Samsung and Uni-Pixel team up for better, cheaper TMOS displays
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted Oct 19th 2009 11:41PM
posted Oct 19th 2009 11:41PM
Uni-Pixel has developed a new display technology that could succeed LCD and LED displays, and if all goes according to plan we might see something come to market as soon as next year. Opcuity uses one layer of MEMS film in in a TMOS (multiplexed optical shutter) device for results that are said to be ten times brighter and sixty percent cheaper to manufacture than LCDs (which use five layers). Since TMOS displays are very similar to LCDs, existing manufacturing lines can be used -- lowering start-up costs and rescuing older assembly lines in the process. According to the company's CFO, the manufacturing process "subtracts from existing LCD lines--you just need to remove some equipment that is no longer needed." Samsung and Uni-Pixel have teamed up to produce 4-inch displays using the technology, but who knows? Maybe Microsoft Research's interactive office will become a reality sooner than you think.
[Via OLED-Info]
[Via OLED-Info]
Aww what happen no Apple Post Royal Flush
Can't you see the forbidden fruit on the picture?
Awesome "The Room" photoshop.
"You are tearing me apart, Lisa!"
Oh hai Engadget comments.
Spoon!
"...because you're a woman."
Where did they get that picture of that guy on the toilet....
Not only eliminating switching Costs for manufacturing, but also 60% cheaper.
If I were Sony, I'd take this over OLED anyday
I know my comment seemed like crap to you (literally), but please don't spam up meh' post. It is just rude (unless I had already been downranked, then the rules of comment etiquette grant you the right to spam or troll my post with pride.)
And if I were a consumer, I'd take Sony
"Listen, most sports are shot on a Sony HD camera. So if sports are shot on Sony, shouldn't you watch them on one."
- Peyton Manning
Since your comment was last earlier, I thought the reply button replies to all posts.
I'm not really accustomed to commenting here.
@szfs
I was only joking, you are fine. No harm done. :D
Oh, hi Samsung.
You are my favorite customer!
Hi doggie!
You should have a Samsung, Mark.
"So anyway, how's your sexlife?"
oh HAHAHAHA what a story mark!
Can I get this TMOS in an app.. You know, for my Apple iPhone??
You're tearing me apart, Samsung!!!
What happened to the HOT girls?
They're still ignoring you, just like always.
Ouch. Burn!
that's why I buy hot girls. sure, there's no tread left on the tires but they are still hot.
How will they look though? all we know is brighter. AMOLED and OLED look amazing. plus they offer the possiblity of an unbreakable screen ;-) If they still look that damn sexy without raping my battery, this would be pretty sweet
Reading From EEtimes, it is like an Non Organic Version of OLED. Except it is cheaper then OLED, faster to Market, Easier to Manufacture.
Not quite - it uses a LED backlight, which could be OLED just as well I guess.
A good explanation of how it works is here:
http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=198000973
Basically it replaces the LCD part of a display with MEMS switches that can rapidly switch between opaque and transparent. Combine that with a backlight that quickly cycles between red, green, blue instead of being just white, and you can create any color you like on a full pixel.
It looks like this won't have issues with viewing angle, but the color rotation may cause colored fringes on moving objects. It will be less laggy than LCD with very low on/off times, so movement should look great on it.
Really looking forward to a prototype, this is very interesting!
"said to be ten times brighter and sixty percent cheaper"
you gotta be shittin' me!!
I may buy one of these for my future wife.
I may buy one of these "instead" of my future wife... ;)
4-inch displays?
Fortunately you only have 3 inches to "display" so, you're covered.
Thank you member pewpewpew for your recent purchase of a platinum membership on my website.
Brighter? LCD's are bright enough, what do we need brighter displays for?
By brighter they mean more transmissive. So you would need a less intense backlight for the given screen brightness. This could, in practice, lead to considerable power savings.
asshole
Let me guess. The online store guy selling jeans and stuff?
Brighter means better contrast which is key to high defintion and that 3D look or "pop".
