[HN Gopher] PHOLED Will Transform Displays
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       PHOLED Will Transform Displays
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 127 points
       Date   : 2023-12-21 15:26 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | csdvrx wrote:
       | I love OLED displays my laptop and tablet: when working at night,
       | it's a wonderful complement to eink (when working at day)
       | 
       | I thought 4k was great, but if I can get a 25% increase in dpi or
       | a better efficiency, I'm very interested!
        
         | rpastuszak wrote:
         | I can't wait for OLED displays in Macs. Night mode > dark mode
         | ( https://untested.sonnet.io/Heart+of+Dorkness)
         | 
         | I built an OLED friendly reading app (midnight.sonnet.io) and
         | I'm waiting to add night mode to my writing app
         | (enso.sonnet.io) since I occasionally use it in darker
         | environments.
         | 
         | I also made a simple obsidian "night mode" config I use on my
         | OLED screen.
        
           | bookofjoe wrote:
           | >MacBook Pro With OLED Display Likely Still at Least Three
           | Years Away
           | 
           | https://www.macrumors.com/2023/10/11/macbook-pro-oled-
           | three-...
        
           | alin23 wrote:
           | Wild! I am working on exactly the same thing now for Lunar
           | (https://lunar.fyi), and I'm also calling it Night Mode ^_^
           | what a coincidence
           | 
           | I've been trying to make _" white regions in dark
           | backgrounds"_ less painful for months, but doing that at the
           | system level on macOS is incredibly hard. I see you're doing
           | it with CSS filters, which make sense in the limited scope of
           | an article. But applying something like that on the whole
           | macOS UI would cause confusion.
           | 
           | I already use something similar on the iPhone: I read on the
           | Kindle app which has white text on black background, then I
           | have a full red Color Tint filter on the Triple Back Tap
           | shortcut which I use before reading. Very similar effect to
           | your solution, although I don't have images in my books.
        
             | csdvrx wrote:
             | > I've been trying to make "white regions in dark
             | backgrounds" less painful for months, but doing that at the
             | system level on macOS is incredibly hard. I see you're
             | doing it with CSS filters, which make sense in the limited
             | scope of an article. But applying something like that on
             | the whole macOS UI would cause confusion
             | 
             | Can I suggest you "my one simple trick" when I was doing
             | the same on Windows?
             | 
             | Increase contrast, a lot, in the original RGB space, then
             | only keep the R channel, then invert the picture.
             | 
             | It's like doing a "black and white" mode, but as "black and
             | red" and avoids losing "faint colors".
             | 
             | Also, you remove the color consistency problem (IIRC the
             | perception of colors is not symmetrical on light and dark
             | backgrounds, I think it was pioneered by Ethan Schoonover
             | for Solarized)
             | 
             | BTW the inversion should be optional, to be nice to apps
             | using a dark theme (ex: many terminals by default) and may
             | work best on a window-by-window basis if that's possible on
             | the Mac.
             | 
             | The best results are when using a system light theme +
             | light themed apps.
        
           | csdvrx wrote:
           | > Night mode > dark mode
           | 
           | Absolutely!
           | 
           | > I built an OLED friendly reading app
           | 
           | Very nice! On windows, I use a program that runs matrix
           | operations on the color space, so that I could increase the
           | contrast, invert, then only keep the red chanel
           | 
           | On wayland I can do that with wl-gamma: for an equivalent of
           | your app but at the wayland level, try: `wl-gammarelay-rs &
           | busctl --user -- set-property rs.wl-gammarelay /
           | rs.wl.gammarelay Temperature q 1000`
           | 
           | > I also made a simple obsidian "night mode" config I use on
           | my OLED screen.
           | 
           | I had similar setups for my editors, but removing syntax
           | coloring and using the raise contrast + only keep the red
           | channel turned out to be simpler to generalize
        
           | crazygringo wrote:
           | > _Night mode > dark mode_
           | 
           | Can you elaborate what that means?
           | 
           | I looked through the article linked but couldn't find any
           | obvious explanation.
        
             | cracrecry wrote:
             | Red letters and icons like in submarines so your "day mode"
             | vision does not get activated.
             | 
             | Here is the astronomical software Stellarium:
             | https://rasc.ca/sites/default/files/SMP-red.png
        
             | Novosell wrote:
             | Instead of the dark areas being dark gray, they are pure
             | black. To me it looks worse tbh.
        
