Sep/090
Verdicts in the battle of Plasma vs. LCD vs. OLED.
hasn’t the world pretty much moved beyond rear projection?
This means three HDTV display technologies seem primed to race for all the marbles: plasma, LCD, and OLED.
At this year’s CES, both plasma and LCD have bragging rights to some new-and-improved’s, while OLED is just new and improved in general. So what are their strengths, weaknesses, and likelihood to be the reigning HDTV-display technology?

OLED
THE SCIENCE
With OLED (organic light emitting diode), a stack of organic polymers, including both emissive and conductive layers, is deposited on a substrate containing a thin-film transistor (TFT) array. An electrical charge passing between the bottom electrodes and an additional transparent layer on the surface of the display stimulates the emissive organic layer, which in turn creates light.

STRENGTHS
If you’ve not seen a prototype OLED TV or Sony’s new compact model, it’s hard to fully understand the impact of the picture. I’ll sum it up in one word: contrast — or rather Contrast, with a capital ‘C.’
Like plasma, OLED is a self-emitting display technology that requires no backlight or projection lamp. But unlike most plasmas we’ve seen to date, an OLED doesn’t need to keep its pixel cells partially fired up at all times to be ready to respond to the signal. That’s because OLED cells respond so quickly, they can be fully turned off until needed. Signal response time in an OLED is measured in microseconds (a far cry from the several millisecond response times in today’s LCDs). Bottom line: Blacks on an OLED should be pretty much as black as black can be, which makes for a bright and dynamic picture with depth that has to be seen to be believed. Add to this a wafer-thin form factor that will have your interior designer drooling, and you can make a good case that OLED is the future of HDTV. At its core, the manufacturing process is simpler than LCD or plasma, which could eventually make OLED the most economical display type. OLEDs also promise dramatically reduced power consumption, and much faster screen response times than either LCD or plasma. With a depth of only a few millimeters, OLED is by far the thinnest display technology available — its ultra-slim form factor makes it akin to an architectural element like glass or mirror. Also, variations on the technology, such as transparent OLED, hold the promise of cool, futuristic stuff like video displays that transform into a window-like surfaces when switched off. Other OLED benefits include punchy contrast and color, wide viewing angle (a characteristic it shares with plasma technology), and low power consumption.
WEAKNESSES
How about ridiculously expensive and prohibitively small, for starters. I’ve not seen an OLED prototype from any manufacturer beyond 31 inches diagonal, and the only commercially available product right now — Sony’s XEL-1 — measures a mere 11 inches and costs $2,499! I suppose you have to start somewhere, but I wouldn’t anticipate big, affordable OLEDs anytime soon. While the XEL-1’s $2,500 price tag will limit its appeal for now and manufacturing OLEDs involves several patented technologies, which might require costly license fees. Still, large-scale production could eventually lead to OLED displays actually costing less to build than their LCD and plasma counterparts. Whereas plasma and LCD are both mature technologies snagging sizeable chunks of the current TV market, OLED technology has barely busted out of the lab. OLED displays can be found in digital cameras, GPS units, and portable media players, but the only consumer OLED display you can buy today is an 11-inch monitor from Sony that costs $2,500 — about the same as an average 52-inch LCD or plasma TV! Two reasons why OLED manufacturing lags behind the other flat-panel options are low yield (only a small number of panels actually make it past the quality-control stage) and differential aging (the blue pixels in an OLED display tend to lose brightness at a faster rate than red and green ones, which means OLED TVs have a limited lifespan compared to LCD and plasma — technologies spec’d to last two decades or more).
DOMINATION POTENTIAL
Great promise, and probably the eventual winner in the HDTV technology sweeps, once sizes grow and prices drop. But recent advances in plasma and that technology’s cost-size advantages in today’s world (see below) could give OLED a serious contender for the long term, at least in picture quality. And LCD has heavy market forces behind it. Despite its modest size, Sony’s 11-inch XEL-1 could be the start of something really big. OLEDs redefine how thin a display can be, and their low power consumption will be a clear plus point in an increasingly green conscious world. A critical assessment of OLED’s performance potential will have to wait until we get one into our testing facility. Until OLED’s technical issues get ironed out, it will continue to be aimed at the portable electronics, as opposed to home theater, market. But once its hurdles are overcome (and you can be sure TV makers are working feverishly on it), OLED’s wafer-thin form factor and crisp, punchy picture quality will likely let it trounce competing flat-panel technologies. Plasma and LCD are hereby put on notice.
