Hope you weren't too attached to the idea of "medium to large" sized
OLED HDTVs coming from Sony this year, according to the
Wall Street Journal's sources, the company's slipping share of TV sales mean profitability takes precedence over sweet, super slim new displays. Surprised by its inability to sell truckloads of $2,500 11-inch versions CEO Howard Stringer decided to put the project on the back burner, apparently more focused on things like
competing in Wal-Mart and implementing
cheaper LED technology for its LCDs. With
LG also on a timetable that puts us a year or more away from seeing one of these on store shelves in decent sizes, things are
up to Samsung to bring it home -- we're waiting.
posted Aug 17th 2009 6:04PM
Sony did this cause since it will hard for tv to appear to majority of consumer consider price drop of led, and plasma and lcd is extreme bargain price point.
Huh?
you lost me there with your hip, young lingo
Translation.
LCD=cheap.
OLED=expensive.
I saw a Sony OLED TV and I said: "WTF is this that really that small!?"
$2000 dollars WTF? Not surprised they didn't sell.
I sense disturbance within your force... who's side are you on?
I have always liked sony, so watching their slow painful death is painful.
"I haven't ever liked sony, so watching their slow painful death is bliss."
Fixed.
Sony = overpriced electronics.
well someone has to try and compete with apple for the market of overpriced nonsense :)
I have always loved Sony pricing policy so watching them die slowly is magic to my ears >=D
Well said, Anthony.
Nothing wrong with paying a premium for quality built products. You enjoy that plasticy Toshiba notebook and Dynex LCD while they last champ.
11 inches....$2500. No crap nobody bought these. They could buy the new 52" LED's by Sammy that look amazing.
Yeah they're insanely priced but I gotta tell you, those 11" were so insanely gorgeous I was actually considering the ridiculous price.
Wish they had these screens on laptops...they look unbelievable.
Who buys an 11inch tv anyways. My 10.4 eee is small I would never watch a tv that size. Not to mention the price. I don't have a snide comment sufficient enough to say how stupid it is. I could get two 47inch Visios for that price
even at 42" for $2500.. would it be a significantly better image than the new LEDs?
profoundly
No.
Two year old plasmas have significantly better PQ than the new LED LCDs.
So, yes.
This is one of those products you have to see to believe. Once I can get a 22" OLED monitor for $800 or less, I'm all over it.
LED LCDs do not even come close to OLED goodness. OLEDs are the most beautiful screen to grace mankind (and the thinnest, too).
OLED TV's quality is amazing but to succeed they have to be even less expensive than LCD TV's which in turn get better and cheaper every 6 months.
Why do they have to be less expensive that LCDs to succeed? Even if they were priced slightly more, they would sell just as well if not better.
Because people want to pay less...
Look at Vizio. Killing the sales. People don't care about the picture,
@windblownmonkey:
That's like saying "look at McDonald's. They're killing the sales. People don't care about the poison."
"windblownmonkey " : people care about the picture, but people dont have the money.............if people have $600, they buy a cheap 42" LCD, not a 26" LCD Full HD......................right??
I just want it in stores so I can finally see what the image quality is like.
Financial crisis: 1
Sony: 0
Small screens: 1950
OLED longevity: ???
OLED life cycle is about 2+ years of continuous operation, means you'll throw it out before it dies.
The last time I checked the lifespan of OLED was increased to 50,000 hours. That's 5.7 years of continues use.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/25/toshiba-and-panasonic-double-oled-lifespan-exceeds-lcds/
The will be overpriced anyway.
Having seen a whole lineup of ultra thin Samsung LCD TVs ranging in size from about 24" to (approx) 50" where even the largest TV was priced at less than half of that of Sony's 11", I do not understand what on Earth Sony were thinking? I saw their OLED 11" the other day, and it is tiny. What is the point - even at £200?
The Samsung ultra thin TVs looked stunning and made all the other TVs in the same store look positively bulky and old fashioned, but were not really too pricey considering. About £1600 UK for the 50".
Just as many of Microsoft's potential competitors fail not because Microsoft is better but because their competitors mess up, so Samsung are succeeding due to the loss of momentum and common sense of their competitors. And then they bang the nail in the coffin through aggressive pricing.
Just this week, we purchased a gorgeous touch sensitive Samsung halogen cooker hob. It not only looks stunning and does a great job, but it was less than half the price of it's competitors such as Hotpoint, NEFF and others.
Sony need to go back to their roots and innovate again, and then be more realistic with their pricing during a recession. Waitrose (UK) did it and survived the supermarket wars.
"I do not understand what on Earth Sony were thinking? I saw their OLED 11" the other day, and it is tiny. What is the point - even at £200?"
