The Sony Drive XEL-1 OLED TV: 1,000,000:1 contrast starting December 1st
[Via Impress]
Filed under: Displays
[Via Impress]
Relevant Posts
- Sony gets official with PSP-3000 (54 days ago - 132 Comments)
- Life with PlayStation begins today (25 days ago - 63 Comments)
- Kodak stuns with world's first 7.6-inch OLED picture frame (26 days ago - 53 Comments)
- Cowon's S9 Curve with 3.3-inch AMOLED touch-screen kills with style (49 days ago - 93 Comments)
- Sony Ericsson launching first round of XPERIA X1s on September 30 (33 days ago - 41 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
number13 @ Oct 1st 2007 1:27AM
holy moly
Homeboy @ Oct 1st 2007 6:07AM
That's what I said when I read the article without having read the title.
At first sight it looked like an all-in-one PC!!!! W00T
rob @ Oct 1st 2007 1:35AM
this probably wont make the day after thanksgiving sale, right??
nih @ Oct 1st 2007 1:36AM
If you got four of them you could split the video feed and make it nearly as good as one of them LCDs or CRTs. Hot.
caramelzappa @ Oct 1st 2007 1:36AM
Obviously ridiculous at the moment but it looks like promising technology.
Philip S @ Oct 1st 2007 1:40AM
Is it just me or does that actually seem somewhat cheap compared to what plasmas initially sold for?
MastrCake @ Oct 1st 2007 1:55AM
I believe you have a point. When plasmas first came out, you were lucky to get a 42 inch for $7000. Now, if the pricing stays consistent, I would expect a $6800 price for a 42 inch OLED, using simple mathmatics. However, OLED are apparently not capable of doing this size yet, so it will be intresting to see what the price will be once the 42 incher appears...
suv4x4 @ Oct 1st 2007 7:41AM
Don't forget that when plasmas initially sold, LCD-s also were more expensive, and had worse view angles, response speed and contract ratio.
It's a different landscape now, and this is why Sony makes only 2000 of those, versus mass producing them.
noazark @ Oct 1st 2007 4:09PM
all the more reason for them to unleash the 105incher on the world. id buy.
geoffreyji @ Oct 1st 2007 6:50PM
Do your math properly =P 48/11 is about 4, but that's not it. You gotta square that to about 14.5. The total comes out to a bit more than $25,000. OLEDs are extremely expensive to manufacture, and Kodak has a monopoly on OLED patents, so we won't be seeing them for a while.
Justin @ Oct 1st 2007 1:41AM
Why don't they center that stand thing... I think it would look much better if it was centered.
t-bone @ Oct 1st 2007 1:53AM
I didn't really look closely at the pictures, but now that you brought it up it is very distracting. It seems really strange.
ANTI-APPLE @ Oct 1st 2007 1:52AM
They did it to prove that it's light as F#$@! Now that they've got the point across... CENTER IT! And the rez sucks! Give me 1920x1080 on an 11" LCD and I'll get me one :D
RDx @ Oct 1st 2007 2:30AM
I would think that its in the side so you can put something on top of the stand, such as a dvd player, ect.
L @ Oct 1st 2007 2:47AM
I actually like the asymmetric design :D
I'm looking forward to seeing 20+" OLED all-in-one Vaio's with a similar design in a few years. A TV with 11" is a bit pointless, but at least OLED seems to be used for anything but small phone screens now...
kadajawi @ Oct 1st 2007 3:51AM
The off-centered design looks really, really great. I love it. Wouldn't look half as good if it was in the middle.
And nice to finally see an OLED in production that isn't tiny. Ok, it still is small, but it's the right direction.
suv4x4 @ Oct 1st 2007 7:19AM
It's apparently a statement product, hence they tried to fit-in the most statements in as possible.
1. We're on top of the industry, so we'll sell few thousand OLED TV-s a year, to claim the flag.
2. We can only make it 11 inch size before the already high price makes it totally infeasible for the potential buyers.
3. Instead of putting the tuner up, we'll put it down, so we can show off how thin OLED screens actually are (there's no backlight).
4. The remaining screen frame is so light, so we'll make this painfully obvious by putting the hinge off-center.
The resulting product looks kinda sad. That box down there is much uglier than more classic designs. The off-center frame look fragile, and distracts.
I wish them all luck in the world with this new product, but if their projected sales are less than 2000/year, then they already know they've not made this to sell it.