Plasma
THE SCIENCE
Employs an enormous array of tiny cells of ionized gas (plasma), which activates each cell’s colored phosphor.

STRENGTHS
Plasma sales have been fading as of late against the LCD jauggernaut, but it’s not due to lack of image quality. Of course, this has to be qualified: When I talk about plasma HDTVs these days, I refer primarily to those coming from Pioneer — a company whose current sets are so far above the competition, they clearly define the state of the art.
That said, Pioneer continues to vastly reduce — and promises now to eliminate — the aforementioned “idle brightness” that keeps plasmas from delivering totally black blacks. The most talked about demo at this year’s CES, by far, was of Pioneer’s prototype ultra-black panel offered as proof-of-concept, followed by the company’s 9mm wafer-thin prototype. Pioneer says it will bring out TVs that combine both features, probably within a couple years. If they can, there may be life yet in this old dog, even in the face of OLEDs slow march to presumed dominance. Plasma displays continue to define picture quality standards, especially when it comes to darker images and shadow detail. The best examples can deliver a sense of color accuracy and consistent screen brightness from corner to corner that LCDs have a hard time matching. As Sound & Vision’s recent Plasma vs. LCD TV comparison test made clear, plasma still retains a distinct performance edge over LCD. Picture contrast, screen and grayscale uniformity, viewing angle — plasma TVs consistently rate better than LCD on all these key parameters. So for the foreseeable future, I will continue to nudge quality-conscious consumers seeking a new flat-panel set toward plasma.
WEAKNESSES
Heavy and power-hungry come to mind, though it remains to be seen if a super-thin plasma will still carry a big weight. And truth be told, image burn-in will always remain at least a mild concern with plasma TVs despite advances in this area. Manufacturing a display with cells small enough to deliver the 1920 x 1080 “Full HD” resolution demanded by many specification-driven customers can be costly. Power consumption has been improving with each generation, but still lags behind LCD displays. Plasmas tend to look less punchy than LCDs in a brightly lit environment. For a given size, plasma sets are usually deeper and heavier than an LCD. While plasma offers a lot to satisfy demanding videophiles, those with more general viewing habits may find fault with the technology. Although the plasma “burn-in” issue has been seriously over-hyped by misguided sales folk, it’s true you can potentially damage a plasma TV if you use it mostly to play videogames or continuously watch channels like Bloomberg TV (that are crammed with static onscreen graphics) with the contrast and brightness settings cranked up.
DOMINATION POTENTIAL
Today’s best flat-panel images come from today’s best plasmas, and it remains an evolving technology from which the best is yet to come. Unfortunately, though, recent plasma advances may simply be too little, too late. I won’t fully discount it yet, but beyond the most demanding consumers willing to pay top prices, plasma is likely to cede the market to LCD. Plasma continues to rule the roost in the 50-inch-and-up category, and remains the technology of choice for many videophiles. Early generation concerns regarding burn-in and panel life are now largely solved. When used in a controlled home theater environment, plasma delivers superior picture quality over competing flat-panel technologies. For the most part that’s something that won’t change dramatically. But unless plasma-makers manage to successfully reduce panel depth (Pioneer displayed a [3/4]-inch deep prototype model at the recent CES, indicating that progress is being made in that area), it may have a tough time going forward as new technologies like OLED shift into the big-screen TV marketplace.
LCD
THE SCIENCE
A matrix of thin-film transistors applies voltage to liquid crystal-filled cells sandwiched between two sheets of glass. When hit with an electrical charge, the crystals “untwist” to filter light coming from behind the cells. Each pixel comprises a red, green, and blue cell.

