- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,267
- 126
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I'd like a flatscreen 60" because the current bigscreen rear projection tvs are absolute ass in terms of viewing at an angle and this is the main reason I'm still watching on my 27" at home!
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Interesting but it doesn't say what the resolution is like.
I for one don't like plasmas because I personally think the resolutions suck. If something were to interest me now, it would have to be a 1080p capable TV.
Originally posted by: KnightBreed
Is this going to end up like OLED where an actual product is "right around the corner" for the next 3 years? I'm disappointed the article doesn't talk about how the tech works. Ok, so they use chemical vapor deposition to grow the nanotubes. Great, so how is the image actually created? If the panel is only an inch thick then the nanotubes have to emit their own light. It will extremely difficult to fit a backlight behind the substrate on a panel that thin.
So many questions.
I didn't know you could get carbon nanotubes to emit electrons like that. Pretty cool. I wonder if they plan on improving the phosphor compound to reduce burn-in and increase luminance.Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: KnightBreed
Is this going to end up like OLED where an actual product is "right around the corner" for the next 3 years? I'm disappointed the article doesn't talk about how the tech works. Ok, so they use chemical vapor deposition to grow the nanotubes. Great, so how is the image actually created? If the panel is only an inch thick then the nanotubes have to emit their own light. It will extremely difficult to fit a backlight behind the substrate on a panel that thin.
So many questions.
It isnt backlit
The tubes emit electrons that strike a phoshor screen like a CRT. Instead of one "gun", each tube acts as one.
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Interesting but it doesn't say what the resolution is like.
I for one don't like plasmas because I personally think the resolutions suck. If something were to interest me now, it would have to be a 1080p capable TV.
This ought not to be a problem at all. The number of pixels increases with screen size, like the number of cells in a honeycomb. If the electronics permit, this could display much higher resolutions than that.
Carbon nanotubes can be extraordinarily small - less than 10nm. I certainly hope they would have no trouble fitting enough to reduce any issues with "screen-door effects". Carbon nanotubes are predicted to eventually replace modern CMOS transistors, which are currently around 90nm and still shrinking. Plasma cells are large because they have to store fluorescent gas in each individual pixel (actually 3 cells per pixel). This will ultimately limit how many cells you can fit on the substrate, and ultimately how large (or small) the screen can be for a given resolution.Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Interesting but it doesn't say what the resolution is like.
I for one don't like plasmas because I personally think the resolutions suck. If something were to interest me now, it would have to be a 1080p capable TV.
This ought not to be a problem at all. The number of pixels increases with screen size, like the number of cells in a honeycomb. If the electronics permit, this could display much higher resolutions than that.
The question is, is this technology more like plasma or LCD. Plasma has problems because the cell sizes are large making it suitable mainly for larger screens. Does making a 1080p NED require making the screen exceptionally big because you cannot shrink the cells? Will you get screendoor effect on these NED like plasmas because the cell sizes are large?
So many questions.
Originally posted by: KnightBreed
Carbon nanotubes can be extraordinarily small - less than 10nm. I certainly hope they would have no trouble fitting enough to reduce any issues with "screen-door effects". Carbon nanotubes are predicted to eventually replace modern CMOS transistors, which are currently around 90nm and still shrinking. Plasma cells are large because they have to store fluorescent gas in each individual pixel (actually 3 cells per pixel). This will ultimately limit how many cells you can fit on the substrate, and ultimately how large (or small) the screen can be for a given resolution.Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Interesting but it doesn't say what the resolution is like.
I for one don't like plasmas because I personally think the resolutions suck. If something were to interest me now, it would have to be a 1080p capable TV.
This ought not to be a problem at all. The number of pixels increases with screen size, like the number of cells in a honeycomb. If the electronics permit, this could display much higher resolutions than that.
The question is, is this technology more like plasma or LCD. Plasma has problems because the cell sizes are large making it suitable mainly for larger screens. Does making a 1080p NED require making the screen exceptionally big because you cannot shrink the cells? Will you get screendoor effect on these NED like plasmas because the cell sizes are large?
So many questions.
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Real technology that if it scales up for production will give us 1 inch thick displays 60 inches wide!
AND less than 3k too!