But "...ten times brighter and sixty percent cheaper to manufacture than LCDs " hmmmm where have I heard this before? Oh yeah OLED and still nothing. Don't hold your breath I'd give it at least three years before you see a larger size in the consumer market. Even if it does come it won't be cheap regardless of what they say.
If the claims of being able to use existing LCD lines are accurate, this technology has (potentially) a pretty big advantage over OLED.
I think the "60% cheaper to manufacture" thing just comes from he fact that there are 2 layers in the system as opposed to 5 in LCD, correct?
I wonder what kind of yields they get with these MEMS shutters compared to LCD panels...
Troll
I'm sorry, I wish I had the power to go back and delete because now I feel bad. I thought it would tell me that my post was too large and not even submit.
maybe I can get an app for my iPhone that will be able to delete it
Was it really necessary to brag about your gear? Have we all been enlightened now?
Or maybe people can just click the little report "!" until Engadget finally deletes it.
I think Vizio can match them since I saw a few @ Sam's Club for $850us on a 42" 120Hz. Just my two cents
Oh yeah, I think that's Jackie Chan
sony's are good, but they're expensive. Sony may have cheap 1080p HDTVs, but look @ their contrast ratio
I could be wrong, but I thought sony uses samsung displays...
I didn't! Thats bull. I didn't hit her. I did not. Oh hi Samsung!
I don't now what he is saying, but my first thought was...
KAAAAHHHHHNNNNNN!!!!!!!!
POWER LEVEL 9000!!!!!!!!!
10x brighter, 60% less energy, yadda yadda, just give me these facts if you're introducing a new display technology:
1) Color accuracy
2) Contrast ratio/black levels
3) Refresh rates (mentioned in article, good job)
4) Input lag (or lack there-of)
5) Viewing angles (least important by far though imo)
Exactly. It still has a backlight (unlike OLED), so no matter what, there is going to be some sort of backlight bleed/backlight transmission, which means contrast ratios that will be less than perfect. And input lag, refresh rate? Who knows.
OLED still seems like the most promising new display technology at this point. I'm sick of band-aids and gimmicks like locally-dimmed LED backlighting and BS "refresh rates", LCD technology as a whole is inherently flawed and I'll be glad to see it gone.
1) Color accuracy
2) Contrast ratio/black levels
3) Refresh rates (mentioned in article, good job)
4) Input lag (or lack there-of)
5) Viewing angles (least important by far though imo)
Worse than on LCDs
Thats why its cheaper.
Because if its better, you won't want to pay 5x premium.
You don't have to believe me, just look at the price of Sony's OLED TV - 11 inches for $2500.
How about:
"The first samples of Opcuity(TM) Active Layer films were tested in static demonstration units built specifically for determining the performance of the films. These measured greater than 74% pixel efficiency, exceeding the targeted level to achieve maximum uniformity, and thus negatively impacted the uniformity of the test unit. The contrast ratio for a four by four (4x4) industry standard checkerboard pattern measured 140-to-1. The uniformity measured corresponding with the measured pixel efficiency was approximately 80% on one axis and 92% on the other axis. Comparison data measured in the UniPixel lab of a similarly sized LCD unit demonstrated light uniformity of 79% and 95% on its two axes, with a corresponding contrast ratio measure of 63-to-1. "
http://www.elecdir.com/press_release/store/1799/index.html
So it looks to outperform LCD. Pay no mind to the contrast ratio, this is not the number that manufacturers put on their panels. Just look at the comparison: 140:1 versus 63:1.
JUST WONDERING
Is it me, or, the bigger our TV's get, the crappier the content available on them gets... ???
WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE
FTW
YOU ARE TEARING ME APART, SAMSUNG!
You r tearing me apart Lysa!!!!
What a juxtaposition of faces in that photo... Poll: which one is scarier?
^ No, your not wrong. Sony DOES use Samsung panels. Samsung has almost 25% of the global LCD TV market. They are much bigger than Sony.
A crotch shot would have made this pic a massive win.