future of lcd displays price

Since no backlight is used, the display requires very little energy in order to operate. This means: a lot of money can be saved over time. Think about the costs of a drive thru menu that stays running all year for sixteen whole hours a day. Those costs add up. Can you imagine spending $20k a year – just to power your display? That would cut your profits in a very noticeable way. So, I bet you’d be pretty pleased to find such a low-energy alternative.

Reflective displays really are a unique thing. You don’t have to hide them from the sun. You don’t have to shield your screen with your hand in order to eliminate glare. You don’t have to tilt it at funny angles that cause your neck to throb in pain, just so that you can read what’s on the screen. Funny, because those are our natural reactions whenever LCD and sunlight combine. Not with a reflective display though.

You could almost compare a reflective display to a piece of paper in the way that it becomes more visible when light is shining directly on it. It’s really bizarre to see, and you almost have to witness it in order to wrap your head around it, because it’s totally unlike what you’re used to.

Most modern computer monitors, and even televisions, have an edge-lit LCD display that’s fundamentally similar to the first such displays sold decades ago, but that’s not where the future is headed. The twin threats of Mini-LED and OLED want to conquer the world of PC displays for themselves.

Which will win, and where is the future headed? I spoke with Ross Young, CEO of Display Supply Chain Consultants, and David Wyatt, CTO of Pixel Display (and inventor of Nvidia G-Sync), for the inside scoop.

Modern OLED displays rarely exceed 1,000 nits of brightness, and when they do, are incapable of sustaining it. LG’s C9 OLED television, for example, can’t sustain a peak brightness above 160 nits (according to testing by Rtings). Mini-LED displays like Apple’s Liquid Retina XDR, Samsung’s Odyssey Neo G9, and Samsung’s QN90A television can hit peak brightness well above 1,000 nits and sustain at least 600 nits.

Wyatt points to this as a key advantage. The best HDR standards call for up to 10,000 nits of brightness. Current consumer Mini-LED displays don’t achieve this, but it’s possible future displays will.

And Micro-LED, which uses individual LEDs as per-pixel lighting elements, can reach even greater heights. Wyatt says his company’s VividColor NanoBright technology will be capable of reaching up to one million nits.

Such brightness is not necessary for computer monitors or home televisions and instead targets demanding niche components, such as avionics displays. Still, it hints that we’ve only seen a sliver of HDR’s real potential – and that Mini-LED and Micro-LED, not OLED, will lead the charge.

OLED’s greatest strength is the opposite of Mini-LED’s incredible brightness. The self-emissive nature of OLED means each pixel can be turned on or off individually, providing a deep, inky, perfect black level.

“Mini-LED has clear advantages in sources of supply and brightness,” Young said in an email, “but OLEDs have advantages in regards to contrast, particularly off-axis contrast, response times, and no halo effect.” The “halo effect,” also known as blooming, is the halo of luminance that often surrounds bright objects on a Mini-LED display.

The advantages of OLED add up to superior contrast and depth. You’ve likely noticed this when viewing an OLED television at your local retailer. High-quality content has an almost three-dimensional look, as if the display is not a flat panel but a window into another world.

Modern Mini-LED displays often claim to rival OLED. Apple’s Liquid Retina Display XDR, for example, lists a maximum contrast ratio of 1,000,000:1. In reality, Mini-LED still noticeably lags the contrast performance of OLED because it can’t light pixels individually. This will remain true at least until Micro-LED, which can light pixels individually, goes mainstream.

Mini-LED improves on traditional edge-lit LCD displays by improving the backlight. The LCD panel itself, however, is much the same as before and retains some flaws common to the technology.

Display quality can shift significantly depending on viewing angle, and significant blur will be visible when displaying fast motion. Both problems are inherent to LCD technology. The liquid crystals do not block light uniformly, so the image looks different from different angles, and require a few milliseconds to respond to a charge, causing blur or ghosting in rapidly changing images.

