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.
94 Comments
- vonskippy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+612 sentences of info spread across 3 pages of drivel.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+52Aside from the fact that he didn't even get his facts right. SED is delayed into 2008 according to toshiba themselves.
By the way, here is something interesting. Check out the first few people who dugg this:
http://digg.com/users/shoesy
http://digg.com/users/mcheben
http://digg.com/users/Singlecoil
http://digg.com/users/Alchemist5
Maybe I'll get another article about me:
http://digg.com/links/Digg_Member_Makes_%5BH%5Dard_Accusations - Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Discount Alchemist5 for a second. The three other accounts digg *nothing but* each other's articles, and *all* of the articles go to the gotfrag.com domain.
Maybe if they were digging other peoples' submissions or submissions to other domains, you'd have a point, but they aren't. If the only thing they digg goes to the gotfrag.com domain, then why don't they just read that website instead of Digg?
Sock puppet spam accounts are fairly easy to spot if you know what to look for. - Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Friends digg what you digg, but if the same friends consistently land amongst the first diggs on an article regardless of when the article is posted, that's a bit suspicious. As for what is a reasonable threshold of suspicion, I leave that to you.
- muyuu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Exactly. And no, my next monitor won't be a SED since I'm buying one today, not in 2008 or later.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Tech comparison - comparisons on cheap end of market.
CRT:
Pro - Fast refresh, refined tech (last generation stuff, likely to be proven and reliable), inexpensive ( 3)
Con = Bulky (although not as bulky as they used to be) (-1)
Total: 2
TFT:
Pro - Thin, bright, sharp ( 3)
Con = Dead pixels, not as cheap as CRT (-2)
Total: 1
SED:
Pro - Thin, bright, sharp, fast refresh (cheap to produce too - but not counted, as this may not reflect price) ( 4)
Con - Delay until 2007 (-1)
Total: 3
I think I can wait until 2007 to upgrade my reliable CRT. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"However, the fragile nature of the OLED construction is far from the most worrisome problem with the technology. The organic materials that contain the light-emitting molecules have a pretty short life span, approximately 1000 hours. Now assuming, conservatively assuming, you keep your TV on for three hours a day. This means that your OLED will likely 'burn out' in less than a year."
When was this article written? Even in late 2004, they were already doing 70k hours. As of last May, they passed the 100k mark. In December, they reached 150k. How long is 150,000 hours? It's 17 years of running 24/7... and that's only until the brightness drops to 50% of the original capability. Also, since the time when the life was around 1,000 hours they've made other important advancements like being able to spray OLEDs with inkjet-like devices onto plastics and other more practical surfaces, making them very flexible and durable (moreso than an SED on a glass substrate). OLEDs will be cheap, thin, durable, long-lasting, efficient, flexible (some of them), transparent (some of them), bright (prototypes have been able to do 700 cd/m), and capable of reaching black (or very close to it). If SED turns out to be better, it probably won't be by much.
We're already seeing portable devices with OLED displays and Samsung showed off a 40" OLED TV a year ago. I have been trying to hold out as long as possible with my current CRT monitor in the hope that a new technology will emerge before it dies... but they sure are taking their time. I don't care if it's SED or OLED. I just want it now! - Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Anyone who thinks LCDs are too dim needs to sit in front of a new iMac and see the light. The LCD's are too bright. My G5 iMac's LCD is almost bright enough to illuminate the room; it probably could if I turned the brightness up. My pet peve is that at least in the G5 iMacs, you can't turn the screen brightness down enough; even when it is turned as dim as it will go, it's still painfully bright.
- Udon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I think I will stick to sliced bread.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11the one major drawback of lcd is the black level performance. lcd's are terrible with blacks.
- Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10PS: Add edtstu to the list, this seems to be the person operating the sockpuppets (also lists that domain as his website in his profile):
http://digg.com/users/edtstu - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10lcd's are too dim? is that why 172x 1/2 blinds me when i walk into the room with the lights off.
i'm sorry but 1995 called they want their lcd's back, because todays lcd's are plenty bright.
and plasma isn't expensive compared to lcd, they just have bad burn in problems and short life spans. oh and they are heavy buggers to, forget slim hang on the wall plasma's, you need 10" screws embedded into hardwood beams to hold up a 50" plasma - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The edit timer ran out right as I remembered this part:
I forgot to mention how FAST they are, too. Their early response times need to be measured in microseconds. Ghosting will be a thing of the past. - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Sounds kinda like Duke Nukem Forever. Think we can look forward to a parallel launch? ^_^ lol
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+71000's of reasons? give me ONE.