       | pawelduda wrote:
       | What's the state of MiniLED for gaming/movies? Isn't that best of
       | both worlds? No burn-in, higher brightness (I know OLED would be
       | pain to use in a room where blinds cannot be pulled down all the
       | time). And image quality can match, or be better than OLED?
        
         | mgrandl wrote:
         | You are thinking of MicroLED. MiniLED is mostly just marketing
         | and not close to OLED.
        
           | pawelduda wrote:
           | I was specifically referring to MiniLED, because it is
           | actually available in the market as of today. And it does
           | appear to be close to OLED.
        
             | imp0cat wrote:
             | They are capable of displaying brighter whites and darker
             | blacks, but not at the same time. :(
             | 
             | Check the "starfield" test:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVSQTHYZXD0&t=715 - the LG
             | OLED TV shows all the stars on a perfectly black
             | background, the Sony LED TV shows all the stars, but the
             | background is not perfectly black. The TCL MiniLED TV shows
             | near-perfect black background, but is missing most of the
             | stars!
        
             | layer8 wrote:
             | The additional contrast of MiniLED is very low-resolution
             | (2000 pixels or so per dimming zone). It is useless for
             | text, for example.
        
           | guilamu wrote:
           | MiniLED is not "just marketing" according to rtings:
           | 
           | https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/aoc/q27g3xmn
           | 
           | https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/innocn/27m2v
        
             | potatolicious wrote:
             | Yeah, I'm actually personally pretty excited about MiniLED.
             | It's not "perfect" in terms of lighting like OLEDs or
             | MicroLEDs are, but they also don't suffer from many of the
             | downsides like burn-in.
             | 
             | The fact that it's not as good as OLED on one performance
             | metric doesn't mean it's smoke and mirrors, it's just a
             | middle ground technology that makes different tradeoffs.
        
             | itishappy wrote:
             | How are you interpreting these? Contrast, local-dimming,
             | and black-level are all fairly poor compared to the the
             | perfect scores received by OLED monitors.
             | 
             | To be fair, MiniLED displays are _significantly_ cheaper
             | than OLED displays, but their performance isn 't really
             | comparable.
        
               | newZWhoDis wrote:
               | Don't forget LCD's garbage response times. "MiniLED"
               | screens smear a lot and lack the crisp smoothness of
               | OLED's 0.1ms response time
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | You still have motion blur with OLED due to sample-and-
               | hold. Techniques like backlight scanning or BFI are
               | needed to achieve true motion clarity.
        
               | guilamu wrote:
               | Oh, I agree. $1,200 monitors are mostly better than $300
               | ones.
               | 
               | A more interesting comparison here IMHO is with panels
               | using the same technology, sold around the same price
               | (IPS or VA) and lacking Mini-LEDs backlighting.
               | 
               | Rtings seems to conclude that Mini-LEDs backlighting is
               | far better than full panel back lighting.
               | 
               | Hell, I'm using one right now (KTC M27T20, paid 330
               | euros) and it's just amazingly good... even if not as
               | good as OLED.
               | 
               | Also, right now, OLED also suffer from text fringing
               | issues : https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=
               | showfull&id=...
        
           | mensetmanusman wrote:
           | MiniLED is better for displays in bright environments that
           | need better lifetimes.
        
         | AndrewDucker wrote:
         | Lots of OLED TVs out there. I'm not aware of any that need the
         | blinds pulled down to use.
        
           | pawelduda wrote:
           | I sometimes need to limit outdoor light for watching a non-
           | OLED TV, can't imagine not having to do that even more with
           | your average OLED
        
         | SirMaster wrote:
         | MiniLED is just LCD panel with an array of small white LEDs
         | acting as a local array dimmable backlight.
         | 
         | MicroLED is like OLED but using tiny LEDs for each sub-pixel.
         | MicroLED is still far from affordable prices and also not
         | really able to make high resolution like 4K in a common sized
         | TV or display. MicroLED are mostly still like 100"+ to reach 4K
         | pixel density.
        