OLED is different from LCD technology. There’s no liquid crystals to twist or move. Each pixel is an organic element that creates its own light when a charge is applied. The light is emitted in a relatively uniform pattern and can turn on or off extremely quickly, removing the viewing angle and motion performance issues of LCD entirely.

The last few points—contrast, black levels, viewing angles, and response times—highlight the strengths of OLED technology. But, OLED has a weakness: durability.

This problem is most often discussed in the context of burn-in or image retention. Burn-in happens when specific pixels on an OLED panel degrade differently from those around them, creating a persistent shadow in the image.

Want to see the effects yourself? I recommend Rting’s burn-in testing page, which shows results over a period of eight years (though, unfortunately, Rtings has not updated its result since February of 2020). This testing shows OLED degradation is indeed a thing, though its severity depends on how you use your display.

Monitor pricing remains a sore point for PC enthusiasts. As explained in my deep-dive on upcoming OLED monitors, pricing is tied to the efficiency of production.

This advantage will likely continue in the near future. OLED pricing is reliant on availability of OLED panels, which are not as widely produced as LCD panels. Companies looking to build Mini-LED displays can design the backlight somewhat independently of the LCD panel and choose panels as needed based on the panel’s capabilities and pricing.

Because of this, there’s more ways for manufacturers to deliver Mini-LED displays in notebooks and monitors, which may lead to a more aggressive reduction in price.

The current OLED vs. Mini-LED battle is give-and-take. Mini-LED wins in brightness, HDR, durability, and pricing (of full-sized monitors). OLED wins in contrast, black levels, viewing angles, and motion performance.

OLED’s big break may come with the introduction of new fabs. Young says they will “lower costs significantly for 10-inch to 32-inch panels, giving OLED fabs the same flexibility as G8.5 LCD fabs, meaning the ability to target multiple applications from a single fab.” The first of these new fabs should start producing panels by 2024.

Affordable OLED seems alluring, but Wyatt champions a different approach. He believes the Micro-LED technology championed by Pixel Display will meld the strengths of LCD and OLED while ditching the weaknesses of both.

However, Micro-LED is a technology more relevant to the latter half of this decade. The more immediate fight will see OLED attempt to improve brightness and durability while Mini-LED pursues increasingly sophisticated backlights to mimic the contrast of OLED.

Personally, I think Mini-LED shows more promise—when it comes to PC displays, at least. The static images, long hours, and sustained brightness of Mini-LED displays pinches on OLED pain points, which will remain even if pricing becomes more affordable.

I’ve been in the display industry for the past 17 years, and I never cease to be amazed by the ability of LCD to reinvent itself. Time and again, as alternative display technologies emerge, questions arise about LCD’s future, prompting new developments that defy expectations and demonstrate its versatility.

Over the last 20 years, LCD displays have become thinner and lighter, and have expanded to larger sizes, as well as offering huge increases in screen performance, including resolution, colour, contrast, brightness and refresh rate. The next evolution is set to bring these developments to more products than ever before – the future lies with flexible displays.

Our organic LCD (OLCD) technology makes use of carbon-based, rather than silicon, transistors, allowing us to sidestep the limitations of flat screens and embrace curved surfaces. This novel feature will bring many benefits to both existing and future products, and there are three key areas where our technology stands to make a significant positive impact. The most obvious application for flexible OLCD is as a replacement for glass LCD screens in products – such as tablets, laptops and TVs – that will benefit from thinner, lighter or unbreakable displays. There’s also the potential to make borderless screens without the bezel or border around their edge, which enlarges the usable screen space, as well as simply being more aesthetically pleasing.

Finally, there is the limitless possibility of adding displays to everyday objects or surfaces that can’t make effective use of glass displays. This will introduce new, previously unattainable, functionality into our homes, offices and cars. One particular application that is gaining traction is using OLCD displays on the inside of the A-pillar in your car. Combined with an external camera, you can make the pillar ‘invisible’, increasing visibility and improving safety.

