Good taste. We've heard of it
|
|
|
Canon patent victory could change the future of TV
HAVING WON A CRITICAL patent appeal in its native Japan, Canon is well on the way to being the first electronics manufacturer to make displays based on surface-conduction electron emitters.
Canon had previously sub-licensed the patent technology to make SEDs and had started designing TVs using the technology, displaying prototypes as long ago as 2006. But patent-holder Applied Nanotech took Canon to court, claiming that this sub-licensing was illegal.
The US circuit court ruled in July that it was wrong, and Applied has today announced that it won't be pursuing the matter further.
Canon now plans to start working SEDs into a line of TVs to complete with rival OLED technology, pushed hard by Samsung and Sony. But the technology may be put on the back burner for now: Canon's President Tsuneji Uchida told the Financial Times that with the current economic climate not exactly buoyant, "At times like this, new display products are not introduced much because people would laugh at them."
Will SED hit the big time? With such a troubled delay in production, it seems fairly unlikely, especially given the rave reviews given to OLED screens, which seem set to take over from LCD as the display standard of choice in the next decade.
But having wrangled hard for the right to make SED displays, maybe Canon will pull something out of the bag. µ
L'Inq
FT
Share this:
Share
SED/FED displays might have been a good bridge product to OLED but there is no way they can compete against organic displays. Considering that OLEDs will be in mainstream use before SED technology,
SED is a dead end path.
OLEDs can be made thinner, larger, flexible, opaque and all for much cheaper than SEDs. They also use much less energy and don't irradiate you like CRTs or SED/FEDs. No special leaded glass is needed for OLEDs so they can use current LCD glass for mainstream production while SED/FEDs will need new more expensive display substrates to be produced. And one of the highly touted benefits for SEDs is completely false due to the ignorance of their fanboy base, SEDs will have set resolutions. There is an emitter behind each and every pixel in a SED/FED display. Unless you can have some sort of magical matter creation device to produce more emitters and also scale size and density, at your resolution whim, you are stuck at a native resolution. The only benefit going for SED at this point would be color reproduction and usable life. By the time SED comes out several production years of OLED models will have been out and these problems will be continually improved upon just like they did with Plasmas and LCDs. OLED is the only future.
Looks to me that SED will have a minimum size limitation similar in ways to Plasma.

Good for 12" + screen sizes only.

But should have a longer, more stable lifespan than OLED.

If SED is cheaper to make for domestic TVs than OLED, Plasma or LCD then of course the manufacturers will thrust this upon us.
I thought SED also has native resolution due to the fact that SED uses many surface electron emitters.
and my entire digital life shall be under Canon's Awesome Rulz!
Do the commenters here know the difference between THEN and THAN? Makes your statements less than credible...
SED will blow all other formats out of the water, if it ever gets here.
SED certainly does have a native resolution, though I can't imagine a TV with new technology that WON'T be 1080p. SED does, however, share most of the other advantages of CRTs, and I would love to get my hands on one. The manufacturing should be simpler than LCD and plasma, so hopefully it will be able to compete, cost-wise.
I never understood Applied Nanotech's lawsuit. They caused a 2 year delay and may have doomed the technology. It will be very hard for Canon to bring SED to market where LCD and plasma are so cheap. And there's a worldwide recession. Way to go guys!
Carbon nanotube based pixels have been around for long, long time. With strange curled wires that lead into thinner glass, all tv types have roots back to 1930s', including FED. 

Plasma still rules, yet SED/FED technology was supposed to be really BIG advancement this decade. Then OLED took spotlight.

Yet today if you really, really want SED/FED, Jumbotron makes them. Mostly for Ball Parks, each pixel is huge Vacumne tube in display. Bigger than Can of Tennis Balls.

Of course entire display is often 100+' wide. So whether Plasma, LCD, OLED or SED/FED, its TV, Most will Cook Your Pets, However. & Alas, LCD are going to thicknesses' of less than 3/8". So Heavy Glass Front of SED/FED along with extreme power, make one wonder. How about Nice Backyard TV?
TS Drashek

Check out: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-sed-monitor.htm


SED is about 33% less power usage then Plasma and is still lower LCD.
Sony has recently demonstrated its new display technology named FED which appears to be very similar to SED, so they may compete with Canon on both the OLED and the SED segments
Where is the homework? What is the power consumption differences between them and other factual stuff.
Well although there has been many big boys pushing for LED based technology I don't think they can get certain problems to ever go away.

For one, SED is pretty much like CRT no native resolutions, no text distortion, no aspect ratio issues, bright under sunlight, better colour reproduction, more then 60Hz refresh.... Well I guess it was more then one but as you can see SED gives the slim display like LED and all that is good from CRT.

You make the call, I'm so happy to read this cause I was soon going to buy a LED TV. I will wait for SED to hit even if it takes a year or two.