|
Monday, July 21, 2008 A New Competitor to LCDA novel pixel design promises to be faster and brighter. By Prachi Patel-Predd
A pixel that uses a pair of mirrors to block or transmit light could lead to displays that are faster, brighter, and more power efficient than liquid crystal displays (LCDs). Researchers at Microsoft Research who published their novel pixel design in Nature Photonics say that their design is also simpler and easier to fabricate, which should make it cheaper. LCDs corner half of the global TV market and are the most popular technology for cell phones and flat-panel computer monitors. But for three reasons, they do not boast the best image quality. First, the pixels do not turn completely off. Second, it takes 25 to 40 milliseconds on average for the pixels to switch between black and white, which is slow enough to blur fast-moving images. Third, LCDs are almost impossible to use in bright ambient light. "There is nothing in LCD technology that stands out," says Sriram Peruvemba, vice president of marketing at electronic-paper pioneer E Ink, based in Cambridge, MA. "The only reason it has done well is it's the lowest price [flat-panel] display today." The new telescopic pixels switch completely off and on within 1.5 milliseconds. Michael Sinclair at Microsoft Research says that the ultrafast response time translates to simpler, low-cost color displays. In LCDs, a pixel is made of three subpixels--red, green, and blue--that are lit up simultaneously at different intensities to create, say, yellow. Each subpixel is controlled with a separate transistor circuit, which makes the circuits complex. Because the telescopic display switches so rapidly, you could put red, green, and blue light-emitting diodes behind each pixel, Sinclair says, and have them sequentially light up to create a color shade. "This would reduce the complexity and cost of today's LCD," he says. The telescopic pixels are also significantly brighter. In an LCD, by the time light passes through the polarizing films, the liquid-crystal layer, and the color filters, only 5 to 10 percent of it comes out. The telescopic pixels, on the other hand, let about 36 percent of the light through. "I could get by with a less-powerful backlight, because the telescopic pixel is more efficient," Sinclair says. The greater brightness would also make the display more visible in bright sunlight. |
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Nanowires for Displays
05/06/2008
White Papers
Comments
bkf11 on 07/21/2008 at 12:49 AM
6
EDIT:
Oh, I see now that the LEDs are probably a single light source backlighting the entire screen and the display itself modulates the individual pixels. OK, I spoke too soon!
emilius on 07/21/2008 at 6:13 AM
3
bj on 07/21/2008 at 7:30 AM
24
cjameshuff2 on 07/21/2008 at 9:01 AM
14
The main issue I see is fabrication. LCD manufacture boils down to depositing a few patterned films on a glass surface. Building microelectromechanical displays of any sort will require more complex etching processes and more trips between etching and deposition processes. More expensive chemicals consumed, more time spent on the machinery, more production losses due to slight misalignments or other errors during processing. The technology might be superior, but I don't see it replacing LCDs.
gupta on 07/22/2008 at 1:59 AM
2
GaryB on 07/21/2008 at 1:43 PM
42
AshleyCJohnson on 07/21/2008 at 4:29 PM
1
Brittany Sauser on 07/31/2008 at 3:20 PM
Web Producer and Technology Reporter
17
I can get in touch with the reporter for you. Please send me an email with your questions and I will forward them to her as I cannot hand out her information. email: brittany.sauser@technologyreview.com
Thanks,
Brittany
echoelman on 07/22/2008 at 2:05 AM
1
Manuvidya on 08/01/2008 at 6:16 AM
12
To be honest, I think I'd sooner 'protect' my money by buying the new competitor than by going for OLED (which I think will be great for keyboards etc, but not for anything over 15").
Time will tell, though I like the sound of having a 40+" display for the price of a current 17" LCD display :P
godricbj on 07/22/2008 at 3:33 PM
1
it's much simpler, cheaper, well into prototype, lets 60% of the light through and uses standard LCD fabrication... check out the website... so who wants Microsoft?