• On CHOW: Girls who hate girly drinks
September 30, 2009 3:41 PM PDT

OLED TV makers look to shift out of neutral

by Erica Ogg
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 31 comments

LG OLED TV

LG's 15-inch OLED TV, which is set to go on sale in Korea by December.

(Credit: Erica Ogg/CNET)

SAN FRANCISCO--Though LG's eye-popping OLED (organic light-emitting diode) display wowed audiences in Berlin last month, it's best not to get too excited. There's not going to be more where that came from, at least for a while.

The industry is still at least three years away from churning out standard-size televisions of 32 inches or larger at something approaching acceptable prices. And though Sony grabbed all the attention in early 2008 with its $2,500 11-inch OLED, it's faded into the background when it comes to nudging the technology forward. Initially promising to follow up with 21-inch and 27-inch models, Sony's deferred those plans while battling bigger problems with its TV business.

With Sony on the sidelines, it seemed like we were witnessing yet another false start for a technology that's been intent on challenging existing TV standards like LCD and plasma for almost half a decade now.

Beset by the standard issues that come with bringing a new technology into the mainstream, like the exorbitantly high cost of development, OLED TVs might be on the verge of shifting out of neutral as new standard bearers for the technology emerge. The ones to watch now are Samsung and LG Electronics, which have each signaled that they're ready to make larger investments in OLED technology for TVs.

At the OLEDs World Summit 2009 in San Francisco on Wednesday, still most of the hope surrounding this nascent branch of the display industry was focused on energy efficient lighting and smaller displays for cell phones and MP3 players, since that's where the money is coming from right now.

DisplaySearch analyst Jennifer Colegrove said that the second quarter of 2009 was the best quarter yet for the OLED industry, with revenues reaching $190 million worldwide. It's good--and perhaps unexpected--news for a burgeoning technology that was just beginning to ramp up right when the recession hit.

But while they're finding success putting OLED in smartphones, these companies are still trying to figure out how to prove that the desirable properties of OLED--ultrathin displays, brighter, crisper images, and improved energy efficiency--can be produced efficiently on a large scale. The reason they're extra cautious: the factories needed to stamp out 30- and 40-inch TVs cost at least $1 billion to build and equip. "They need to prove it will scale before making a huge investment," noted Barry Young, managing director of the OLED Association.

For now, these 11- and 15-inch TVs are coming off production lines intended to make 2-inch and 3-inch displays. It works, but only as a temporary solution; they can't produce the amount of displays per year necessary to be profitable or meet demand.

LG says it plans to start selling its 15-inch OLED in South Korea by the end of the year. But for now, it only has the capacity to make 200,000 per month, or 2.4 million per year. Compare that to Samsung and its more advanced infrastructure for OLED displays for cell phones and MP3 players. On Wednesday Ho-Kyoon Chung, advisor to Samsung Mobile Display, said by next year its factories will be pumping out 10 million displays per month smaller than 15 inches.

LG won't be able to expand past 200,000 per month until at least 2010. But the two highly competitive Korean companies watch each other closely ("They're like two brothers that fight. One always has to do what the other is doing," is how one industry analyst put it). The competition's effect could push OLED TVs closer to the mainstream, both in screen size and in price.

The cost of OLED TVs at retail is still laughably unrealistic for most. "Price points on these displays are very steep," noted iSuppli's Jakhanwal. "The 11-inch Sony is still $2,500. The LG (OLED TV) might be in the same range." Though larger size OLED TVs might start appearing in three years, pricing is harder to predict now.

There's also a wild card in this deck: Apple. A whirlwind of speculation has surrounded the company's plans (or lack thereof) for building a tablet computer. Some in the industry have wondered if the screen will be an OLED, though Jakhanwal said that's less likely. "I feel they're more likely to start using OLEDs for iPods rather than launching straight away to a tablet. Apple's strategy has always been to use current, existing technology for its products, and work on (getting the) pricing down," she said.

Though that could be tough for suppliers because Apple has a way of getting prices to "unbelievable levels," as she noted, it could be a boon to retail shoppers. If Apple were to drive down the prices of smaller OLEDs, even for iPods or iPhones someday, it could shift pricing of larger displays for notebooks and TVs as well. And cheaper components mean more vendors will buy them and more choice for consumers.

In the meantime, "Price continues to be an issue," said Jakhanwal. "High premiums (are) not acceptable in the market."

