this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2024
338 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59161 readers
2158 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 97 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

The fact that quantum dots are already being successfully applied to LCD-LED and OLED screens is encouraging for future QDEL products. QDEL stakeholders claim that the tech could bring efficiencies like lower power consumption and higher brightness than OLED. (Research using a prototype device has recorded quantum dot light-emitting diodes reaching 614,000 nits. Of course, those aren't the type of results you should expect to see in a real-life consumer product.)

614,000 nits

That's fucking insane. HDR 1400 displays are at least 1,400 nits. 614,000 nits seems like you'd be staring at the fucking sun.

There's also hope that QDEL could eventually last longer than OLED, especially since QDEL doesn't rely on organic materials that can cause burn-in.

Tbh the burn-in issue is the reason why I don't like OLEDs as computer monitors. I know phones and TVs don't tend to have major burn-in issues, but the fact that it exists sucks. TVs have a variable-enough image that long-term use isn't an issue imo, and even the most thrifty person will probably end up replacing their phone every 4~6 yrs. However, I'm used to having computer monitors be long-term things. My last monitor lasted about 10yrs before it died.

As it stands, QDEL displays would become noticeably dimmer more quickly than today's OLED displays.

Aw, that's disappointing. At the same time though, if they're able to get even 10% of the 614,000 nits on commercial units, then they'd have to lose a significant amount of brightness to dim to current display levels.

But optimists believe QDEL display lifetimes could one day be on par with LCD-LEDs and outlast OLEDs.

Yeah, I hope so too.

[–] Patches@sh.itjust.works 56 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

So the formula for nits to Lumen is below:

N=L/3.426

614,000 = L / 3.426

2,103,564 Lumens

Bruh...

1m² of the sun is 127,000 Lumen. This TV is at most 2 m². It'd certainly be the last thing you ever saw.

[–] xePBMg9@lemmynsfw.com 61 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That lab sample must have been a single diode emitting for a nanosecond or something.

[–] mriguy@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Light emitting diode -> smoke emitting diode -> flame emitting diode

[–] BigDaddySlim@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Imagine playing CS2 or CoD and getting flashbanged with a screen that bright

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] newH0pe@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I checked the linked paper and sadly this brightness reduced the cell lifetime from over 5000h at 100 Nits to just around 5h.

So unless they find some magic, even better chemistry this TV as bright as the sun won't happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wahots@pawb.social 19 points 6 months ago

We will continue to wait for the holy grail of micro LED monitors and phones. So far, all of my OLED phones have burnt in around the 5 year mark. Avoiding OLED like the plague for longer lasting devices like Monitors, TVs and (god forbid) car displays.

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I would assume a retail ready model would have the capacity for that blinding level of nits, but undervolt to a more reasonable brilliant 2,000 and then add voltage over time to compensate for the dimming over time.

I will say that having a >10,000 nit display could be really cool at 8k, you could produce some really awesome images and stare at the Sun without having to go outside and with less cone damage.

Apparently the Sun at noon is 1.6 billion nits, that would be hilarious in a TV.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

phones definetly have issues with burnin still. my last phone had it as well as some image degradation despite constant promising its all good now. at this point ill just stick with lcds until we have better tech.

[–] shottymcb@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago

I'm posting this from a 7 year old phone with an OLED screen. The screen still looks as good as the day I bought it.

[–] FrozenHandle@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I am worried about burn-in on computer screens, but at the same time I am just wondering about how others use their phones, my last 4 phones had OLED and I have never had any burn in occur. I bought a used Galaxy S4 mini at some point and when I got it had slight burn-in of some icons, but it didn't get any worse in the two years I was using it. Am I maybe just too old because I use a computer while young people use their phones for 10 hours a day?

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

As a young person that uses their phone extensively, daily driving both a Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus from 2019 and a Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra from 2024 for about 6 to 7 hours every day, I can tell you that at least for flagships, AMOLED display burn-in is a non-issue, it arguably does not exist.

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I cannot confirm. The phone I'm writing these very words on is a Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus from 2019 running LineageOS 20, and the AMOLED display is absolutely gorgeous and looks as good as today's top-tier smartphone screens. But maybe that's because this is a Samsung flagship, and Samsung is notorious for making kind of the absolute best displays for their flagships.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Cool, so they'll be available without all the spyware, right? ... Right??

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, there will be Spyware in the fucking diodes...

[–] Aopen@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] kerrigan778@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Sometimes when you spend too long staring into the quantum dots, the quantum dots stare back at you.

[–] SitD@feddit.de 4 points 6 months ago
[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 32 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] tarmac@lemm.ee 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bring on the nanomachines.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 11 points 6 months ago (4 children)
[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 19 points 6 months ago

What is this? A TV for quarks?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 22 points 6 months ago (4 children)
[–] kawa@reddeet.com 12 points 6 months ago

Well, it makes sense in French where DEL means : Diodes Electro Luminescentes, which is LED in english.

[–] rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

From the article:

Quantum dots are already moving in the premium display category, particularly through QD-OLED TVs and monitors. The next step could be QDEL, short for "quantum dot electroluminescent," also known as NanoLED, screens.

[–] Threeme2189@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

No.

Quantum diode emitting lights

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PhAzE@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Won't these lose brightness over time as the chemical reactions die out, forcing you to buy a new tv?

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

That's that entrepreneurial spirit whenever been looking for! Straight to the top of the corporate ladder with you.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

Refills.

HP begins salivating.

Could you imagine a TV needing “printer ink”?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

I get the distinct feeling the writer doesn't understand quantum Dots, and doesn't understand the technology behind any of the display technologies he attempts to describe.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 11 points 6 months ago

Come back if you have it on market.

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How much do you reckon the first qdel tv cost? 20k?

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago

2000 plus all your personal information, habbits and sex noises you make.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 10 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


With OLED-equipped TVs, monitors, and other gadgets slowly becoming more readily available at lower prices, attention is turning to what the next landmark consumer display tech will be.

Micro LED often features in such discussions, but the tech is not expected to start hitting consumer devices until the 2030s.

But when it comes to technology that could seriously address top user concerns—like image quality, price, and longevity—quantum dots seem the most pertinent at the moment.

Not to be confused with the QLED (quantum light emitting diode) tech already available in TVs, QDEL displays don't have a backlight.

The expected result is displays with wider color spaces than today's QD-OLEDs (quantum dot OLEDs) that are also brighter, more affordable, and resistant to burn-in.

If commercialized and mass-produced, QDEL can have a cost-to-performance ratio better than that of OLED, but it would still struggle to compete with LCD-LED on a cost basis.


The original article contains 514 words, the summary contains 150 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sounds a lot like Sharp going "please don't buy OLED panels, we don't make them!"

My 2017 LG OLED is still going strong, looks great, and when it eventually dies, I've seen the 77" model in Costco for just over £2000. For all the chatter about burn in, I've never seen any of it, and that's with heavy gaming use. Not sure I'd use one for desktop PC use, but for everything else, just get OLED.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

I just bought two LG OLEDs to replace Roku TVs after the great brickening of Roku TVs earlier this year. I wish I would've done it sooner. Even a month later I look at the screen sometimes and am just blown away by how much better it looks than the QLED whatever Roku garbage I had.

[–] russjr08@bitforged.space 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Dang, OLED TVs haven't even gotten to my price range yet! Though admittedly I could probably do a better job at looking I suppose...

[–] Retrograde@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

We just bought a 55" Sony OLED for a thousand bucks, and it is glorious. Been waiting for it to hit the $1k mark for many years

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Will they be available in computer monitors?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›