Wwhat @ Oct 1st 2007 9:42AM
I wonder if the arm is detachable somehow, so people can put the electronic box in a cabinet, or vertical, and the display on the wall (although at 11" it is a bit small for wallmounting)
Of course that depends on the kind of cabling in the arm, but it seems quite thin (since it has a hole) so the cable(s) in it must be rather simple.
And thinking about it, the display itself must have some driving electronics too to decode what that cable in the arm delivers, which must include a powercable for all those LED, so now I wonder what is in that big box underneath it, tuners are tiny so it must be mostly empty space and a PSU, in the way that DVD players have a lot of empty space inside.
waiownsyou @ Oct 1st 2007 1:47AM
I bet you Samsung is like, "OMGWTFBBQ 1M CONTRAST!! H4XX!!!!!!!"
ark_v2 @ Oct 1st 2007 1:53AM
OMFG, 1,000,000 : 1 is sooo over the top. Good job Sony, really god job.
Wwhat @ Oct 1st 2007 9:44AM
The numbers are a bit deceptive, if something goes completely black that raises the contrast ratio exponentially I read once.
ark_v2 @ Oct 1st 2007 3:15PM
Yeah, that's true, but still, the theoretical 1,000,000 : 1 is something rarely seen, specially for an OLED, for sony, with THAT sexy and slim design.
Jeff @ Oct 1st 2007 1:54AM
I can remember reading PC Magazines religiously about 10 years ago and having them rant about OLEDs and the future of displays. It's amazing to actually see it in real product form. Technology is truly amazing.
importjap @ Oct 1st 2007 1:55AM
Yes, cos we all want to watch TV on an 11 inch screen. I doubt the human eye can even appreciate such a contrast ratio.
Sony's going to need to try harder next time around, especially with that price.
Jon @ Oct 1st 2007 2:57AM
Your trolling attempt amuses me. Try better next time.
Kax02 @ Oct 1st 2007 3:12AM
indeed, you would much rather prefer a 200:1 CCFL LCD screen right?
As the other poster noted, nice trolling attempt. Better luck next time when you know you might not be so blatantly full of it.
importjap @ Oct 1st 2007 3:19AM
The only trolls are you two - who are now getting insulting. Does it cut you I think 11 inches is too small for a TV? Or that Sony needs to try harder? 11 inches isn't a TV size and you know it.
It's a fact, this is too expensive, and it's too small.
Jon @ Oct 1st 2007 3:44AM
First generation technology always have limitations and are always more expensive. Did you think LCD TVs were launched at $200 or scaled straight up to 40" during the first generation? Or do you have any idea how technology works?
Does not change the fact that TVs do not need to be 40" to be practical. This could be used in the kitchen for example.
Your trolling reply failed too.
importjap @ Oct 1st 2007 4:53AM
Wow, all this effort because I'm not over the moon about this screen. No I don't understand why Sony would debut only an 11" screen. Why not 14, the smallest monitor size?
Your own trolling does you a disservice, there's no need to get upset because I don't think this screen is a good enough effort.
A C @ Oct 1st 2007 4:58AM
Wow ..Sony isn't forcing you to place this in the middle of your living room to be your main TV. Did they? So I dont see where your coming from. Sometimes people just cant see the whole picture. Sony is bringing new cutting-edge technology out there and your complaning its too small for watching F***ing Greys Anatomy? You are obviously missing the point and just proved to everybody here how Dumb some people are. Funny I dont see anybody complaning about watching their movies on their new ipod NANO with video? Do us and yourself a favor and keep your comments to yourself. Engadget and the world would be a better place.
Poom @ Oct 1st 2007 6:27AM
I don't know what to say. Sony is the first to produce consumer level OLED screens, giving up to 1M:1 contrast ratio, despite Samsung saying the company would not make the deadline. Yeah, sure, it's only 11inch. So what? It's frigging first gen! Bigger and bigger ones are going to come out, this is like a symbolic first step.
Besides, defending yourself for such trolling is really... stupid.
Jerome @ Oct 1st 2007 10:00AM
why not 14inch?
Simple, money!
The 14inch OLED might of cost 2240$ compare to the 1740$ price tag.
There is psychology involve too, new technology, high price, etc.
You can't tell consumer to buy this 2240$ OLED tv that is new stuff and expensive! I am sure they debate over this but this is NEW and taking a smaller risk if all this does not work.
I am pretty sure they have all the OLED size imaginable that are waiting for the production GO!
Ralph Wiggum @ Oct 1st 2007 2:05AM
Will this be the Trinitron of LCD's?
I miss the days when Sony displays ruled, back when nothing could beat a Trinitron.
I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Oct 1st 2007 2:39AM
It's not LCD, It's OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode. Big difference.