Erica Ogg is a CNET News reporter who covers Apple, HP, Dell, and other PC makers, as well as the consumer electronics industry. She's also one of the hosts of CNET News' Daily Podcast. In her non-work life, she's a history geek, a loyal Dodgers fan, and a mac-and-cheese connoisseur. E-mail Erica.
Recent posts from Circuit Breaker
Report: Apple paying 15 percent refund on broken 27-inch iMacs
Remember when Sony was the innovator?
Who will buy the iPad?
iPad unites Apple's media and mobile ambitions
Apple iPad tablet makes debut (live blog)
McGraw-Hill: Tablet will be based on iPhone OS
Apple event countdown brings new rumors
Apple earnings jump 50 percent
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (31 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
by Gold_Storm_Mac September 30, 2009 4:01 PM PDT
The picture of the OLED TV was not a good example of its capabilities. Please find a better one.
Reply to this comment
by adamphotographicdotcom September 30, 2009 4:10 PM PDT
You will not be able to represent the quality of the OLED picture no matter how good the picture is when viewed on an LCD. <br /><br />LED TVs generally look so much better and use 40% less power. I will probably pick up the next gen of LED TV in a couple of months when the cost declines somewhat. It already has.
by Gold_Storm_Mac September 30, 2009 4:14 PM PDT
@Adam<br />what do you mean viewed on an LCD?
by ikramerica--2008 September 30, 2009 5:16 PM PDT
the point is the pic has weird artifacts in it. bad compression or something.
by sflocal September 30, 2009 6:43 PM PDT
@gold_storm:<br /><br />Okay, let's get this straight. You're looking at a web page on a regular monitor / notebook/ rose-colored glasses and you want the author to post a picture that better illustrates the capabilities of OLED?<br /><br />Ooops... sorry... I've mistaken your post for one that was worth responding to. Sorry! My bad.
by freemarket--2008 October 1, 2009 5:59 AM PDT
Well, if you look closely, it IS a crappy picture...
by zyxxy October 1, 2009 6:16 AM PDT
You are seeing the LED multiplex drivers. The LEDs do not run in constant current mode. They use a form of PCM or PWM to adjust output levels. The response time on the human eye is slow enough that you integrate the image over time into a smooth image. The same is true of an old style CRT, you do not perceive the scan lines, but they are there.<br /><br />This photo was taken with too fast a shutter speed. It should have been taken from a tripod with a slow (1/15?) shutter speed to blend the LED levels. Then it would have looked better, but no where near as good as seeing it live. I have seen the 11" SONY, and the image on that is amazing.
by CupertinoBill September 30, 2009 4:30 PM PDT
They are very vibrant but fade fast in bright light. Not so good in a room with lots of windows. And of course you do not want them to get any water on them either. They are no perfect for big TV's, more like Zune application I think.
Reply to this comment
by Gold_Storm_Mac September 30, 2009 4:34 PM PDT
was that meant to be sarcasm? the zune has a better chance of being in sunlight and getting splashed with water.
by rapier1 September 30, 2009 5:11 PM PDT
Damn, there go my plans for giving my outdoor pond an underwater OLED theater!
by Random_Walk October 1, 2009 6:25 AM PDT
Now, I dunno know about you, but some of us keep our televisions in these rooms where sunlight does get in during the day (though up here in the Pacific Northwest, you wouldn't know that half the time :) ). After all, we live in the whole house, not just the basement. ;)
by richard993 October 2, 2009 8:40 PM PDT
I have an OLED based device and it is much brighter than any other LCD device that I have, especially in sunlight. The only device that I have which is better in sunlight is my e-book reader.
by Spartan_458 September 30, 2009 6:34 PM PDT
I want SED back. It looked like easily the most promising technology, and it would've had the best picture. I still say rear-projection big screens look better than anything else out there right now, and SEDs would've been the thinner, better follow-up. Alas.
Reply to this comment
by FirstReflections September 30, 2009 8:11 PM PDT
I agree that SED displays could have provided the best picture quality. But they would have required higher power consumption, which is a notable concern these days. <br /> <br />I also disagree that rear projection big screen TVs look better than anything else. The Pioneer Kuro plasmas and the Panasonic V10 plasmas all offer excellent picture quality that is better than rear projection in several key facets such as higher contrast and far better off-axis viewing. It is such a shame that the Kuro plasmas are no longer being made. But at least the Panasonic plasmas are a close "second best".
by Nataku4ca October 1, 2009 11:29 AM PDT
I just got my V10 and ITS GREAT! I've seen rear projection TVs, but they seem worse than some LED LCD screens... maybe I'm just looking at one thats in the bottom pile?
by renGek October 1, 2009 12:09 PM PDT
well if canon didn't get sued by patent trolls one would have been in my living room already.<br /><br />Its a very tough sell be it SED, FED or OLED. People in the last 5 years made a massive switch to flat panels. And to turn around and tell them all to buy another one so quickly is a tough sell.
by seven7dust September 30, 2009 9:37 PM PDT