OLCD is set to transform the world around us. Thanks to the existing, low-cost manufacturing supply chain for LCDs, it’s a small step for designers to begin developing the next generation of products that take advantage of the flexibility afforded by this innovative technology.

There"s a new TV tech on the horizon, and it promises incredible picture quality and even more incredible sizes. You can buy one right now if you"ve got deep pockets. It"s called MicroLED, and it combines the best features of the current TV technologies into something new -- and huge. Using millions of tiny individually addressable LEDs, MicroLED promises to rival the picture quality of

Although super-expensive now, MicroLED is on the cusp of being the next great display technology. And it could end up in your home sometime in the future, even if you"re not rich. Here"s what you need to know.

With MicroLED, on the other hand, the LEDs themselves directly create the image. The picture you watch is composed of individually-addressable LEDs, which makes it more like how OLED works. No more LCDs.

Here"s how it works. As the name suggests, MicroLED is made of millions of micro, well, LEDs. Tinier versions of what"s in your current LCD TV, or newer flashlights, light bulbs and what myriad other devices

Turns out that process is a lot harder than it sounds. One problem is that when you shrink LEDs, the total amount of light they produce goes down. So you either need to drive them harder, increase their efficiency, or both. Just driving them harder introduces new issues. The TV will need a lot more electricity and have to dissipate a lot more heat. The dozens of LEDs in your current TV don"t emit that much heat, certainly not compared to older technologies like plasma and CRT, but put millions of them right next to each other and things can get toasty.

Sure, wall-size TVs are cool, but no one will buy them. If a manufacturer wants to make a profit on its new tech, it needs something easy to make in the 60-inch range, or smaller. If they can do that, the big sizes will get even cheaper.

To put it another way, current LCD and OLED TVs have different size pixels for different screen sizes. So a 4K 75-inch LCD has larger pixels, but the same number, as a 4K 50-inch LCD. MicroLED could, possibly, just add more pixels of the same size to make a larger, and higher resolution, TV. This could turn out easier than changing the tiny LED pixel sizes, from a manufacturing standpoint. We"ll have to wait and see if it happens that way. Right now though, Samsung"s three sizes have the same resolution, meaning the 88-inch has the smallest pixels of the lot.

LG is the latest company to announce MicroLED displays, though not every model from their DVLED Home Cinema line is MicroLED. Sizes range from 108-inches to 393-inches, with HD, 4K, and even 8K resolutions. You can even get 32:9 models that allow two full-sized 16:9 shows or games running simultaneously side-by-side.

It wasn"t long ago that OLED was a far-off future tech that never seemed to leave the prototype stage. Now there are multiple sizes and resolutions that would have seemed impossible in the tech"s early days. It"s possible we"re now in the early days of microLED. It"s a technology that holds a lot of promise, in both picture quality, screen size and myriad other uses -- but it"s not without its issues. Heat and price are stumbling blocks, but engineers love a challenge. The fact that you can, if you"ve got $100,000 or so to burn, buy one now says a lot. Could this replace LCD TVs in many homes? Maybe. Could it give OLED a run for its money? Possibly. Will it replace projectors? Could be. As I said, it"s an interesting technology.

In recent years, China and other countries have invested heavily in the research and manufacturing capacity of display technology. Meanwhile, different display technology scenarios, ranging from traditional LCD (liquid crystal display) to rapidly expanding OLED (organic light-emitting diode) and emerging QLED (quantum-dot light-emitting diode), are competing for market dominance. Amidst the trivium strife, OLED, backed by technology leader Apple"s decision to use OLED for its iPhone X, seems to have a better position, yet QLED, despite still having technological obstacles to overcome, has displayed potential advantage in color quality, lower production costs and longer life.

Zhao: We all know display technologies are very important. Currently, there are OLED, QLED and traditional LCD technologies competing with each other. What are their differences and specific advantages? Shall we start from OLED?