         | newZWhoDis wrote:
         | MiniLED is trash.
         | 
         | MicroLED is the only thing that will dethrone OLED
        
         | ksec wrote:
         | >What's the state of MiniLED for gaming/movies?
         | 
         | If it is within your budget, take a look at Sony X95L MiniLED
         | TV. If there was an award for least complained TV set on
         | avsforum in recent history ( if not the whole history ) it
         | would be the X95L.
         | 
         | Although I am eagerly waiting for the 2024 series to see what
         | Sony has to offer in terms of MiniLED.
        
       | aredox wrote:
       | The "More from Spectrum" at the bottom shows what are the
       | timescales of this kind of progress: "almost ready" = 10 years.
       | 
       | https://spectrum.ieee.org/bright-blue-pholeds-almost-ready-f...
        
         | kridsdale1 wrote:
         | Hardware is hard. Especially when it means inventing new
         | physics and chemicals.
        
           | cubefox wrote:
           | That doesn't really explain though why someone would say they
           | were "almost ready" when they very much weren't.
        
       | chilmers wrote:
       | It's not mentioned in the article, but it seems like VR displays
       | especially could benefit from the higher resolution and better
       | efficiency.
        
         | TheFuzzball wrote:
         | Yep, and computer displays. IMO smartphone displays don't need
         | more resolution.
        
           | jacobr1 wrote:
           | But they do need higher efficiency
        
           | crazygringo wrote:
           | Retina computer displays are already high enough as well.
           | 
           | MacBooks and iMacs don't really need further pixels either.
           | 
           | VR seems like the only mainstream focus now on increasing
           | density. It seems like the Vision Pro is going to get us
           | halfway there from e.g. the Meta Quest, but there's still
           | going to be another big jump to get to Retina-equivalent.
        
         | shostack wrote:
         | Not just VR, but think AR wearables as well. This is accretive
         | to enabling smaller power sources without sacrificing
         | capabilities, thus improving form factors.
        
       | FredPret wrote:
       | I hope this leads to a phone / smart watch that lasts multiple
       | days. Does anyone know how energy requirements break down between
       | CPU and display in a typical device?
        
         | nosefurhairdo wrote:
         | I've just shopped for a running watch, and while the AMOLED
         | screen watches look nice, they claim to have ~50% the battery
         | life in GPS mode compared to transflective LCD display watches.
         | 
         | The article suggests a near-term 25% efficiency gain from this
         | tech, so seems unlikely to translate to >2 day battery life.
        
           | jeffbee wrote:
           | I have a Garmin with an OLED display and I usually have to
           | charge it once a week or so. The GPS is by far the biggest
           | power consumer. During activity tracking with the GPS turned
           | on the battery lasts maybe 10 hours. It doesn't feel like a
           | change in display technology would meaningfully change that
           | situation.
        
             | FredPret wrote:
             | Why do these Garmins outlast Apple Watches by 5-10x? Is it
             | because they're bigger? Or does the Apple Watch do more
             | things?
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | > GPS is by far the biggest power consumer.
             | 
             | There are some cool research papers about delayed
             | processing of GPS data in the cloud. The idea is you turn
             | the GPS on for just a few milliseconds, record the raw
             | radio data (without getting a GPS location fix), and do
             | that every 10 seconds or so.
             | 
             | Then later you upload all the collected data to a big cloud
             | compute cluster which can figure out all the locations (and
             | where battery life doesn't matter).
             | 
             | People are using that technique to have GPS trackers with
             | years of battery life - handy for things like tracking
             | animals.
        
               | xur17 wrote:
               | Do you have any idea what the storage requirements are
               | for a solution like this?
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | Pretty high - each location sample is hundreds of
               | kilobytes if I remember correctly, although it was
               | possible to trim that down if you knew there was a strong
               | signal or you were happy to have some probability of an
               | incorrect location.
               | 
               | Annoyingly I can't seem to find the paper now.
        
               | ska wrote:
               | Tracking animals would seem to be a different set of
               | requirements than, say, turn-by-turn car navigation.
               | 
               | I'd imagine that for a lot of research, longer lifetime
               | would win over real-time ish data, and possible you don't
               | care so much about precision and granularity either. You
               | probably want to upload semi often or risk losing the
               | whole thing, but otherwise minimize batter use.
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | GPS already isn't good enough for car navigation, which
               | also integrates wheel rotation and steering angle
               | sensors. Even on a bicycle the tracking is noticeably
               | better when you add a wheel rotation sensor to a GPS head
               | unit.
        