STRENGTHS
Image quality is advancing rapidly among LCD flat-panels lately, especially with the advent of LED-array backlights that can dim “locally” behind dark areas of the screen to achieve deeper blacks. Response time, color accuracy, picture uniformity (the ability to deliver consistent brightness and color across the screen), and horizontal viewing windows have (for the most part) also improved notably in the latest generation of sets. But the biggest thing LCD may have going for it is that manufacturers are banking on it as the future of mass market television, and have invested mountains of cash in new automated plants that will drive volume up and prices down. LCD boasts the widest range of screen sizes, from compact tabletop 13-inchers, to 65-inch-plus room fillers. 1080p resolution is common even in mid-sized models, though the benefits of 1080p with screens under 50 inches are debatable. Most LCDs have matte screen surfaces that are less susceptible to reflections in a brightly lit room, and power consumption is typically less than similarly sized plasmas. LCD picture quality has undoubtedly come a long way in the past year. When you combine that development with the reasonable prices LCD sets command, the technology’s broad appeal is understandable.
LCD is also the bright-room TV champ, edging out plasma by a nose when it comes to retaining picture contrast in well-illuminated spaces. And with new developments like LED-backlit LCD panels and ultra-fast refresh rates (180 Hz prototype models were shown at this year’s CES), picture performance just keeps getting better and better. Going forward, we’ll also see a shrinking of LCD cabinet depth: Hitachi just introduced a series of 1 1/2-inch deep models at CES, and it also displayed an even thinner 3/4-inch prototype with a 32-inch screen.
WEAKNESSES
Despite the new backlight technologies, LCD’s blackest blacks remain a notch below the best plasmas or any OLED, so it can’t quite equal those technologies in contrast and image depth. Narrow viewing angles on some models can also still be a problem in rooms with a broad swath of seating, though the best LCDs in this regard have very wide viewing windows. Many LCDs lose contrast when you’re seated off-axis. While prices are competitive in the 47-inch-and-under range, larger LCDs tend to cost more than equivalent plasmas. Some models are susceptible to motion blur and judder. LCD is currently riding the marketplace popularity wave, but its long-range prospects could be limited. That’s because, unlike self-emissive technologies like plasma and LCD that generate their own luminance, LCD display require a backlight. As Hitachi’s engineers demonstrated at CES, that backlight can be squeezed into a strikingly thin, 3/4-inch deep frame. But I can’t imagine LCD sets ever getting much thinner than that.
DOMINATION POTENTIAL
With plasma strong technically but fading in the market, and OLED still really a gleam in our collective eye, we can probably count on LCD to eventually take over as the volume leader for HDTV sales. LCDs sales dominance has been marching steadily up through the size ranges, and they now control most of the market below 50 inches. Their bright and punchy picture is a real asset on a brightly lit sales floor, even if that doesn’t always translate to a better picture in the typical home environment. We’ll be watching to see whether OLED can become a serious challenger. LCD delivers a one-two punch of solid picture performance and affordable price. For those reasons alone, LCD TVs are going to find their way into millions of homes over the next few years. But as other technologies — most notably OLED — manage to grow their screen sizes while retaining a wafer-thin form factor, LCD may ultimately get displaced — much in the same way current flat-panel TVs consigned bulky CRT models to the consumer electronics landfill.
Aug/090
EST. 1 Billion HDMI products in 2009
Some love it others loath it but despite what you think more than 340 Million people are now using HDMI connectivity as their preferred connection technology. More than 394 million HDMI-enabled devices will ship in 2009 claims the HDMI Licensing organisation creating an installed base of 1 billion devices, says In-Stat. But the successful HDMI standard is about to be upgraded to Version 1.4.
The HDMI spec is chasing added functionality by consumer electronics and PC makers. Says Steve Venuti, president of HDMI Licensing LLC, “The 1.4 specification will support some of the most exciting and powerful near-term innovations such as Ethernet connectivity and 3D formats. Additionally we are going to broaden our solution by providing a smaller connector for portable devices and a connection system specified for automobiles, as we see both more and different devices adopting the HDMI technology.”
You can expect to see new HDMI 1.4 cables when new HDMI 1.4 devices become available. Here are some of the most notable new features:
• Standard HDMI Cable – supports data rates up to 1080i/60
• High Speed HDMI Cable – supports data rates beyond 1080p, including Deep Color and all 3D formats of the new 1.4 spec
• Standard HDMI Cable with Ethernet
• High Speed HDMI Cable with Ethernet
• Automotive HDMI Cable – to connect external HDMI-enabled devices to an in-vehicle HDMI device
The HDMI 1.4 spec will add a data channel to the HDMI cable to enable high-speed bi-directional communication. Connected devices with this feature can send and receive data via 100 Mb/sec Ethernet (making them instantly ready for any IP-based application).