Huang: OLED has developed very quickly in recent years. It is better to compare it with traditional LCD if we want to have a clear understanding of its characteristics. In terms of structure, LCD largely consists of three parts: backlight, TFT backplane and cell, or liquid section for display. Different from LCD, OLED lights directly with electricity. Thus, it does not need backlight, but it still needs the TFT backplane to control where to light. Because it is free from backlight, OLED has a thinner body, higher response time, higher color contrast and lower power consumption. Potentially, it may even have a cost advantage over LCD. The biggest breakthrough is its flexible display, which seems very hard to achieve for LCD.

Liao: Actually, there were/are many different types of display technologies, such as CRT (cathode ray tube), PDP (plasma display panel), LCD, LCOS (liquid crystals on silicon), laser display, LED (light-emitting diodes), SED (surface-conduction electron-emitter display), FED (filed emission display), OLED, QLED and Micro LED. From display technology lifespan point of view, Micro LED and QLED may be considered as in the introduction phase, OLED is in the growth phase, LCD for both computer and TV is in the maturity phase, but LCD for cellphone is in the decline phase, PDP and CRT are in the elimination phase. Now, LCD products are still dominating the display market while OLED is penetrating the market. As just mentioned by Dr Huang, OLED indeed has some advantages over LCD.

Huang: Despite the apparent technological advantages of OLED over LCD, it is not straightforward for OLED to replace LCD. For example, although both OLED and LCD use the TFT backplane, the OLED’s TFT is much more difficult to be made than that of the voltage-driven LCD because OLED is current-driven. Generally speaking, problems for mass production of display technology can be divided into three categories, namely scientific problems, engineering problems and production problems. The ways and cycles to solve these three kinds of problems are different.

At present, LCD has been relatively mature, while OLED is still in the early stage of industrial explosion. For OLED, there are still many urgent problems to be solved, especially production problems that need to be solved step by step in the process of mass production line. In addition, the capital threshold for both LCD and OLED are very high. Compared with the early development of LCD many years ago, the advancing pace of OLED has been quicker.While in the short term, OLED can hardly compete with LCD in large size screen, how about that people may change their use habit to give up large screen?

Liao: I want to supplement some data. According to the consulting firm HIS Markit, in 2018, the global market value for OLED products will be US$38.5 billion. But in 2020, it will reach US$67 billion, with an average compound annual growth rate of 46%. Another prediction estimates that OLED accounts for 33% of the display market sales, with the remaining 67% by LCD in 2018. But OLED’s market share could reach to 54% in 2020.

Huang: While different sources may have different prediction, the advantage of OLED over LCD in small and medium-sized display screen is clear. In small-sized screen, such as smart watch and smart phone, the penetration rate of OLED is roughly 20% to 30%, which represents certain competitiveness. For large size screen, such as TV, the advancement of OLED [against LCD] may need more time.

Xu: LCD was first proposed in 1968. During its development process, the technology has gradually overcome its own shortcomings and defeated other technologies. What are its remaining flaws? It is widely recognized that LCD is very hard to be made flexible. In addition, LCD does not emit light, so a back light is needed. The trend for display technologies is of course towards lighter and thinner (screen).

But currently, LCD is very mature and economic. It far surpasses OLED, and its picture quality and display contrast do not lag behind. Currently, LCD technology"s main target is head-mounted display (HMD), which means we must work on display resolution. In addition, OLED currently is only appropriate for medium and small-sized screens, but large screen has to rely on LCD. This is why the industry remains investing in the 10.5th generation production line (of LCD).

Xu: While deeply impacted by OLED’s super thin and flexible display, we also need to analyse the insufficiency of OLED. With lighting material being organic, its display life might be shorter. LCD can easily be used for 100 000 hours. The other defense effort by LCD is to develop flexible screen to counterattack the flexible display of OLED. But it is true that big worries exist in LCD industry.