               | ska wrote:
               | Interesting! That doesn't really change the argument,
               | does it?
               | 
               | "Where am I right now", is a different requirement than
               | "where have I been, roughly, over the last 6 mo"
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | Yeah I was trying to agree.
        
             | xur17 wrote:
             | Do you use it with the display always on, or do you have it
             | wake up whenever you look at the display?
             | 
             | I have a Garmin watch with a transreflective display, and
             | end up charging it ~once a week with 1-2 hours of activity
             | tracking per day.
        
         | jampekka wrote:
         | There are smart watches that last multiple weeks, e.g. most
         | Amazfit watches. The older models also used to have always-on
         | transflective displays, which were vastly better to use a than
         | the current OLEDs that need weird wrist gyrations to turn on.
        
         | J_Shelby_J wrote:
         | Just disable the screen on an Apple Watch and it lasts for 2
         | and half days.
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | These have existed for decades. The problem is the ever
         | demanding software filling up any of the hardware gains made in
         | the last twenty years.
        
         | bityard wrote:
         | I have a not-very-fancy Android smartphone that will easily go
         | over a day between charges, if I let it. I can bump that up to
         | 2.5 days between a full charge if I turn off Location and
         | Bluetooth. (Which I usually do since I typically need neither.)
        
       | TheFuzzball wrote:
       | I was planning on buying a QD-OLED TV next year... maybe I'll
       | wait.
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | From my experience these new types of displays show up in small
         | form factors first before the yield is good enough to build
         | larger panels such as for televisions.
         | 
         | I have yet to see this in small panels so you may need to wait
         | for quite a lot longer than a year.
        
         | Joeri wrote:
         | FWIW, I don't think you should wait. I bought this year's
         | samsung s95c qd-oled, and it is such a nice looking display
         | that I feel we're well into the territory of diminishing
         | returns of further improvements. I was struck by how much nicer
         | 4k hdr movies look compared to the last few times I went to a
         | movie theatre.
         | 
         | The only real downside is that now I notice just how much
         | content is not 4k hdr. Improving the upscaler's software would
         | probably make a bigger real world difference than improving the
         | panel, at least for me.
        
         | MBCook wrote:
         | There's always a better one a year away in the OLED game.
         | Brighter, faster, better colors, cheaper, whatever.
         | 
         | It's a bit like waiting for a faster PC in the 90s. At some
         | point you just have to buy.
        
       | staflow wrote:
       | >says Michael Hack
        
         | jasonjmcghee wrote:
         | Relatively common surname dating back long before computers
        
           | kridsdale1 wrote:
           | We used to hack lots of things. Jungles, reeds, grain,
           | timber, enemy Viking tribes.
        
       | tromp wrote:
       | > Replacing the fluorescent blue with phosphorescent blue will
       | mean a more balanced pixel structure and could enable higher-
       | resolution displays in the future. In the near term, the switch
       | will lead to an approximate 25 percent gain in efficiency
       | 
       | I would have expected a 50% gain. According to the quoted
       | efficiencies, the blue fluorescent subpixel needs 4x more power
       | (at 25% efficency) than the phosphorescent red and green
       | subpixels (at near 100% efficiency). So making the blue
       | phosphorescent as well should reduce 1+1+4 to 1+1+1 power, a 50%
       | reduction (technically a 100% gain in efficiency). Why is the
       | near term gain only 25% ?
        
         | manwe150 wrote:
         | I don't know the answer, but I think there is usually 2 green
         | subpixels, so 1+1+1+4 to 1+1+1+1 for that facet
        
           | anderskaseorg wrote:
           | You're thinking of the Bayer pattern for sensors, which have
           | four equal RGGB squares. When an RGGB pattern is used for
           | displays, the more numerous green subpixels need to be
           | smaller to maintain the correct white balance, resulting in
           | the same 1+1+4 power profile.
        
             | kurthr wrote:
             | Yes, for cameras it is called Bayer. For displays Samsung
             | coined Pentile. It is by far the most common array of
             | mobile OLED subpixel designs (RGGB), used in mobile devices
             | (eg iPhone, Galaxy, Pixel, Huawei, Oppo, Xiaomi).
        