Sigh. Do you recall what Plasmas initially cost in the 1980's? ($15,000-$20,000 US, try not to consider inflation, ouch.) New technology is always obscenely expensive and it is the well-to-do early adopters that buy this stuff TODAY, so you and I can buy this stuff LATER at affordable prices. Is that not common sense?
Personally I credit Sony for kickstarting the OLED TV segment, no matter how expensive, no matter how small the TV. It's because of Sony that Samsung/LG/Philips/etc have put OLED into their roadmaps.
They were custom ordered, not mass produced. The price was obviously only put out for the most eccentric and richest of the videophiles.
This sucks. I want OLED now dammit but not at that size and price.
Kobe called, he want's his personal pictures back.
32'' inches would be fine. but 11''. really?
That's what she said.
she's huge!
the sony xbr8 46" LED sounds like a deal compare to this =)
I saw that little OLED TV running at a Sony Style store and the picture was literally beyond words in how beautiful it was but it was pathetically expensive...the guy at the store told me that NOT one has sold so far and this was at a major mall with heavy traffic from international tourists....so no surprise by this news
Come on, Lawler... trim down those sentences. They're freakin' huge!
school's tough, but stick it out Jack.
meanwhile, here in Brazil, Samsung is denying the fact their LED-backlit LCD TVs are LCD TVs. they prefer to call them "LED TVs" (not as a brand, but as a category) and say they "consume 40% less power than an LCD TV" (instead of "...less power than
CFL-BACKLIT/OTHER LCD TVs")
All of you people who are talking down on the OLED are morons and obviously havent seen the technology for yourselves. Im not saying that its a good deal for an 11 inch screen but its a new technology and Sony is THE FIRST to have any type of OLED on the market and to this point THE ONLY company to have one on the market. Goto a Sonystyle store and tell me that you could see that picture on any POS overrated Samsung who pays reviewers to rate their products better than Sonys... i.e. CNet... Nice ads before any of the video reviews.
considering LED-backlit LCDs still aren't better than plasma....its not surprising that nobody is going to bite on a 11 inch screen OLED screen that turns greeen....just sayin'
*sigh* LCDs, LED backlight or not, are not even close to what an OLED is. Actually know what you are talking about before you post. Wait, nevermind, this is Engadget I'm posting on.
Right now they're pretty deceptive..oh look, the screen itself is super thin, but the big ugly remainder of the TV is just relocated to the base. Once these are actually the size of the screen itself I'll be more interested.
They need to drop those screens into laptops, then ramp up the production and slowly make larger panels.
Sony's plan was to release 27" and 32" OLED TV's later this year.
Here are some pictures of the Sony 27" OLED TV:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/sonys-1-000-000-1-contrast-ratio-27-inch-oled-hdtv-1/128897/
I can't believe how many people are bitching about how expensive the XEL1 is. You do realize that no other company has an OLED TV that you can actually buy, right? And that this thing came out a year and a half ago, and still nobody else has commercialized a TV using this technology, in any size?
If you see $2500 for 11 inches and think "I could buy two 47" Vizios for that" then maybe this product isn't for you. It's for the folks that bought the $20,000 plasmas ten years ago, that gave manufacturers the R&D funds to make it possible for you to buy a $599 plasma today.
From where I sit, Sony was the only company really pushing this tech forward as far as TVs go. Too bad they're having to delay the progress now.
OILED tv slipped to next year? What a surprise!
God whey are you people comparing samsung LCD's to OLED. Its a totally new technology format and looks wicked. Yes it will be expensive at first so just calm down people and dont poo in your pants
Take a hint Sony (and all other OLED developers) I own a 50" plasma, if I buy another newer TV one day it will be 50" minimum, I am looking at a 60" or 70".
And OLED TV better not look like LCD with their exorbitant amount of sharpness, I can barely watch my friends 42 LCD, it makes HD unenjoyable, thats why I have a plasma, smooth and crisp.
These tvs are amazing, simply walk into sony style and and take a quick look if you don't believe me, the image quality was so astounding it looked like the images were 3D, I agree everything sony is overpriced, but unlike apple, you cannot find the same quality product for cheaper, I can get the same specs that a macbook pro has for half the price, but products like the oled and the ps3 are unparelled, one is a home entertainment system that boasts internet, storage, gaming and blu-ray for only 300 CAN (with the introduction of the ps3 slim on september 1st) and the other is an incredible tv, it is clearly not targeted towards consumers that prefer deficient samsung or don't have the money for a better product. Get a better job, go back to school, whatever, if you can't afford it it isn't sony's fault you are poor, they are already selling products at a deficit (e.g. playstation 3) and only making the money back in software and accesories, so quit your whining, once again, only comment if you can afford this system in the first place, no shit if you can't afford it you will complain, I'm in university working fulltime and I can still afford it, geez.