LCD industry can also try other (counterattacking) strategies. We are advantageous in large-sized screen, but how about six or seven years later? While in the short term, OLED can hardly compete with LCD in large size screen, how about that people may change their use habit to give up large screen? People may not watch TV and only takes portable screens.

Some experts working at a market survey institute CCID (China Center for Information Industry Development) predicted that in five to six years, OLED will be very influential in small and medium-sized screen. Similarly, a top executive of BOE Technology said that after five to six years, OLED will counterweigh or even surpass LCD in smaller sizes, but to catch up with LCD, it may need 10 to 15 years.

Xu: Besides LCD, Micro LED (Micro Light-Emitting Diode Display) has evolved for many years, though people"s real attention to the display option was not aroused until May 2014 when Apple acquired US-based Micro LED developer LuxVue Technology. It is expected that Micro LED will be used on wearable digital devices to improve battery"s life and screen brightness.

Micro LED, also called mLED or μLED, is a new display technology. Using a so-called mass transfer technology, Micro LED displays consist of arrays of microscopic LEDs forming the individual pixel elements. It can offer better contrast, response times, very high resolution and energy efficiency. Compared with OLED, it has higher lightening efficiency and longer life span, but its flexible display is inferior to OLED. Compared with LCD, Micro LED has better contrast, response times and energy efficiency. It is widely considered appropriate for wearables, AR/VR, auto display and mini-projector.

However, Micro LED still has some technological bottlenecks in epitaxy, mass transfer, driving circuit, full colorization, and monitoring and repairing. It also has a very high manufacturing cost. In short term, it cannot compete traditional LCD. But as a new generation of display technology after LCD and OLED, Micro LED has received wide attentions and it should enjoy fast commercialization in the coming three to five years.

Peng: It comes to quantum dot. First, QLED TV on market today is a misleading concept. Quantum dots are a class of semiconductor nanocrystals, whose emission wavelength can be continuously tuned because of the so-called quantum confinement effect. Because they are inorganic crystals, quantum dots in display devices are very stable. Also, due to their single crystalline nature, emission color of quantum dots can be extremely pure, which dictates the color quality of display devices.

Interestingly, quantum dots as light-emitting materials are related to both OLED and LCD. The so-called QLED TVs on market are actually quantum-dot enhanced LCD TVs, which use quantum dots to replace the green and red phosphors in LCD’s backlight unit. By doing so, LCD displays greatly improve their color purity, picture quality and potentially energy consumption. The working mechanisms of quantum dots in these enhanced LCD displays is their photoluminescence.

For its relationship with OLED, quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) can in certain sense be considered as electroluminescence devices by replacing the organic light-emitting materials in OLED. Though QLED and OLED have nearly identical structure, they also have noticeable differences. Similar to LCD with quantum-dot backlighting unit, color gamut of QLED is much wider than that of OLED and it is more stable than OLED.

Another big difference between OLED and QLED is their production technology. OLED relies on a high-precision technique called vacuum evaporation with high-resolution mask. QLED cannot be produced in this way because quantum dots as inorganic nanocrystals are very difficult to be vaporized. If QLED is commercially produced, it has to be printed and processed with solution-based technology. You can consider this as a weakness, since the printing electronics at present is far less precision than the vacuum-based technology. However, solution-based processing can also be considered as an advantage, because if the production problem is overcome, it costs much less than the vacuum-based technology applied for OLED. Without considering TFT, investment into an OLED production line often costs tens of billions of yuan but investment for QLED could be just 90–95% less.

Given the relatively low resolution of printing technology, QLED shall be difficult to reach a resolution greater than 300 PPI (pixels per inch) within a few years. Thus, QLED might not be applied for small-sized displays at present and its potential will be medium to large-sized displays.

Zhao: Quantum dots are inorganic nanocrystal, which means that they must be passivated with organic ligands for stability and function. How to solve this problem? Second, can commercial production of quantum dots reach an industrial scale?