               | ska wrote:
               | GP's point was that it's not the number of pixels, but
               | the power draw that matters here (for power consumption)
               | and while there are more greens they are smaller and draw
               | less.
               | 
               | This design pattern happens because humans are more
               | sensitive to greens, but that doesn't mean you need more
               | green _output_.
        
               | kurthr wrote:
               | Exactly, for a white balanced screen you need the same
               | number of photons whether they are at a higher resolution
               | (like Pentile) or not. Adding a White (or Yellow or Cyan)
               | subpixel for RGBW can improve efficiency for the less
               | saturated part of the color gamut, but obviously not the
               | pure red green or blue colors.
        
               | rowanG077 wrote:
               | If I understand correctly you don't want the same number
               | of photons. You need more blue photons.
        
         | kurthr wrote:
         | My professional experience is that blue sub-pixels for a 5500K
         | balanced white use about 50% of total power (rather than the
         | 66% you show). My understanding is that this is because even
         | though Blue 460nm is shorter wavelength (higher photon energy)
         | than RG(530&610nm) it is also less significantly less bright
         | (in photons/sec/solid angle).
         | 
         | I've struggled to find a good webpage, but roughly in subpixel
         | power% it comes to 45%+35%+4x(20%)=160%. By improving blue
         | efficiency it could become 45%+35%+20%=100% and require only
         | ~2/3 of the original power and total display power efficiency
         | by ~50% (ignoring all the computation, RC losses, coms, etc).
         | 
         | White balanced power is independent of the number of pixels (or
         | pixel arrangement) such as RGB vs RGGB, but RGBW or RGBY or
         | RGBC can improve efficiency (and reduce this relative
         | improvement %).
        
       | loufe wrote:
       | This video is a great primer on the state of the art of display
       | technology right now and seriously changed how I view each tech.
       | Seems like there is a lot of convergence between the main
       | technologies and they all borrow from each other in different
       | ways in their pursuit of the ideal display.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyUA1OmXMXA&pp=ygUjZGlzcGxhe...
       | 
       | IIRC talks about PHOLED as one of the upcoming technologies to
       | get to the pinnacle.
        
         | Dolototo wrote:
         | I'm still waiting for my affordable microled displays.
         | 
         | But the last few years they became noticable used.
         | 
         | This year in a outdoor it event I had to check the display wall
         | behind the speaker to check it out.
         | 
         | It was full color, fast, bright (we are talking no cloud hot
         | bright summer day and that display was in the sun and it was
         | LEDs!
         | 
         | Crazy impressive
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | I'm still waiting for my light field displays.
           | 
           | https://www.holoxica.com/light-field-displays
           | 
           | Review:
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0touQFIwns
        
             | zimpenfish wrote:
             | I've got a Looking Glass Portrait and it is spooky how
             | effective it is (although it depends a lot on the quality
             | of your depth map.) The software is terrible though and
             | getting stuff onto it is a chore.
        
               | wlesieutre wrote:
               | Their upcoming model (currently on Kickstarter) is
               | internet connected, so will presumably be easier to put
               | content on it
               | 
               | https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lookingglass/looking
               | -gl...
        
               | bethekind wrote:
               | Is it worth $250 though? A 2 hr battery seems short,
               | though if the software can automatically convert all my
               | old photos into 3d, I would buy. (NERFS and gaussian
               | splatting)
               | 
               | I think my friends would love to see our old memories
               | come alive again
        
           | wlesieutre wrote:
           | Apple has been rumored to be working toward MicroLED displays
           | in their products for a while, popular opinion is that the
           | Apple Watch will be the first one to make the jump like they
           | did with OLED.
           | 
           | Now that they have the Apple Watch Ultra at $800 and in
           | comparatively low volume (I assume), I won't be surprised if
           | it shows up in the next version of that, then makes its way
           | to phones and elsewhere.
        
             | atoav wrote:
             | Makes sense, it has the smallest display so it is likely a
             | good test bed for the manufacturing process.
        
             | bobsmooth wrote:
             | Isn't the Vision Pro is using microLED?
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | I'm just waiting for a tv that has instant startup times like
       | phone displays, why they cant replicate instant sleep/wake like
       | mobile phones can is a mystery to me.
        
         | solarkraft wrote:
         | My Samsung TV (LCD) is fairly quick to start up. I think slow
         | startup times are generally a case of bad software.
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | TVs do not need software beyond the minimum of firmware
           | needed to drive the thing.
           | 
           | See: Monitors.
        