The HDMI Ethernet Channel will allow an internet-enabled HDMI device to share its Internet connection with other HDMI devices without the need for a separate Ethernet cable. The new feature allows HDMI-enabled devices to share content between devices, too.
The new version will add an Audio Return Channel to reduce the number of cables required to deliver audio upstream for processing and playback. In cases where HDTVs are directly receiving AV content, the Audio Return Channel allows the HDTV to send the audio stream to the AV receiver over the HDMI cable (eliminates need for an extra cable).
The new 1.4 version defines common 3D formats and resolutions for HDMI-enabled devices. For 3D Over HDMI , the spec will standardize the input/output portion of the home 3D system and will specify up to dual-stream 1080p resolution.
HDMI devices will be able to support HD resolutions at 4X the resolution of 1080p. Support for 4K x 2K lets the HDMI interface transmit content at the same resolution as many digital theaters. Formats supported include:
• 3840×2160 24Hz/25Hz/30Hz
• 4096×2160 24Hz
Other enhanced functionalities in the spec include:
• expanded support for color spaces specifically for digital still cameras, including YCC601, Adobe RGB and AdobeYCC601
• a Micro HDMI 19-pin connector supporting up to 1080p resolutions for portable devices and about 50% smaller than the extant HDMI Micro Connector
• an Automotive Connection System cabling spec for in-vehicle HD content distribution, (specified resistance levels to heat, vibration and noise)
Aug/090
The Truth About Monster Cable – Grand Finale (Part III)
I warned you that it was back on. Monster’s priciest—a $250 35-foot HDMI cable—goes toe-to-toe with Monoprice’s longest and thickest—a $35 35-footer and a $53 50-footer. Which will win? Or more importantly, which will fail? Let’s have a look, shall we?
As I mentioned this morning, I skipped the testing on the shorter cables because, using Monster’s own gear, we showed that they could carry today’s 1080p signal without trouble. (One, from XtremeHD, had trouble with some extreme video simulations, but it passed all of the real-world simulations, so you can keep using it… for now.)
But as you know, both the 35-footer and 50-footer from Monoprice failed the 1080p test in the lab. I used the very same cables from the lab for the real world test below, and guess what? The 35-footer did just fine, as did the 35-ft cable from Monster. But Monoprice’s 50-footer gave me some unmistakable trouble signs, as you will see below.
The TV in all of these shots is a Samsung LN-T5265F 52-inch 1080p LCD. It’s nice and big, the better to spot any aberrant cable behavior. I recognize that you might think the TV’s error correction is interfering with the test, to which I reply:
• I ran preliminary tests with a Sony Bravia KDF-37H1000 rear-projection set, but since it had 1080p inputs but only 720p display, couldn’t use it for the finals.
• We are only testing 1080p TV signal. Given that tightened criteria, wouldn’t all new “full HD” sets have at least some competent error correction?
• If error correction is truly the name of the game, then it especially doesn’t matter which cable you buy.
There was actually quite a lot of noise—a bouncing picture that happened so frequently I was able to capture the effect with a still camera. I was able to reproduce the noise with some consistency, too. Here’s the noise detail for you to scrutinize:
While it may seem conclusive that the 50-foot Monoprice is not a good choice, I was fortunate enough to have another 50-footer from the company, one that was not part of the original lab test. When I used it, I was not able to reproduce the noise. Furthermore, I double-checked the noisy cable on the Sony Bravia KDF-37H1000 with 1080p input (but 720p display) and again could not duplicate it.
The missing piece is Monster’s “No Frills” $300 50-footer. I know some of you wish I had tested it, that it had been part of this from the beginning. I don’t have a time machine to fix that, but I will say that, given how the Monster 35 footer (10M) did in the lab, chances are you’re not going to see noise on the Monster 50 footer.
For the love of God, what does it all mean???