Peng: Good questions. Ligand chemistry of quantum dots has developed quickly in the past two to three years. Colloidal stability of inorganic nanocrystals should be said of being solved. We reported in 2016 that one gram of quantum dots can be stably dispersed in one milliliter of organic solution, which is certainly sufficient for printing technology. For the second question, several companies have been able to mass produce quantum dots. At present, all these production volume is built for fabrication of the backlighting units for LCD. It is believed that all high-end TVs from Samsung in 2017 are all LCD TVs with quantum-dot backlighting units. In addition, Nanosys in the United States is also producing quantum dots for LCD TVs. NajingTech at Hangzhou, China demonstrate production capacity to support the Chinese TV makers. To my knowledge, NajingTech is establishing a production line for 10 million sets of color TVs with quantum-dot backlighting units annually.China"s current demands cannot be fully satisfied from the foreign companies. It is also necessary to fulfill the demands of domestic market. That is why China must develop its OLED production capability.

Huang: Based on my understanding of Samsung, the leading Korean player in OLED market, we cannot say it had foresight in the very beginning. Samsung began to invest in AMOLED (active-matrix organic light-emitting diode, a major type of OLED used in the display industry) in about 2003, and did not realize mass production until 2007. Its OLED production reached profitability in 2010. Since then, Samsung gradually secured a market monopoly status.

So, originally, OLED was only one of Samsung"s several alternative technology pathways. But step by step, it achieved an advantageous status in the market and so tended to maintain it by expanding its production capacity.

Also, Samsung has spent considerable time and efforts on the development of the product chain. Twenty or thirty years ago, Japan owned the most complete product chain for display products. But since Samsung entered the field in that time, it has spent huge energies to cultivate upstream and downstream Korean firms. Now the Republic of Korea (ROK) manufacturers began to occupy a large share in the market.

Liao: South Korean manufacturers including Samsung and LG Electronics have controlled 90% of global supplies of medium and small-sized OLED panels. Since Apple began to buy OLED panels from Samsung for its cellphone products, there were no more enough panels shipping to China. Therefore, China"s current demands cannot be fully satisfied from the foreign companies. On the other hand, because China has a huge market for cellphones, it would be necessary to fulfill the demands through domestic efforts. That is why China must develop its OLED production capability.

Huang: The importance of China"s LCD manufacturing is now globally high. Compared with the early stage of LCD development, China"s status in OLED has been dramatically improved. When developing LCD, China has adopted the pattern of introduction-absorption-renovation. Now for OLED, we have a much higher percentage of independent innovation.

Then it is the scale of human resources. One big factory will create several thousand jobs, and it will mobilize a whole production chain, involving thousands of workers. The requirement of supplying these engineers and skilled workers can be fulfilled in China.

Although we cannot say that our advantages triumph over ROK, where Samsung and LG have been dominating the field for many years, we have achieved many significant progresses in developing the material and parts of OLED. We also have high level of innovation in process technology and designs. We already have several major manufacturers, such as Visionox, BOE, EDO and Tianma, which have owned significant technological reserves.

Peng: As mentioned above, there are two ways to apply quantum dots for display, namely photoluminescence in backlightingFor QLED, the three stages of technological development [from science issue to engineering and finally to mass production] have been mingled together at the same time. If one wants to win the competition, it is necessary to invest on all three dimensions.

units for LCD and electroluminescence in QLED. For the photoluminescence applications, the key is quantum-dot materials. China has noticeable advantages in quantum-dot materials.

After I returned to China, NajingTech (co-founded by Peng) purchased all key patents invented by me in the United States under the permission of US government. These patents cover the basic synthesis and processing technologies of quantum dots. NajingTech has already established capability for large-scale production of quantum dots. Comparatively, Korea—represented by Samsung—is the current leading company in all aspects of display industry, which offers great advantages in commercialization of quantum-dot displays. In late 2016, Samsung acquired QD Vision (a leading quantum-dot technology developer based in the United States). In addition, Samsung has invested heavily in purchasing quantum-dot-related patents and in developing the technology.

