CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

[WanMan]

Last week Sony announced it was no longer going to continue development on its Field Emission Display, was was destined to compete with Canon's Surface Conduction Electron-Emitting Display.

While these are fixed-pixel flat-panel technologies, the basis for them are that when light for a pixel isn't needed it simply wasn't generated (a la CRT). I suppose this leaves Sony in the Samsung camp with OLED for the non-Always-On imaging technology. My concern is that leaving Canon (and SED) as the only solution for long-term technologies that can literally not produce light when it isn't called for is limited.

With this in mind, do we need to formally ask Sony to reinvent the CRT wheel? Somehow I think the next 5-10 years will be filled with manufactures and cowsumers applying the 80% rule in which lackluster product performances will be delivered for the Walmartian price.

[macgyver655]

I'm a little confused as to why they are talking like this technology is the first that's similar to CRT tech. Plasma is very close. In a plasma flat panel, each pixel consists of 3 tiny chambers, each chamber front has a phosphor coating for red, green, and blue. The chambers are filled with a plasma gas containing electrons. When the electrons are excited by an electrical charge they begin flying around in their respective chamber and bouncing off the phosphor coating and exciting the coating to make it glow. The more current, the faster the electrons move, the brighter the glow. Each chamber capable of 256 shades of its color and 3 cambers producing this many shades equals......how many millions of color..(someone else can do the math......my head hurts......

So no current, no glow.......which is why plasma can have such a pure black plus have great color reproduction.

Of course there are only a few companies making plasma panels and all the other manufactures use these panels in their displays. I dont know if Sony makes their own plasma panels as I haven't had any yet but I do know that most use LG or Samsung panels. And the technology is probably patent protected so maybe Sony and Canon want to go out on their own with something they claim is different and to make their own panels.....

[macgyver655]

Oh..and just to add....this is why plasma's use so much more power then LCD. It take more power to excite the phosphor. Actually a plasma will draw much more power to produce a white screen then a black one. Same as CRT.....

So just remember it will cost you more money in electricity to watch a movie with a lot of snow then if you watch something from outerspace......

[Kiev Savoie]

[quote="WanMan"] Somehow I think the next 5-10 years will be filled with manufactures and cowsumers applying the 80% rule in which lackluster product performances will be delivered for the Walmartian price.[/quote]

That doesn't bother me in the least. I really enjoy knowing I have a cheaper better performing system than everyone else that just goes to a big box store to get a flat panel and then don't even realize that they are watching standard definition on their shiny new display because they don't know HD requires different cables and don't know what HD looks like anyway.
I have been hearing a lot about CRT having a limited future as king of the hill lately. I'm glad to hear evidence to the contrary!

[CRT_Ben]

[draganm]

you guys are overlooking one big problem with CRT, and it's not perfromance related. The leaded glass is considered toxic waste. I can't get rid of my old 27" Sony, I have to pay someone $50. to haul it away.
There is now talk of having a surcharge (tax) on very electronic device made to cover it's disposal or recycling. To be paid up front by the manufacturer. I as a consumer don't like paying that cost but it's better than a land-fill leaching toxic heavy metals into the groundwater. Each cell-phone is a little teeny super-fund site all by itself.
So in that regard CRT is something with chips stacked against it. Also, you can't get around 400 pounds of glass, not popular with the general public.

[ecrabb]

Of course, there's mercury and other stuff in a lot of the new stuff, too... hence the taxes they're considering on everything.

I love my CRT projector. Given what I paid for my G70, the bang-for-buck factor may not be approached or exceeded by digital for several more years - or longer. Still, it's not at all a fair value comparison simply because of the prices most of us paid. If we had to pay $15,000 for a G70, the new digital stuff would look like (and actually BE) a bargain in comparison.

More important, even if they were free, I don't WANT a CRT projector in my living room, den, bedroom or office. They're simply incompatible with the function of the room, the aesthetics, and the usability. Given that, if there's some technology that can deliver the same or better quality than a CRT, but do it in a MUCH smaller, lighter package, why wouldn't we want to see that technology develop and improve? That's the disappointing/maddening thing that I think Wan was getting at - that we don't get to see improvements in technology - primarily because the bean-counters don't think the "cowsumers" are even interested. In other words, it's not worth it to spend the money on R&D.