I have to say I for one have learned a few things with all of this testing, and I hope you have too. The way I see it:
• It never pays to buy a Monster cable first. It doesn’t even make sense to buy the “marked down” $50 cable you can buy if you don’t want Monster. Go online, order your cables, and wait.
• Even if you’re going for the long haul, try a cheaper cable from a reliable vendor first. Monoprice isn’t the only one. During this process I’ve spoken with good people at FireFold, DataPro International, and others, and tested an assortment of discount products, with no noticeable problems. I am confident that, if a vendor has a solid return policy and satisfaction guarantee, you should feel free to buy even a super-long cable from a discount house. In the case of my 50-footer noise, a quick return would have been all that was required.
• Monster has a point about future-proofing. I have no doubt, given our testing, that Monster cables can outperform other cables in video formats that are not yet in use. What does this mean for a consumer? Does it make sense to spend $300 now on a 50-foot cable, assuming you will spend thousands to upgrade all of your video equipment around it in the next few years? Logic dictates that the answer is no.
• The only people who should buy Monster cable are people who light cigars with Benjamins. Fortunately for Monster, there are plenty of those people. They’re not even suckers, they are just rich as hell, and want the best. This testing did not prove that Monster is not the best. It just proved that the best is, for the most part, unnecessary.
Aug/090
Difference between 1080i and 1080p
While high definition has become a reality for many consumers, the technical jargon associated with this exiting new technology is causing much confusion. Just as we were beginning to understand the differences between Blu-ray and HD DVD along comes a new high-definition format, 1080p.
But why do we need another high-definition format anyway? Many of us have bought our HD Ready screens and were ready to sit back and enjoy this new viewing experience, but now we are all wondering if we bought the right kit in the first place.
Many of the more recent HD Ready flat screens feature a resolution of 1,366×768 pixels. This will display the commonly used 720p and 1080i formats, although 1080i/1080p signals will be downscaled to fit. To display 1080i/1080p signals in their entirety, you’ll need a screen with a resolution of 1,920×1,080 pixels, coined ‘Full HD’ by the marketing men.
However, just because a screen has 1,920×1,080-pixels it does not necessarily mean that it will accept 1080p input – so check before you buy.
Remember, 720p, 1080i, 1080p are formats in which ‘Sources’ of high definition content are presented for viewing on a particular output device such as your LCD/Plasma screen. The source could originate from your TV cable provider for example, or your xbox 360. To restate the point, 1080i/1080p needs a screen resolution of 1,920×1,080-pixels to display in its entirity, but you don’t have to have a screen with this resolution to display a 1080i/1080p signal – lower resolution screens downscale the signal to fit.
Taking a step back, 720p and 1080i were initially set out as the two key standards for High Definition content, with Sky HD, HD DVD and the Xbox 360 supporting these formats. Any TV that supports 720p and 1080i is classed as HD Ready. Let’s take a step back for a moment and take a quick look at the development of TV technology to see how we arrived at these standards.
In a CRT display (the TV you grew up with), a stream of electrons is generated by a gun, and is scanned across the face of the tube in scan lines, left to right and top to bottom. The face is coated in phosphors, which glow when hit by the electron stream. A method of scanning was required that would reduce the transmitted TV picture’s bandwidth and work in accordance with the electricity supply frequency (50Hz in the UK and Europe and 60Hz in the US). The result was interlaced scanning.
A method of reducing bandwidth was required because early sets were not able to draw the whole picture on screen before the top of the picture began to fade, resulting in a picture of uneven brightness and intensity. To overcome this, the screen was split in half with only half the lines (each alternate line) being refreshed each cycle. Hence, the signal is interlaced to deliver a full screen refresh every second cycle. So if the interlace signal refreshes half the lines on a screen 50 times per second this results in a full screen (or frame) refresh rate of 25 times per second. The problem with interlacing is the distortion when an image moves quickly between the odd and even lines as only one set of lines is ever being refreshed.
As TV screen technologies have progressed another system called Progressive Scan has also been developed. With progressive scanning the frames are not split into two fields of odd and even lines. Instead, all of the image scan lines are drawn in one go from top to bottom. This method is sometimes referred to as ’sequential scanning’ or ‘non-interlaced’. The fact that frames are shown as a whole makes it similar in principle to the way film is shown at the cinema.