Jon @ Oct 1st 2007 2:12AM
The technology looks promising, and it's nice to see that sony is actually pushing the concept out the door, but is anyone really going to pay almost $1800 for an 11-inch sub-HD set?
Still, I can't wait until laptops have this ;)
Shinogu @ Oct 1st 2007 2:24AM
Cool.
Now... where's that 23/27-incher that would have the 1080p? I remember it being announced alongside the 11" one earlier this year.
octoberasian @ Oct 1st 2007 2:54AM
Hmm, at exactly $158.18 per inch (not square-inch), a 23-inch will set you back $3638 USD and 27-inch, $4271 USD.
Now, for square pixel, that price of that OLED TV is about $2.42 per square pixel.
A 1920x1080 resolution TV is 1440 square pixels. That would set us back $3,485 USD. @_@
This is pretty damn expensive, but we can't blame it for being new.
Imagine... 60-inch TV at $9491 USD if going by those numbers alone.
I wouldn't mind having one in my room. XD
Now, to win the lottery....
Shinogu @ Oct 1st 2007 2:27AM
Okay. Never mind. Checked the Japanese site, and this baby rocks ALL the res. 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p. Holy coolio.
o29 @ Oct 1st 2007 2:39AM
I'm confused. In the article it says "features a 960 x 540 pixel resolution."
Shinogu @ Oct 1st 2007 2:41AM
I went straight to the "Read" link for this article, basically the specifications listing for the OLED TV. Had the support resolutions there.
I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Oct 1st 2007 2:44AM
No sir. The Screen features 960x540 (pixels) but it can accept (and down convert) 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 480p and 480i INPUT SIGNALS.
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=/language_tools&u=http://www.sony.jp/CorporateCruise/Press/200710/07-1001/
Shinogu @ Oct 1st 2007 2:46AM
Oh ho, I see. *rubs chin* Acceptance is okays by me. :]
o29 @ Oct 1st 2007 2:49AM
I think you're right, and I was just arriving at the same conclusion through babelfish.
Wouldn't it be nice if it could do HD resolutions though?
Shinogu @ Oct 1st 2007 2:51AM
If you do the math, it's practically 1/2 1080p. :P
octoberasian @ Oct 1st 2007 2:59AM
Well, if going by this comment in Joystiq:
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/28/halo-3-not-hd-runs-at-640p-pixel-counters-claim/#c7866318
There is one game that runs at 540p-- The Darkness. So, no scaling at all. LOL
Then other games will look odd if played at that resolution. XD
raw @ Oct 1st 2007 2:34AM
Is it me or is SONY coming back to it's usual cool-self. I mean, even if you look only at engadget, for last couple of weeks, SONY has been coming up with a steller product line up! Rolly, OLED tv, Sonic-stage -less-walkmans, video-walkmans and yeah walkmans with tv tuners and so many different VAIOS for everyone. Isn't it kewl to see they are back on track innovating real "gadgets" like they did back when they were unstoppable. Of course they don't have that Apple-sort of hype where fan bois go ga-ga over anything apple throws out(ok may be except for iphone update 1.1.1), but looks like SONY has finally awakened! About time!
Chinthaka @ Oct 1st 2007 3:47AM
amen to that! :-) I've always had a soft spot for sony... the overall quality of their goods (hardware wise) has always been top notch... nice to see them innovating and releasing now without the damn businessmen screwing them up in every way possible (proprietary...proprietary....)
Poom @ Oct 1st 2007 6:22AM
Yeah, I think the same too. Well.. not the Rolly bit.
suv4x4 @ Oct 1st 2007 7:31AM
I can see they're trying to replicate their earlier self, but looking at the actual stuff they produce, they've a long way to go.
You know, the stuff they produced before were at the same time top technology, luxury, and practical. And those goods were mass produced.
I don't think Rolly (what's the point of this thing?), or OLED TV produced at 2000 units per year makes up for it.
Honestly, 2000 units per year. This is just PR product, when they drive it to a state when they feel confident mass producing their "gadgets" and people buying them, I'll arrive at your conclusion Sony is back to its old self.
raw @ Oct 1st 2007 8:35AM
Well, I guess SONY has always done lot of innovating! they didnt necessary have to be the biggest commercial success stories! remember that robo doggy? and there were bunch of portable gadgets apart from walkman, i.e. watchman which they discontinued after a while. Besides if SONY doesn't try things who would? So a succesful portfolio means lot of commercially successful products like trinitons and bravias and lot of innovations and concepts like rolly!