ironic that the Mitsubishi, the company that manufactured the Japanesese planes that bombed Pearl Harbor, now sells cars and SUV's in the US.
How much will these sets cost compared to plasma?
"Only problem is there's still not much on to watch :("
The hardware gets better & better but the output gets worse & worse.
Does this mean that you'll have to wear your sunglasses while you watch TV? Seriously, this is like the great running stereo/speaker wars started in the 70's. A new stereo system or speakers pledged better and better sound. No matter that after a point the human ear couldn't really tell much of a difference, but I'm sure a lot of new equipment was sold!
The only way out is to buy a boob tube just before you die. But seriously, I have 2, 35 inch tube TVs and they are the best. Mitsubishi and Sony. They're plenty big enough and you don't get that stretched out look you get when you have a wide screen HD Tv and the broadcast isn't in high def.
Can the human eye really see with the clarity that is now being engineered? I'm sure someone is working on in-home holograms, so it won't stop until that is the prevailing technology.
"Completely different situation. Betamax was incompatible with other media formats."
My point was: Would Toshiba rather be receiving licensing royalties or spur competition from other companies?
This was Sony's mistake. If they had licensed betamax, like JVC did with VHS, we might have been using betamax instead of VHS because betamax was the superior technology (at the time). I say this having never owned a betamax.
SED is not going to be the end all/be all in display technology, and unless Toshiba is willing to stifle the competition by allowing others to pay them to use the technology, then they will promote others to develop other (better?) displays.
I already understand that such R&D goes on already, but unless someone has developed something comparable/better than SED, at the same or lower price, then the bean counters would/will insist on paying royalties to Toshiba than producing a more expensive (non-competitive) product.
How is that a "totally different" situation?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.