At this point it is worth considering what we mean by resolution in relation to TVs;
Resolution: HD-Ready TVs need to be able to display pictures at the resolution set by the new standard. Resolution can be described either in terms of “lines of resolution,” or pixels. The resolution you see on your TV depends on two factors, namely the resolution of your display and the resolution of the video signal you receive. Because video images are always rectangular in shape, there is both horizontal resolution and vertical resolution to consider.
Vertical resolution: This is the number of horizontal lines that can be resolved in an image from top to bottom. The old familiar CRT TV displays 576 lines, while Digital HD television operates at a resolution of either 720 or 1080 lines. This is the most important resolution as it is most noticeable to the human eye.
Horizontal resolution: This is the number of vertical lines that can be resolved from one side of an image to the other. Horizontal resolution varies depending on the source. The number of horizontal pixels is not quite so critical as vertical resolution as it is not as obvious to the human eye during normal viewing.
An analogue TV signal in Europe, where the PAL standard is used, has 625 horizontal lines of which 576 lines are displayed and the image (or frame) is refreshed 25 times a second. This is the standard we have been used to for years.
A High Definition Digital TV signal delivers significantly more picture detail and audio quality than a standard signal, producing pictures that are significantly better, sharper and clearer;
720p: 1,280×720 pixel resolution. High-definition picture that is displayed progressively. Each line is displayed on the screen simultaneously, therefore it is smoother than an interlaced picture.
1080i: 1,920×1,080 pixel resolution. High-definition picture that is displayed interlaced. Each odd line of the picture is displayed, followed by each even line, and the resulting image is not as smooth as a progressive feed. 1080i is therefore a more detailed picture suited to documentaries and wildlife footage, but less suitable for action-oriented material such as sports and movies.
1080p: 1,920×1,080 pixel resolution. High-definition picture that is displayed progressively. Each line is displayed on the screen simultaneously, therefore it is smoother than an interlaced picture. This is the ultimate high-definition standard — the most detailed picture, displayed progressively.
There are two main formats for HDTV, namely 720p (i.e. a 720 line picture progressively scanned 50 times a second) and 1080i (1080 lines interlaced at 50 cycles per second). The picture resolution of a high definition digital TV is about 4 times greater than a typical 576 line TV picture.
not having a screen which is able to display 1080p may not be important to you. However, there are exceptions, and if you are a serious game player you will probably already know one of them, or to be precise two of them. The xbox360(with a little tweak) and the playstation 3 produce output at 1080p. Also, the new High Definition DVD format, blu-ray has also been designed for 1080p ouput. Is the difference worth the extra investment? Maybe, something you will have to judge for yourselves …
Aug/090
How Vizio will stand out among the sea of Web TVs
As Internet-connected TVs become more popular, set makers are looking for ways to stand out from each other. Vizio, which made its name by undercutting much larger names in electronics on LCD sets, is no longer just looking to attract buyers at Costco. It’s now trying to compete directly on the number of bells and whistles with the likes of Samsung, Panasonic, and Sony.
Announced in late June, Vizio’s Via HDTV has some things going for it that its competitors’ sets do not: integrated 802.11(n) Wi-Fi–which means no separate dongle for connecting to the Web–2GB of flash memory, and a well thought-out remote control.
The remote design is almost a no-brainer in retrospect, and makes you wonder why it hasn’t been done before. It looks like a standard model, but with this one, Vizio took into account what the user would be doing with it: interacting with Web applications like Twitter, Facebook, Yahoo Sports, and Flickr. The TV maker put a slideout QWERTY keyboard on the back of the Bluetooth remote, so users can type as they would on some smartphones, instead of keying in letters one at a time. And, it doesn’t seem to add much to the price of the Via HDTV: the 42-inch version will begin at $999 when it starts selling in stores in November.
Vizio is also looking to differentiate itself with developers who will create more applications for the TV. Yahoo developed its TV widget engine last year, which brings a range of preselected applications like Twitter, eBay, Flickr, Yahoo Sports, Showtime, and many others right onto the TV screen. Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, and Vizio each offer it. But Vizio says it wants to appeal to application developers, so it integrated Adobe Flash directly into its Via HDTV.
