HDTV Almanac - Sony and Panasonic: New Entrants in OLED TV Race

[alfredpoor]

This story has me scratching my head a bit; Sony and Panasonic will partner in developing OLED TVs. According to the press release, the two companies will pool their “core and printing technologies” to develop a “printing method-based next-generation OLED … <a href="http://hdtvprofessor.com/HDTVAlmanac/?p=1855">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">→</span></a>

Read Column

[videograbber]

> This story has me scratching my head a bit; Sony and Panasonic will partner in developing OLED TVs. According to the press release, the two companies will pool their “core and printing technologies” to develop a “printing method-based next-generation OLED technology.” Perhaps the most puzzling part is that they “aim to establish mass-production technology during 2013.” <

Well, I have to agree with you on this one, Alfred. A first glance, it does seem a bit odd.

> can they accomplish this by next year? That seems to be a very tall order, given the early stages of development for metal oxide backplanes and OLED materials (especially the problematic blue emitters). It’s hard to see just how they might manage to pull this off. <

It does appear to be an ambitious and difficult goal. However, I may have an explanation. They never said anything about producing or selling any of these TVs in 2013! Simply that they would "establish the technology" to do so. Perhaps actual manufacturing will come in 2014. And mass quantity sales not until 2015? Sometimes you have to read the deeper meaning behind the initial impression the (carefully chosen) words convey.

The main take-away that I get from this announcement is that it's primarily PR, to let people know that they're still in the game. [Like MS recently trumpeting their new Surface computers, that won't even exist for 4-8 months! Which is an eternity in that marketplace. But I digress.] And that they have not ceded OLEDs to LG and Samsung. I.e., while their competitors may be first to market, Panasonic and Sony are saying they too will have offerings "soon", and they may be both cheaper and better. For those who don't buy a big-screen TV every year or two, this may cause them to wait a bit to see. Say nothing, and those sales opportunities are gone for a long time.

This is the first I've heard of either company being involved in this arena, and I would have thought LG and Samsung to be my exclusive options, for the next few years. And in fact, they may still be. But, from my perspective, it's good to see that OLED will have more power-players contributing to the competitive landscape.

> This strikes me as two drowning swimmers throwing each other cement life rings. <

How so? Yes, you made the case for them being in some difficulty, but how is OLED a "cement life ring"?

- Tim

[videograbber]

I had written:

> How so? Yes, you made the case for them being in some difficulty, but how is OLED a "cement life ring"? <

And tried to add...

> It's a clever analogy. I just don't see how it applies here. <

but even though the system would let me access my posting, and spend all the time I wanted to edit it to my heart's content, it then blocked the actual revision. Too late, obviously. Missed a time-window. But it's unfortunate that it's set up to let you waste your time making changes that it won't let you post. [/end gripe]

- Tim

[Shane]

...but even though the system would let me access my posting, and spend all the time I wanted to edit it to my heart's content, it then blocked the actual revision. Too late, obviously. Missed a time-window. But it's unfortunate that it's set up to let you waste your time making changes that it won't let you post. [/end gripe]

- Tim

Hi Tim,

The editing time window is 10 minutes ... should be enough time to review and make any edits necessary. Unfortunately, even if this is increased, there's no way for the system to know if you "start" editing within the window and "submit" after .... all it knows is that it's receiving a submitted change after the 10 minute window. One of the unfortunate side-effects of the stateless web.

- Shane

[videograbber]

> there's no way for the system to know if you "start" editing within the window and "submit" after <

Thanks, Shane. I realized that after I posted. Still, even though there's nothing that can be done about it by the web-page developer, the consequences are no less painful.

> The editing time window is 10 minutes ... should be enough time to review and make any edits necessary. <

Could you possibly make that 15? Some of us are kinda slow. (Only half kidding.) It might reduce the frequency a bit, though honestly that's already pretty low (for me). It's been only 3 times now, in quite a few years, and quite a few posts. The fact that I remember those 3 times though seems somehow significant to me.

> One of the unfortunate side-effects of the stateless web. <

Indeed. When can we have a state-ful web, please?

- Tim

[Shane]

Could you possibly make that 15?

Done.

You know what I've come to do by habit now? Any time I'm submitting an online form, or replying to a forum post, I always CTRL-C (or Command-C, for us Mac folk) the content before clicking submit. I've been burned too many times, losing a plethora of pensively-prepared prose in the process. Not that I'm suggesting this as the "fix" ... just my experience.

- Shane

(Yes, I'll do it with this post as well)

[videograbber]

> Done. <

Thanks!

> You know what I've come to do by habit now? Any time I'm submitting an online form, or replying to a forum post, I always CTRL-C (or Command-C, for us Mac folk) the content before clicking submit. <

??? I do that too (on those occasions when I remember, sometimes I get lax), but isn't a ^A required first? Just the Copy alone doesn't get the stuff I've typed in.

> I've been burned too many times, losing a plethora of pensively-prepared prose in the process. <

I hate it when THAT happens. I think you've exhausted the supply of p's for a while.

- Tim

[Shane]

but isn't a ^A required first? Just the Copy alone doesn't get the stuff I've typed in.

Precisely (oops, another "P"). I thought about including the ^A as well but didn't want to get too geeky ... I guess it was an implied ^A

- Shane