LCD vs OLED - Part II

Our provocatively-titled story from last week, Are new LCDs the OLED killer?  prompted more than a few of you to write in with your thoughts.  Indignation, surprise, incomprehension, disgust: we've seen them all in our Inbox, and all with a convincing justification to match.

The recurring question has been how reasonable it is to consign OLED screens to history without first seeing how good the contrast that this new generation of screens promises to bring really is?

We’ve recently learnt four new interesting facts about the technology which will add to the debate:

1. When it’s used commercially, the technology will be marketed as WLED, not OLED.  So for those who thought that its supporters may have given it up, OLED is very much up for the fight, even if it is under a different name.

2. The contrast tests for theses screens show results of 100 000:1.  So, if the maximum brightness really is 280 cd/m², as is promised, black will only show at 0.0028 cd/m²!

3. This technology will make its debut not only in televisions, but also on computer monitors, starting this November with AOC (19” and 22” models) and then in 2009 from Philips.

4. The energy efficiency measurements taken so far on the first models suggest an improvement of anywhere between 10% and 20% compared with average conventional LCD screens currently available.

Why WLED?  It stands for White LED, because that’s how the screens are backlit, although they aren’t the only product to use this method.  Another caveat: the 100 000:1 contrast must surely be involve the activation of dynamic contrast, but how good will they be without this option?

Much as we’d love to, we honestly can’t tell you any more than that without getting in seriously hot water with some of sources.  We promise to keep you posted though!