             | crazygringo wrote:
             | But as long as consumers keep buying them with the
             | software, because they want to watch Hulu and YouTube and
             | Netflix directly without purchasing an extra device (not
             | unreasonable for the average consumer), TVs will come with
             | the software.
             | 
             | You can argue all you want but the market always wins.
        
               | MBCook wrote:
               | As long as consumers have basically no choice to avoid a
               | smart TV, they'll keep buying them whether they want the
               | smart part or not.
               | 
               | (I agree you're generally correct, but at this point we
               | don't even have a choice)
        
               | crazygringo wrote:
               | You're free to buy digital signage if you want, and some
               | people do. You do have a choice.
               | 
               | But it's just not what most people want. Most people
               | really do want their TV to natively run streaming
               | services.
        
               | MBCook wrote:
               | Signage exists, but it takes a lot of effort and research
               | to buy compared to a "normal" TV. Normal stores just
               | don't have non-smart options, I bet most people don't
               | even know it exists.
               | 
               | I know several people who love not having to use extra
               | boxes due to their smart TVs, I totally get it. I just
               | wish it hadn't pushed out all other options, especially
               | on the high end where subsidies from deals are less
               | necessary.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | Best Buy sells dumb tvs (their in-house brand,
               | "Insignia"), and their brick-and-mortar stores always
               | have a bunch in stock. Options are limited to 32, 40, and
               | 43" displays, though.
        
               | MBCook wrote:
               | Oh really? I had no idea.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | Yep. I've needed a bunch of dumb tvs this year (don't
               | ask) and they're what I landed on. Best Buy overnight
               | delivered a half-dozen ~$100 tvs to my doorstep for free
               | (I bought them one at a time), and I also grabbed some
               | off the shelves at two nearby stores.
        
               | toast0 wrote:
               | Digital signage is getting a lot of smart features too,
               | it's just a bit behind the consumer and hospitality
               | markets.
        
               | CWIZO wrote:
               | Can you point me in the right direction so that I as
               | someone that didn't know this exists up until now could
               | learn enough to know what and where to buy?
        
             | ChuckMcM wrote:
             | Technically correct and actually wrong :-).
             | 
             | TVs do need software beyond the minimum to support the
             | price asked. TVs are a cut throat, low margin, business.
             | And the only way to eek out a bit more margin is to have
             | some "feature" that makes your offering marginally better
             | than your competitor's offering. That margin can be the
             | difference between a going concern and going out of
             | business.
             | 
             | So from the manufacturer's perspective they do "need" that
             | extra software. Until someone establishes the 'spyware
             | free, dumb tv" market that will continue to be the case I'm
             | afraid.
        
               | oriolid wrote:
               | > Until someone establishes the 'spyware free, dumb tv"
               | market that will continue to be the case I'm afraid.
               | 
               | Well, there is Sceptre. Unfortunately they don't seem to
               | be available outside US.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | Insignia also makes spyware-free dumb tvs. They're Best
               | Buy's in-house brand, which means you can at least get
               | them in all of N.A. (maybe the same for Sceptre, I don't
               | know). The last time I checked, they only had models up
               | to 43". Probably meets the demands of the kiosk-mode
               | market.
        
               | 8ytecoder wrote:
               | As a counterpoint, I buy Sony TVs exclusively because
               | they do a much better job of tuning the panel. They don't
               | even make the panel. Sony just slaps Android on it. I'm
               | definitely not the only one there. Sony has been known
               | for their color accuracy for a long time now.
               | 
               | (Sony TVs even have a pretty decent user accessible API)
        
             | katbyte wrote:
             | I have a monitor that takes an absurd amount of time to
             | turn on, like 5-10s
        
               | hollerith wrote:
               | Would you please name and shame this monitor?
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | Mine's Acer V223HQL. It takes ~5 seconds to power on.
               | 
               | This is my disagreeable take, but the reason UIs are
               | always slow is because slow UI imposes less cognitive
               | load on users, and also developers. You're doing less,
               | that's less work for your brain. Only very few impatient
               | vocal minority wants quicker responses. I care, but
               | clearly I don't belong to the majority.
        