That way, developers like Netflix, for instance, can decide if they want to make a Flash-based app or a Yahoo widget to deliver its streaming video service to a TV, according to Matt McRae, Vizio’s vice president of advanced platforms. So far, Netflix and Rhapsody have created Flash-based versions of their services for Vizio. Rhapsody’s app is exclusive to the Via HDTV. McRae said allowing Flash-based apps on its TV would allow for better animation or anything with vector-based graphics
But while Vizio is keen on bringing Web-based activities like Facebook, Twitter, and others (there will be more next year, the company says) to the TV, one thing we definitely won’t see on a Vizio TV is a browser.
The experience of surfing the Web on a TV screen “looks awful,” said McRae. And while Vizio believes consumers want to do some Web activities on TV, they don’t want to duplicate how they’d use a computer. “It’s just a different experience.”
Aug/090
HDMI Type D (Micro) connector
Molex Inc. has introduced the next generation HDMI* Type D (Micro) connector, recently announced by the HDMI Licensing Committee, to meet the digital interface requirements of consumer electronic products.

The HDMI Type D (Micro) connector is the industry’s first miniaturised connector solution for delivering high definition video and images from mobile devices to flat panel screens. The connector, which meets all the electrical and mechanical specifications of the HDMI Specification 1.4, will provide significant benefits to the digital still camera and mobile device markets.
The HDMI Type D connector standard was developed by the HDMI Consortium. As an integral part of this team for the HDMI Type D concept, Molex was responsible for proposing the connector design and connector specification.
“The new HDMI Type D Micro Connector is designed to meet the needs of portable devices by providing these products with a fully functioning, smaller 19-pin connector. We are pleased to see companies like Molex leading the way by providing the market with these new, innovative HDMI solutions,” says Steve Venuti, president of HDMI Licensing, LLC.
The new Type D (Micro) connector is abouthalf the size of the current Type C (Mini)HDMI connector on the market today. Despite its smaller size, the new Type D version delivers equivalent mechanical strength and electrical characteristics. Mobile phone and consumer manufacturers have expressed strong interest in this new technology that will enable users to display higher definition video, photos and other content from their mobile devices onto full-size flat panel TV screens.
“In addition to our recent Emmy® Award win for the HDMI Type A connector, our next generation Type D connector is further evidence of Molex’s leadership in innovative I/O technology development,” said Scott Sommers, group manager, new product development, Molex Incorporated. “Molex continues to drive market innovation with the world’s smallest I/O connector, providing consumers with higher definition video and images.”
Aug/090
What’s the best plasma to pick up in 2009?

We’re not going to pretend this question hasn’t been asked before, but it’s a new year and there’s a few new competitors for the plasma throne. Looks like our friend Akshay was all about LCDs until checking out this article, and now he’s ready to look at plasma for his next flat panel HDTV. The only question is, which one? The Panasonic G10 or V10 series? Find a Kuro on closeout? We’ll let him set the mood:
“Ok, now to the main point – I’m looking to buy a HDTV. I have been trying to read reviews online and have been stuck with the basics — Plasma or LCD. I was going through some Engadget HD archives when I found this article and decided to ask for some advice from the experts. I was leaning a bit towards LCD, especially the Samsung lineup interests me a lot. Then I read an article which easily proved that Plasma is somewhat a notch higher than LCD even though its phasing out.
Ever since I read this, I’m wondering which technology to opt for, given all the factors including picture quality, viewing angles, pricing, marketing gimmicks, etc. If I were to go with Panasonic, which model would be a really good one? My budget is around $1700 (LCD or Plasma). Any lil bit of help/advice from your team would be highly appreciated as I really respect what and how you guys manage engadget! I’m looking to buy it in Aug end/Sept time frame.”
We know at least a few plasma TV owners are reading this, reach out via the comments and let us know which one will fit Akshay’s budget best.
Jul/090
Should Businesses Buy a Projector or an LCD Display?
With the price of large (>32”)LCD displays decreasing rapidly and new functionalities being added to LCD displays, does it still make sense for businesses to buy a projector vs. an LCD display?
Some of the variables to consider when evaluating this question are product quality, price, picture quality, screen size and other such considerations. We discuss these and other factors from a typical business organization perspective. Read other articles and make your informed judgement.
