What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
63 Comments
- blueigloo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20.. last time I checked, $1300 is rather expensive for a TV for *most* people.
- Dimecross, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18How can "$1300" be considered a cheap alternative?
- jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Lol @ "as low as $1,300" statement.
- carguy84, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Wow, finally a TV for under $2000.....wait....
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I could've sworn that my TV cost about 200...
- glitchp-udd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8finally....after over 50 years, i can FINALLY afford a television. that $1300 has been burning a hole in my pocket for decades.
- nograz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6$1,300 is cheap for a brand new technology, no matter the size. Well, this is assuming that it hits the average TV site range, which I wouldn't see why it wouldn't. Do you people, that are talking about wanting SED, realize that SED is going to cost an arm and a leg when it first comes out? That is just the price to pay for being cutting edge.
Either way, I wouldn't buy either one right away. Look at all the trouble that LCD, DLP, plasma and LCoS had when it first came out. Toshiba dropped their LCoS ($8,000 and $10,000) line a short 6 months after its release. Mitsubishi didn't do to well with their first DLP model, that was around $10,000 in their Diamond line. LCD and plasma also had their problems. All these technologies have matured, gotten better and dropped in price. I am huge audiophile and videophile, I have spent way too much of my home theater, I like to get the new technologies... but I try as hard as I can to avoid first generation and wait for second or third generation. This way I can see how the technology holds up and for bugs to be worked out.
I am in the market for a new TV, right now I plan on getting a Sony SXRD. As it is now, there are almost too many choices. Don't get me wrong, choices are great, but with 4 main technologies (CRT, LCD, plasma and DLP) currently with a total of 10 (Direct-View CRT, Rear-Projection CRT, Front-Projection CRT, Flat-Panel LCD, Rear-Projection LCD, Front-Projection LCD, LCoS, plasma and DLP), that is a lot! Add in SED, OLED, Carbon Nanotube with all their different types along with whatever else is around the corner, it can become really confusing. - ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+61300 could be cheap if the TVs are friggin huge. Otherwise, I, too will wait for SED.
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Bah, I've been hearing about this exact technology for 4 years AT LEAST now, and it's always "2 years" off. I'm not holding breath. Look at it this way, Sony can sell you a $3000 TV and make $1500 profit, or they can sell you 2 $1500 TVs and make $750 on each. They make the same amount of money on each, except that the former involves very little up front R&D expense, and the factories are already in place to build them. The latter is going to have to be first developed, then factories built to make them, which means either lower profits in the end, or a more expensive set.
They don't care if YOU Can afford the TV, as long an enough people can to make maximum profits. This technology will eventually materialize, but I'm guessing we'll be 2 years off for quite a while yet. - sparty1969, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7For $1300.00 it better be a 1300" wall TV.
- EmmEff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5TV technology of the week... when black levels are at (not near) CRT levels, burn-in is a non-issue, and the ability to resolve 1920x1080 are commonplace for less than $1000, I'm listening. Until then, vapourware is boring.
- Plopfish, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well this article has no useful info. as demonstrated by this quote:
"Applied asserts that its TVs will sell for as low as $1,300 when they hit the market. Relative to the competition, that could be **high or low***, depending on **when** the nano TVs hit the shelves and **how big** their screens are." - jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It should be in the 60" - 100" range according to a yahoo! financial statement on Nano Proprietary (the company with the patent).
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060320/dam009a.html?.v=2 - 1337geek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4when anything comes under 500$ people will buy it, people cant put thousands into computes and tv's anymore.
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Doesn't sound cheap to me.
User "wickedsun" said that it is cheap in perspective... Just because it will go down in price later doesn't make it cheap. :| If it really was good, and cheap, in comparison to price and quality of other products available, I would buy it, but that doesn't seem like it's going to happen.
And to the poster:
Stop using exclamation points after every sentence and title, that is very annoying. Your title is misleading, too. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Hey remember the new CD tech will bring the price of music down to $2 a album.
- jimmyt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2hrm.. Sounds kind of like - Intel and LCOS ... Where did that go?? Nowhere.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4HOLY ***** THATS CHEAP! Of course, I pay about 25,000 for a pair of sneakers, but I'm just a friggin idiot...
- jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From what I understand, it will be able to scale to almost any size (diagonal) with almost NO change in thickness of the screen). Not sure what the $1300 dollar model would be, however.
- stalky14, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The same can be said of OLED.
- Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2LCDs don't use a lot of power. In fact, that is one of their best benefits vs Plasma...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I wouldn't pay 1300 dollars to watch any show unless it was Thunder in Paradise with Hulk Hogan.