               | MadnessASAP wrote:
               | I have an Acer Ultrawide that takes an absurd amount of
               | time to wake or mode switch. Literally enough time for me
               | to say out loud "I hate this monitor, it takes an absurd
               | amount of time to wake"
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | I don't think it has anything to do with the display.
         | 
         | It's the TV software waking itself up from power-saving sleep
         | mode, possibly combined with some HDMI negotiation, which may
         | involve waking up a second device from sleep like your Apple TV
         | or Xbox.
        
         | organsnyder wrote:
         | My cheap TCL TV has an instant-on mode, but it does use more
         | power. Phones don't start up instantly from being fully powered
         | off, either.
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | The actual display has a pretty much zero turn-on-time
         | (probably under 20ms).
         | 
         | The thing that takes ages to boot up is the 'smart'
         | functionality, on screen display, hdmi link training, etc.
        
           | yread wrote:
           | My AOC takes good 15s to switch on (or between different
           | sources). I was always wondering what is it doing all that
           | time
        
         | skunkworker wrote:
         | Their software takes awhile to boot. If they had something like
         | VRRoom internally, the user experience would be a lot better,
         | switching inputs faster etc.
         | 
         | https://hdfury.com/product/8k-vrroom-40gbps/
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | Isn't that also down to legislation mandating devices to be off
         | and have a maximum off power draw? Mind you, phones seem to be
         | doing alright in that regard.
        
         | leptons wrote:
         | How else are they going to make you look at their logo for 15
         | seconds?
        
         | __david__ wrote:
         | Sure, that's annoying but I cannot understand how syncing up to
         | an HDMI signal can take 5 to 10 seconds. Frankly, I can't
         | understand how it's not measured in milliseconds. WTF are TVs
         | doing? Is the protocol so bad at getting a picture to the
         | screen quickly, or is it the TVs? Just switching from SDR to
         | HDR blacks out the screen for multiple seconds. Come on.
        
           | cubefox wrote:
           | Slow SoC perhaps or badly optimized drivers / OS.
        
       | cybereporter wrote:
       | Curious to know who patented this. LG has strong licensing rights
       | on OLED, hence the Samsung branded QLED. It'll be interesting to
       | see if display manufacturers try to purchase the rights to new
       | display tech.
        
         | newZWhoDis wrote:
         | FWIW: QLED is LCD garbage. QD-OLED (also Samsung) is state of
         | the art.
        
       | discreteevent wrote:
       | I went back to an LCD phone. So much better for reading - for me.
       | I have no idea if it was because of pwm flicker or something
       | else. I just hope they keep making phones with LCD screens.
        
       | tedunangst wrote:
       | My takeaway from this article is I should change my color scheme
       | to amber instead of white on black.
        
       | jeffrallen wrote:
       | I'm holding out for Continuously Obstructed regenerative non-
       | alloyed hybrid OLED (CORNHOLED).
        
       | cbarrick wrote:
       | P-HOLED is a very unfortunate name.
       | 
       | They will surely come up with a better name before this goes to
       | market.
       | 
       | It's probably supposed to be pronounced PHO-LED, but some people
       | are definitely going to read this as P-HOLED.
        
         | mypastself wrote:
         | There's also Pi-hole...
        
         | ProfessorLayton wrote:
         | I doubt it, we live in a world where screen resolutions are
         | touted in multiples of "K" and cameras are sold by number of
         | megapixels.
         | 
         | Tech jargon is the worst.
        
       | at_a_remove wrote:
       | This might even rub off on glow-in-the-dark technology. Exciting!
       | Most glow-in-the-dark materials in blue are feeble by comparison
       | to green and must rely on various inefficient tricks.
        
       | inopinatus wrote:
       | Somehow I feel like I want to pronounce it monosyllabically, so
       | like _foaled_ , rather than like _followed_ or (even worse) _faux
       | lead_.
        
         | jvm___ wrote:
         | Pee holed
        
         | kulahan wrote:
         | _faux lead_ is exactly how I pronounced it lol.
        
       | cubefox wrote:
       | One problem for OLED screens compared to LCDs is their rather low
       | maximum brightness. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like this new
       | blue dye will change much about that.
        
         | wthomp wrote:
         | That doesn't seem to match what I understood from the article.
         | At one point they say explicitly that it will enable brighter
         | displays.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-12-21 23:00 UTC)