China is internationally leading in electroluminescence at present. In fact, it was the 2014 Nature publication by a group of scientists from Zhejiang University that proved QLED can reach the stringent requirements for display applications. However, who will become the final winner of the international competition on electroluminescence remains unclear. China"s investment in quantum-dot technology lags far behind US and ROK. Basically, the quantum-dot research has been centered in US for most of its history, and South Korean players have invested heavily along this direction as well.

For electroluminescence, it is very likely to co-exist with OLED for a long period of time. This is so because, in small screen, QLED’s resolution is limited by printing technology.

Peng: If electroluminescence can be successfully achieved with printing, it will be much cheaper, with only about 1/10th cost of OLED. Manufacturers like NajingTech and BOE in China have demonstrated printing displays with quantum dots. At present, QLED does not compete with OLED directly, given its market in small-sized screen. A while ago, Dr. Huang mentioned three stages of technological development, from science issue to engineering and finally to mass production. For QLED, the three stages have been mingled together at the same time. If one wants to win the competition, it is necessary to invest on all three dimensions.

Huang: When OLED was compared with LCD in the past, lots of advantages of OLED were highlighted, such as high color gamut, high contrast and high response speed and so on. But above advantages would be difficult to be the overwhelming superiority to make the consumers to choose replacement.

It seems to be possible that the flexible display will eventually lead a killer advantage. I think QLED will also face similar situation. What is its real advantage if it is compared with OLED or LCD? For QLED, it seems to have been difficult to find the advantage in small screen. Dr. Peng has suggested its advantage lies in medium-sized screen, but what is its uniqueness?

Peng: The two types of key advantages of QLED are discussed above. One, QLED is based on solution-based printing technology, which is low cost and high yield. Two, quantum-dot emitters vender QLED with a large color gamut, high picture quality and superior device lifetime. Medium-sized screen is easiest for the coming QLED technologies but QLED for large screen is probably a reasonable extension afterwards.

Huang: But customers may not accept only better wider color range if they need to pay more money for this. I would suggest QLED consider the changes in color standards, such as the newly released BT2020 (defining high-definition 4 K TV), and new unique applications which cannot be satisfied by other technologies. The future of QLED seems also relying on the maturity of printing technology.

Peng: New standard (BT2020) certainly helps QLED, given BT2020 meaning a broad color gamut. Among the technologies discussed today, quantum-dot displays in either form are the only ones that can satisfy BT2020 without any optical compensation. In addition, studies found that the picture quality of display is highly associated with color gamut. It is correct that the maturity of printing technology plays an important role in the development of QLED. The current printing technology is ready for medium-sized screen and should be able to be extended to large-sized screen without much trouble.

Xu: For QLED to become a dominant technology, it is still difficult. In its development process, OLED precedes it and there are other rivaling technologies following. While we know owning the foundational patents and core technologies of QLED can make you a good position, holding core technologies alone cannot ensure you to become a mainstream technology. The government"s investment in such key technologies after all is small as compared with industry and cannot decide QLED to become mainstream technology.

Peng: Domestic industry sector has begun to invest in these future technologies. For example, NajingTech has invested about 400 million yuan ($65 million) in QLED, primarily in electroluminescence. There are some leading domestic players having invested into the field. Yes, this is far from enough. For example, there are few domestic companies investing R&D of printing technologies. Our printing equipment is primarily made by the US, European and Japan players. I think this is also a chance for China (to develop the printing technologies).

Xu: Our industry wants to collaborate with universities and research institutes to develop kernel innovative technologies. Currently they heavily rely on imported equipment. A stronger industry-academics collaboration should help solve some of the problems.

Liao: Due to their lack of kernel technologies, Chinese OLED panel manufacturers heavily rely on investments to improve their market competitiveness. But this may cause the overheated investment in the OLED industry. In recent years, China has already imported quite a few new OLED production lines with the total cost of about 450 billion yuan (US$71.5 billion).Lots of advantages of OLED over LCD were highlighted, such as high color gamut, high contrast and high response speed and so on …. It seems to be possible that the flexible display will eventually lead a killer advantage.