Product Life: LCD TVs or displays typically have a backlight life of 30,000 to 60,000 hours (ie, if you have the display on for ~6 hours every day, the backlight will last for 16 years). Even then the backlight can be replaced in most LCD displays. A projector bulb typically has a life of 2,000 hours.
Price Considerations: A basic projector can be found for INR25000. However, if the projector is going to be used for video conferencing or board room presentation, a high resolution, good contrast ratio and saturated colour projector would be required. The cost of such a projector is close to INR 1 lakh. Thereafter, you need to factor in the prices of projector bulb and projection screens. A typical projector bulb needs to be replaced almost every year or two with bulbs costing Rs 20,000+ per bulb. We have added these costs over a five-year period to compare a projector vs. an LCD (see chart below). With 46” LCD TV or display costing around Rs 135,000 – Rs 150,000 and dropping, price becomes less of an issue when considering whether to buy a Projector or LCD display
Figure: Total Cost of Ownership Comparison for Projector vs. LCD Display
Basic Device capital cost for projector is INR 70,000 and that of an LCD display is INR 150,000,Projector Screen Capital Cost (Wall Mount Screens INR 5-15K) is INR 10,000, Consumable cost of the projector is 20,000 x 3 = INR 60,000, Consumable life of a projector is 2,000hrs and that of an LCD display is 60,000hrs and the Cost of Ownership of a projector is Rs.140, 000/- and Rs.150, 000/- for an LCD display.
Assume: 5years of usage @ 5hrs a day ~ 6600hrs of use. This translates to 4 lamps in 5 years requiring the customer to buy 3 lamps in addition to 1 supplied with machine.
What is clear from the above figure is that a Full High Definition 46” LCD Display is, at best, only marginally costlier than a XGA Projector of ~2500AL. Additional costs of low screen installation costs and lower device loss costs are purely additional.
Picture Quality: Projectors such as a DLP or LCD projector use glass panels to combine red, green and blue colours to create the image. When sitting close to screen, the viewer can see the different colours at the borders of an image, aptly described as the rainbow effect. The rainbow effect takes away from the image quality and can give headaches. High-end projectors have been able to reduce the rainbow effect, however the problem still remains and these high-end projectors cost more. LCD TV or LCD displays do not have rainbow effect issues and the quality of the picture is good at close range.
Rather, projectors cannot compare with the picture quality for an LCD display. The vividness of the colours, the contrast ratio, the colour saturation and image sharpness are much better for an LCD display than a projector. When viewing a projector image, especially in ambient light, the viewer has to dim the lights or close the curtains unless the business has purchased an even more costly higher lumen projector. Not true with LCD displays, as the brightness and colour quality are much better.
Viewing angles used to be an issue with LCD displays but this issue is no longer true. Most LCD displays can be viewed from up to 176 degrees.
Dead or Stuck Pixels: Projectors can suffer from dead pixels and LCD displays can suffer from stuck pixels. Both dead pixels and stuck pixels result in white spots in the projected image. However, the manufacturers of both technologies have worked hard to minimize such issues and in most cases they provide warranty against such issues.
Screen Size: A common thought is that screen size is not an issue for most projectors as the thinking is that the projector image can be made larger by moving the projector away from the screen. This is not true as the image quality deteriorates as the image becomes larger. With projectors, most buyers opt for maximum optimized projector image sizes from 76-inches to 120-inches and the actual working normal projection image used is much smaller. Today, if businesses need a large LCD display in the maximum projector image size, a wide variety of competitive LCD displays can be found in this range.
Portability: Projectors are easy to carry and move around. For a business this could be a value-add or a drawback. LCD displays are durable and can be moved however they are not as light as projectors.
Power Consumption: Projector power consumption varies more from unit to unit, with brighter conference projectors requiring more power than smaller portable projectors. It is hard to compare the two technologies on this performance parameter.
Connectivity: Most LCD displays have more number and different types of ports than projectors. As a result more types of devices can be connected to an LCD display than a projector.
Other Value-Add Features: New features are appearing in LCD displays that could be quite valuable for businesses. For example, touch screen features on LCD displays allow for LCD displays to be used as digital whiteboards where the data written on the display can easily get captured electronically in a text document.