___
http://digg.com/links/AJAX_Social_Community_Application - adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"will sell for as low as $1,300"
Jesus, no way i'm spending that much on a damn TV. I doubt i'll even spend half that on a damn TV. - CadMasterAdam, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6i still want my SED.
till then i'm sticking with CRT - CadMasterAdam, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4why is there so much focus on the price?
we're talking about a quality improvment. - Permanent4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3How *big* will that $1300 TV be? If it's just a 32" TV for $1300, it won't take any sales away from LCDs -- especially since a 32" LCD will be about half that price by the time these nanotube TVs hit the market. It better have a color contrast of about 100,000:1 if it wants to compete.
- ViperDaimao, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3It sounds like from the article, $1,300 is cheap right now. So I'm guess they are talking about TV's around 40+ in. However with prices coming down for plasma and lcd, they may not be much cheaper by the time they come out.
Also the technology is said to be similar to SED, but SED wont be hitting shelves until 2007. - donte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I paid $2800 for a 50" plasma... a little less than the average cost of such an item. If they can offer me a comparable-sized flat television with all the wonderful picture quality and a longer lifespan, $1300 is a spectacular price. Don't forget that if this technology does well, it will only drive down the prices on current technology plasmas and LCDs.
Start saving ;) - johnsto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Cheap, just like those megacheap SED and OLED displays... which are cheaper than TFT's... which are cheaper than CRTs...
no, wait... - jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1From what I have read, all your wishes should be granted.
- jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It uses considerably less. Check out www.nanoproprietary.com .
- framitz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is a news dot com article therefore credibility = ZERO.
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm in sort of the same boat. I bought a 30" HD CRT for $400 refurb. It's OK, WAAAY better than the 15 year old 23" TV it replaced. I bought it as something that I could easily afford and use for 3 or 4 years when (I hope) ~50" flat screen (I don't care what technology powers them)) TV's with built in dual HD tuners, etc etc, are available for $1000. I'll buy one of those for the living room and move the CRT into the bedroom (properly calibrated it is a spectacular DVD monitor, and I suspect it will be excellent with HD-DVD as well - which is about all I need/want in the bedroom).
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1At least there are OLED products, no matter how small and expensive, on the market.
- gdog05, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not a fair comparison, but funny. LOL
- conigs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not to be picky, because I agree with you. But I was only aware of CRT... period. There's no such thing as front or rear projection CRT. Front and rear projection TVs, yes, but that's not CRT.
I can understand considering CRT rear projection, maybe. But unless you figure out how to shoot cathode rays from behind you as your watching TV to excite the phosphors on the glass screen in front of you, front-projection CRT isn't a reality. - jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oops, missed the edit window....
The scalability is also very good: it can scale from 60" to 100" (diagonal) while only gaining about 1 cm in thickness. That's really thin considering the fact that they are thinner than the diameter of a penny at 25". - stalky14, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2[HOMER]
Carbon nanotubes: Is there anything they CAN'T do?
[/HOMER] - nograz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ conigs
Seeing as the technology used to do front projection and rear projection CRT varies from how direct-view CRT actually works, I would consider them sub technologies of CRT. Just like flat panel, front-projection, rear-projection and arguable LCoS are all sub technologies of LCD. All types have been around for very long times and front-projection CRT projectors are often regarded as the best out there and insanely expensive.
I should also mention that we may see laser based front projectors (possibly rear-projection) TVs hitting the market also. So that is yet, another TV technology to consider. - wickedsun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes, it does make it cheap.
It is a cheap technology if all it costs (at first) is 1,300$. What was the price tag of a plasma TV when it came out? If the TV costs 1,300$, most of it is going toward the research. After a while, when the technology is paid for, the price will go down dramatically.
Don't compare apples and oranges. Yes, plasma TVs are getting cheaper, but they were FAR from the 1,300$ range when they first came out. - ViperDaimao, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I bought a 56in sharp DLP 780p, for $2000 in Dec. Also there's some pretty good deals at costco.com Their return policy is amazing as well.
- tardmongerster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ conigs
Front projection CRT:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=206493&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation - jmaze, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah, $1,300.....really cheap.....
- swaxhog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I paid $2000 for my 36" CRT 7 years ago and when I went out to get a new HDTV, I paid....$2000.
For people looking to buy, Sony's A10 LCD models are amazing. - jagnum1fan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1To see it in action (VERY EARLY PROTOTYPE):
http://nanoproprietary.com/index.htm?ani.htm
I have been following this company for almost 4 years now (invested 6000 shares when they were only about 46 cents per share). This technology is extremely promising. The TVs will be thinner, cooler (thermally), equally or more bright than Plasmas, use way less energy, and never burn out (no back-light). The carbon nanotubes actually emit their own radiation...
So, really, a comparable plasma/LCD can cost you about TWICE as much or more! - bugsie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+01,300? this might be solar powered. wtf
- sarahb459, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm excited... wonder how it compares with bulkiness and heaviness... hmmm... I agree that it has to be up there in size to compare with the other models. I'd buy it.
- battletux, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3SED? i want my OLED :)
- wthulhu, on 08/29/2009, -5/+5I want my MTV
-
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is