SED is said to be as big a breakthrough in display tech since the CRT monitor. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9LCD is too dim?!
My Apple Cinema Display is brighter than any CRT I've ever used. - fnot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Promising technology, but history has taught us that even though you present a superior technology to the market, it wont necesseraly get adopted. Especially when SED 's come out with price tags that are maybe 2-3 times the LCD's of 2007. Average Joe doesn't give a ***** about 100,000:1 contrast ratio when he has to pay through his nose for it.
I can almost hear the TV dealers going "WTF!! I have enough trouble trying to explain CRT's and LCD's and Plasmas to these idiots. And now I have to teach them about SED's?"
JAFA - Just another ***** acronym! - kodek, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14@HackJandy: Ever heard of "friends"? They will most likely digg the stuff that you like, or that you submit :)
- systemghost, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I have a CRT right now and I'm completely fed up with LCD, plasma and all that drivel. My next monitor upgrade will be SED. Period. It's the most promising technology. This article may be crap but the technology isn't.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5nope take a look at that little diagram it shows it better. SED operates in the same manner as a crt, using electrons to excite phosphers, but instead of 2 guns focus at the rear of a tube, they run along little groves and shoot out when you want the picture displayed. it's be just as flat as an lcd and just as light, only it'd had the advantage of real glass for the surface and be a bit tougher.
one question i do have about SED, is will it suffer from burn in like crt's did? sounds like it would. also will it be as easy ont he eyes as an lcd? after all your going to have a screen refreshing, and i find this annoying even at 90hz on a good crt. my lcd is awesomely easy to look at for long periods of time - DanAtkinson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'd still rather have sliced bread than wait until 2008.
- NitrousFlare, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Howm much are they gonna cost?
- NoodlyAppendage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"This is all speculation of course; SED technology probably won’t be available from Canon and Toshiba for your Average Joe until early 2007"
Only a year eh? I'm holding them to that - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3sed monitors are said to be thinner, more efficient, and lighter than lcd monitors. so no, your comment has no place in reality. (sandb)
i agree with timmarhy. the refresh rates better be high. my eyes are very sensitive to light cycling. i can't stand looking at a crt monitors for more than a half-hour. - jnorris441, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Is it just me or is sliced bread overrated?
- whiskeyclone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@fisherman
You can change colours per app just like in Windows if you know what you are doing.
If it really bugs you, you can invert the entire output, go to greyscale, or adjust contrast.
system preferences>universal access>display - CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've seen far better articles than this on the subject. Here's a better explanation: CRT monitors are the best, but CTR monitors become to large in dimension to effectively go past about 36", and even then you better have Arnold helping you move in because that thing will be huge and heavy. But SED TVs are essentials flat panel CRTs that will offer the same or better quality as the best HD CRTs and be available in the coming years through Toshiba and Cannon.
- Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have both of my LCDs' brightness down below 30%. Too dim my ass. Too BRIGHT!
- seven5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3apparntly he hasn't sat in front of my computer. My iMac G5 20" is bright as hell. I have to keep it at 50% its so bright.
- kneeare, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5what poor journalism... i thought they claimed professionality
- sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The only thing LCD really has over CRTs is being less painful to look at for long periods of time. A high-end CRT will give you a good picture and better performance for a MUCH better price than an equivelent LCD. Gaming quality (5ms AT MOST response time) LCD monitor will set you back about 400 dollars MINIMUM, meanwhile all CRT's offer gaming-quality performance out of the box starting at about 100 bucks for a 15" and I wouldn't be surprised if you could find a 21" for under 300 if you looked hard enough. (keep in mind, CRAPPY 15" LCDs are usually around 200-300, to put tha tin perspective.)
Until you can give me a 4ms response time on a 20" LCD (or equivelent performance from another product) for about 200 or 300 US dollars, I'll be sticking with CRTs, thank you very much. Sure they're bulky as hell, but the combination of high-performance and ultra-low cost is yet to be beaten by competing technologies. - aznboi04k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2no digg because of terrible title descrpition.