I'm more interested in OLED displays for laptops, the current crop of Laptop screens suck becasue of the crappy viewing angles <br />this is probably the biggest application for OLEDs IMO !
Reply to this comment
by Random_Walk October 1, 2009 6:30 AM PDT
Most laptops have a crap viewing angle for "privacy" reasons (they're also cheaper) - Apple is a bit of an exception. <br /><br />The problem I see with OLED is two-fold:<br /><br />* they tend to get dim in strong light and burn more power to compensate<br />* they tend to wear out faster over time, fading color by color.<br /><br />It's still an immature technology. <br /><br />It does have some promise, but it still needs some work.
by ikramerica--2008 October 1, 2009 10:33 AM PDT
Most laptop screens have crap viewing angles because they use cheep parts, not for our benefit. Sorry, that's bogus. And Apple has the same viewing angle issue as others, just not as severe because they spend more. But still, brightness is not even consistent from top to bottom due to different viewing angles.<br /><br />This isn't as big a deal on LCD TVs though, as you sit much further from them, so the viewing angle difference is less.
by sirsparky September 30, 2009 10:41 PM PDT
The new Panasonic plasmas destroy the Kuros,.<br />All the top engineers from Pioneer left for Panasonic. I say this as a Kuro owner.<br />And of course with the recession on (and LED getting a bit better) prices are falling and falling.
Reply to this comment
by ikramerica--2008 October 1, 2009 10:34 AM PDT
No doubt. Even the base Panasonic 50" with the "not as good" engine has blacks blacker than Kuro, but color fidelity isn't great. Still, at $800 street for a 50" plasma with the best blacks you can buy, that's a steal!
by ofmyony October 1, 2009 1:53 AM PDT
I want a curved 50 inch OLED screen. Like a movie theater screen. I just imagine a new viewing experience that adds depth to a picture. I get bored looking at a flat piece of glass. Probably won't see that for another 10 to 15 years.
Reply to this comment
by DarkHawke October 1, 2009 3:31 AM PDT
Why would you want that small a display to be curved? I have a 58" display and it would be a waste of time and considerable cash to curve it. Curved screens only help when they're MEGA-wide, like the good old Cinerama/70mm theater screens of yesteryear. Even then it's not necessary; the best theater near me has a 60 by 40 foot IMAX screen with no curvature to speak of, yet it's an absolutely brilliant screen.
by Random_Walk October 1, 2009 6:32 AM PDT
DarkHawke is correct - unless you have a 20' wide screen, it wouldn't make any sense, and even then the curve would have to be very negligible at best before it would distort the picture.
by cvaldes1831 October 3, 2009 9:16 PM PDT
DarkHawke and Random_Walk are correct.<br /><br />The curved screen works really well for something that is around 20' wide. It is also pretty bad for more than 3-4 viewers, as the experience is optimized for a small locus.
by chrkeller October 1, 2009 4:20 AM PDT
OLED, sure someday. Right now, plasma. The price is reasonable, the size is large and the picture quality is top notch.
Reply to this comment
by gsmiller88 October 1, 2009 8:53 AM PDT
I understand new technology is expensive, but...<br /><br />John: "Hey Bob, come check out my new, cutting-edge LG TV"<br /><br />Bob: "Gee, John, that's--erm-- impressive" *Snicker*<br /><br />John: "What's so funny, Bob?"<br /><br />Bob: "How is the cutting edge? It's one fourth the size of my 60" Panasonic plasma TV? I even have a bigger TV in my bathroom"<br /><br />John: "It's OLED! And I paid $2,500 for it at BestBuy!" *smirk*<br /><br />Bob: "You, my friend, are an idiot" *walks away*
Reply to this comment
by pjcamp October 1, 2009 11:55 AM PDT
Are you kidding? Apple has never driven down the price of *anything.* Apple products are a lagging, not a leading, price indicator.
Reply to this comment
by Gold_Storm_Mac October 1, 2009 3:58 PM PDT
what r u talking about? this has nothing to do with apple.
by NervClaX October 2, 2009 11:51 AM PDT
What a waste of a demo. Couldn't they have shown some live-action or nature footage instead of Ice Age?
Reply to this comment
by patience_hiro December 2, 2009 5:29 PM PST
Does anybody know how I can buy new LG 15" OLED TV now?
Reply to this comment
(31 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
advertisement

Google's social side aims for some Buzz

Facebook and Twitter are the darlings of the social-media world, not Google--which hopes to change that with Buzz, betting it can organize your online social life.

Watching the birth of a gaming start-up

Stewart Butterfield and his friends are back at it with a new company. CNET's Daniel Terdiman was given exclusive, behind-the-scenes access as they built it from scratch.

About Circuit Breaker

The Circuit Breaker will keep you plugged into the world of consumer electronics and PC makers, with close attention to Apple, ever the trend-setter. Erica Ogg will try to make sense of the constant stream of new and increasingly connected devices we find in our homes, cars, and backpacks, as well as the companies that make them. Based in San Francisco, Erica is partial to gadgets that allow her to search for the best mac-and-cheese recipes, read grammar blogs, and watch "Mad Men" and the Los Angeles Dodgers whenever she wants.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Circuit Breaker topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right