Sony has downplayed allegations that its state-of-the-art OLED TV, the XEL-1, has a fraction of the longevity the manufacturer claims it has.
Sony told Register Hardware that it stands by its statement that the XEL-1's brightness drops to 50 per cent after 30,000 hours of usage, despite independent tests that showed the set’s …
So all you do is vacuum pack the OLED panel before you fit it into whatever frame, and that would increase it's lifespan.
Hummm... what other uses might there be for such a breakthough? Imagine the possiblities for vacuum-packing organic objects to preserve their freshness...
"allegations that its state-of-the-art OLED TV, the XEL-1, has a fraction of the longevity the manufacturer claims it has"
Perhaps they should state whether these allegations are proper or improper as that has a significant effect on the implications ... in any case they are, by definition, vulgar!
As I understand it OLED slowly degrades _continuously_, so it doesn't matter if they're on or off.
If I bought a OLED TV then at 9 hours a day for 5 years gives me 16425 hours. Just in time to buy a new one running S-HDTV?
But if it is continuously degrading then that's 17,000 hours or 1.94 years.
Pity they didn't do a brightness test on a 3rd OLED TV that was only switched on briefly at the start and the finish of the test so we'd have some basis for comparison.
At least the fraction in question here is slightly more credible than Sainsbury's - who are currently advertising home insurance for a fraction of the usual cost, where the fraction in question is 3/4. "Vast majority" would be a more accurate term. Sorry, IMO a fraction needs to be 1/3 or less to be called such colloquially.
"during the 1000-hour test period, the ability of the two screens to display blue had degraded by 12 per cent. A seven per cent drop was recorded for red and an eight per cent decline for green."
Never mind the drop in brightness, surely the colour balance will be all out of goose.
It's easy to get the total time wrong if you're assuming a constant linear fade rather than a front-loaded curve that starts to flatten (or the other way around). I think the measurement and graph plotting methods need to be made along with any claims such as this.
Register
Sony has downplayed allegations that its state-of-the-art OLED TV, the XEL-1, has a fraction of the longevity the manufacturer claims it has. Sony told Register Hardware that it stands by its statement that the XEL-1's brightness drops to 50 per cent after 30,000 hours of usage, despite independent tests that showed the set’s …
Nothing new
On all my old CRT's i remember having to increase the brightness up year by year as the tube gets old.
I've noticed the same with my LCD over the past 3 years, started off on 23% brightness, now up to 35%.
Hopefully these OLEDs have variable brightness (no backlights, so i'm not sure) so you can just boost things as they degrade.
So...
So all you do is vacuum pack the OLED panel before you fit it into whatever frame, and that would increase it's lifespan.
Hummm... what other uses might there be for such a breakthough? Imagine the possiblities for vacuum-packing organic objects to preserve their freshness...
vulgar allegations
"allegations that its state-of-the-art OLED TV, the XEL-1, has a fraction of the longevity the manufacturer claims it has"
Perhaps they should state whether these allegations are proper or improper as that has a significant effect on the implications ... in any case they are, by definition, vulgar!
OLED slowly degrades continuously
As I understand it OLED slowly degrades _continuously_, so it doesn't matter if they're on or off.
If I bought a OLED TV then at 9 hours a day for 5 years gives me 16425 hours. Just in time to buy a new one running S-HDTV?
But if it is continuously degrading then that's 17,000 hours or 1.94 years.
Pity they didn't do a brightness test on a 3rd OLED TV that was only switched on briefly at the start and the finish of the test so we'd have some basis for comparison.
Re: vulgar allegations
At least the fraction in question here is slightly more credible than Sainsbury's - who are currently advertising home insurance for a fraction of the usual cost, where the fraction in question is 3/4. "Vast majority" would be a more accurate term. Sorry, IMO a fraction needs to be 1/3 or less to be called such colloquially.
Colour
"during the 1000-hour test period, the ability of the two screens to display blue had degraded by 12 per cent. A seven per cent drop was recorded for red and an eight per cent decline for green."
Never mind the drop in brightness, surely the colour balance will be all out of goose.
still want one
and still a collectors item methinks, are they still only available in japan only? will pay good money....
Seepage
Surely seepage is not on/off dependant so if that is the determining factor then there is trouble ahead! and the lifetime will be poor.
Mines the one wrapped in clingfilm.
linear drop or a curve?
It's easy to get the total time wrong if you're assuming a constant linear fade rather than a front-loaded curve that starts to flatten (or the other way around). I think the measurement and graph plotting methods need to be made along with any claims such as this.
Hmmm
Hmmm , still fitting rootkit as a standard fixture I see , atypical of SONY !
The old story you pays for what you get and get what you pays for , that is for sure !
blueshift??
I'd be more concerned that the hue of the image changes over time, with R, G and B lifeforms dying at different paces...
Or is there something else to it? Do they have bacteria management?
Unimpressed either way.
Spidery thing cause i wanted it.
:p