- t3hX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3... as far as I know, Windows has the same colour scheme - dark text on a light background
- ZMerlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So it would be accurate to say that SEDs won't suffer from dead pixels at all? Man I hate dead pixels.
One advantage of LCDs that has not been mentioned is getting your window resized. With most LCDs, they auto adjust (Especially the Dell ones) quite well, so you don't have to keep pressing Menu then "Left A Little"/"Right A Little"/"Stretch A Little" until you have it just so. That is a pain in the butt on the older curved CRTs, and still an annoying little issue on the flat ones. For the most part, LCDs have that issue sorted before you even do any adjusting. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3i just read the article, and while it was intresting it makes the whole technology sound too good to be true, and one thing i know is if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. he displays none of the cynical attitude it quotes tech writers as having.
there are 1000's of reason this could be a dud, but i'd still love to see a thin light screen technology with 100,000:1 ratio's and 1ms response times. it'd certainly blow all those lcd plants out of the water.
fat chance you'll see this in early 2007 but. - wolver1ne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Can't wait for SED! I love CRT but size is a little issue, though I could easily put 3x 19" on my desk.
- jdavid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i just skiped to the end
- Splitt3rxx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2heh, LCDs are too dim? mine is blinding, about 5x brighter than any CRT in my house.
- Snuffkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah. And if I'd say anything is too dim, it'd be CRTs. The first CRT I used was used so much that it burnt out, becoming incredibly dim. I've never seen that happen on an LCD. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a dead pixel on this particular LCD.
- Snuffkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I seem to recall an article talking about how OLEDs lasted longer when they displayed a wide spectrum of colours as opposed to a narrow spectrum of specific colours. Anyone know more about this?
- neosiv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"LCD's are too dim" - I wonder what LCDs he has been using.
- Kirium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@timmarhy
Your typical LCD has a refresh rate of 16ms (we're talking TVs here, not computer LCDs). Good HDTV displays will go as low as 8ms (Sony Bravia and co.) SED will have a 1ms refresh rate.. 8-16 times faster than the LCD you're probably using now... It'll practically refresh like butter. So smooth it'd be impossible to tell.
I heard some (pretty lofty) comments from those that saw SED at CES saying some of the demo material was like looking through a window... And I think the displays at CES were 720p resolution, not the 1080p planned for production.
So yeah. It'll easily be better on the eyes than your LCD. - Rosewood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@pp
Even though it is like a CRT, because the gun doesn't have to scan top to bottom before it can hit the top again, the response time can be much much faster. 1ms is quoted in the article. That should do you.
(Remember, 90hz = 90 times a second or 11.111111 ms) - coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If you're on OS X, hit ctrl-option-command-8. Instant white on black. To see more visual features like this, take a look in the 'Universal Access' control panel.
If you want to make things look completely different, check out ShapeShifter: http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/shapeshifter - trylleklovn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3shibbie -> i think the fact that most medium priced tft's got awfull colors should be counted as a con too, it is impossible to do any graphics of any sort on such displays.
- mrops, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Lots of challanges to SED.
I read about this technology almost a year or two ago. And the challanges that this technology poses are still not resolved.
One of the largest challange. SED like CRT need low pressure so electrons can travel. Imagine a 60' TV,
there is no mechanically easy way to have two glass sheets apart by a cm with a vacume in between.
1) The glass cracks due to immense pressure from outside
2) If it does not crack, due to elastic nature of glass, the two sheets are closer to each other near the center than at the edges adding to more challanges.
On the bright side, its good to hear that they came up with a name for the technology. Back when I read it, they didn't know what to call it. - TomP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why Your Next Monitor Will Be An CRT: Cant afford a new one :P
- Tom | http://www.tomwrote.info - Splitt3rxx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But the colors on my LCD are so vibrant, compared to my dad crt that looks muddy and washed out. I do have a few complaints though, it doesn't have the greatest contrast. but it IS an emprex 17" that cost $200 normal price, this was 3 months ago taht I got it, a high end LCD would be sooooo much better than mine.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was referring to the blue OLEDs. This is the latest information I've seen regarding blue OLED lifetimes:
http://www.cdtltd.co.uk/news/426.asp
The Wikipedia page seems to be quite a bit behind on OLED developments. - justinvt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oops - this article says blue OLEDs have been made with lifetimes of 30,000 hours - http://www.cdtltd.co.uk/press/archive_press_release_index/2004/338.asp
-
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is