Of course, this is also a direct by-product of the rock-bottom price mentality "cowsumers" have, now. They buy TV's just like they buy computers. Why spend $599 for a really good computer when a $399 Dell is just fine. Why spend $999 on full-featured excellent notebook when a $249 Asus netbook is "good enough". The same people would much prefer paying $699 for a POS LCD than $1200 for something of much higher-quality. That's how you get companies like Pioneer exiting the display business altogether - they can't find enough people amongst the "cowsumers" to pay premium prices for premium products.

We've made our bed and now we're laying in it.

SC

[macgyver655]

[macgyver655]

Hey SC.... I just reread your post and saw you already commented on the mercury issue......Sorry

[donaldk]

The Dutch coffers are filled to the brim, due to the disposal tax levied on each CE product for the past 15 years or so, so full that for the past few years retailers have be asking to halt charging on newly sold products.

Of course we don't want these precious resources to go to waste.

BTW, the main Japanese flat panel manufacturers just opened their first joint flat panel recycling plant for the domestic market the other week.

[donaldk]

As expected the FET technology was seperated from Sony in 2007 to get its write-off of the corporate balance sheet, just as the company had done with its GLV development.

[Kiev Savoie]

[quote="CRT_Ben"][quote="Kiev Savoie"]That doesn't bother me in the least. I really enjoy knowing I have a cheaper better performing system than everyone else that just goes to a big box store to get a flat panel and then don't even realize that they are watching standard definition on their shiny new display because they don't know HD requires different cables and don't know what HD looks like anyway.
I have been hearing a lot about CRT having a limited future as king of the hill lately. I'm glad to hear evidence to the contrary![/quote]

While it's always satisfying to know that you have something close to the pinnacle of video technology, wishing for technology to stop advancing for that reason is extremely short sighted...[/quote]

I hear ya. i'm not wishing for technology to stop developing, in fact it is developing rapidly. my point is simply that the general public is so undiscerning as far as image quality goes that R&D ends up focusing on ever-cheaper products that are easy to mass produce and quality takes a back seat. Simply said, We are some of the few people who recognize true performance and quality even though it is in a package that screams retro Reagan-era antiquity. And THAT is why newer technologies have not bridged the gap yet, Quality is not the highest value. If it were otherwise we would have seen that new technology catch up a decade ago and this whole forum would be about those gadgets while we made jokes about the old CRT dinosaurs we had in college.
When CRT finally is dethroned i'm pretty sure my Geek Ego will push me toward the newest and best thing. After all, if I didn't, what would i have to brag about? I can hear my self now,"Oh man if you don't have laser projection you don't know what your missing."!

[draganm]

I didn't know flat panels had Mercury, I don't have a plasma or LCD. If so then they should be treated or taxed as toxic watse. Not sure how much the Netherlands gets per tV sold but government shouldn't be taking money for this. A better solution is mandating the manufacturer to add the surcharge and hold it in a speific account to be be used in recycling they are required to do. That would insure at least a certain degree of efficiency.
I would pay and extra 50 bucks on a set to know it would be recycled safely in a certified facility run by the company that made it, not by Children in a Chinese toxic waste dump.

[Spanky Ham]

OK, crabb!!!! Now, I see you are starting to use the term. Maybe we need a poll. How many people are using the term "COWSUMER" courtesy of Wan?

Just so everyone knows, I don't even see the word consumer anymore. Thanks, Wan.

[lostmandan]

Mercury comes up a lot in newer electronics. Lead-free solder and components, but traces of mercury. There is a lot less mercury than lead I suppose..

I am not sure which is the lesser evil. I guess one of the better solutions is to produce quality products with the best longevity possible and make sure that the amounts of toxic materials are kept low that way. Easier said than done though! As mentioned above, unfortunately prices (not quality) sell merchandise.

[WanMan]

So, everyone seems to think there will be an abundance of CRT related parts such that the inventory will never dwindle and everyone will always be able to afford a CRT. Hmm.

[Kiev Savoie]

Oh no, nothing is forever, man! but i suppose we still have a while to go still...

[RVonse]