The short of talent human resources perhaps is another issue to influence the fast expansion of the industry domestically. For an example, BOE alone demands more than 1000 new engineers last year. However, the domestic universities certainly cannot fulfill this requirement for specially trained OLED working forces currently. A major problem is the training is not implemented in accordance with industry demands but surrounding academic papers.

Huang: The talent training in ROK is very different. In Korea, many doctoral students are doing almost the same thing in universities or research institutes as they do in large enterprises, which is very helpful for them to get started quickly after entering the company. On the other hand, many professors of universities or research institutes have working experience of large enterprises, which makes universities better understand the demand of industry.

Liao: However, Chinese researchers’ priority pursuit of papers is in disjunction from industry demand. Majority of people (at universities) who are working on organic optoelectronics are more interested in the fields of QLED, organic solar cells, perovskite solar cells and thin-film transistors because they are trendy fields and have more chances to publish research papers. On the other hand, many studies that are essential to solve industry"s problems, such as developing domestic versions of equipment, are not so essential for paper publication, so that faculty and students shed from them.

Xu: It is understandable. Students do not want to work on the applications too much because they need to publish papers to graduate. Universities also demand short-term research outcomes. A possible solution is to set up an industry-academics sharing platform for professionals and resources from the two sides to move to each other. Academics should develop truly original basic research. Industry wants to collaborate with professors owning such original innovative research.

Zhao: Today there are really good observations, discussions and suggestions. The industry-academics-research collaboration is crucial to the future of China"s display technologies. We all should work hard on this.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. for commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

Here at Phoenix Display, we talk about LCD displays every day. With LCDs being such a big part of our daily lives, we thought it would be useful to explore the history of this important technology and where we see it going in the future.

In 1973, Sharp Corporation made use of LCD displays in calculators. Shortly after, the company followed BBC’s lead and mass produced TN LCD displays for watches in 1975.

1980s. After wristwatches came televisions (TVs), with the first color LCD TVs being developed as handheld TVs in Japan. In 1982, Seiko Epson released the first LCD TV, the Epson TV Watch, a wristwatch equipped with a small active-matrix LCD TV.

1990s. The 90s gave way to technology acceleration in the LCD space. Through multiple breakthroughs, researchers and inventors were able to improve contrast and viewing angles, as well as bring costs down.

2000s. After 30+ years of competition, LCD technology surpassed longstanding CRTs. Namely, in 2007, LCD TVs could claim better image quality than CRT-based TVs. Subsequently, in the fourth quarter of 2007,

Next, let’s take a brief look at how the technology works. Essentially, the LCD glass is just a light valve whose sole purpose is to either block light or allow light to go through it. We go into greater details in our post,

It accomplishes this simple task through the liquid crystal fluid, which is a fluid that’s rotated in a steady natural state between two pieces of glass. This rotation, when combined with front and rear polarizers, allows the light to be either transmitted through the glass or blocked. This light blocking state is changed when a voltage is applied to LC fluid which stops the light’s rotation.

Finally, let’s look at the LCD display landscape in the near future. There’s three big areas that are being explored with LCD displays: Flexible displays, 3D displays, and reel-to-reel manufacturing.

Flexible Displays. Even now, you’re probably hearing buzz about flexible displays, which are bendable displays that are virtually shatterproof and unbreakable.

Development has been moving forward with these displays in both military and industry. Funding by the military makes sense given that flexible displays won’t break like traditional displays, providing for numerous field applications that require a more durable display.

In addition, there are plenty of industrial applications that would benefit from flexible displays, such as products that could use displays that wrap around objects.

3D Displays. With 3D being such a popular technology, it’s no surprise there’s activity in this space. These displays are capable of conveying depth perception to viewers, which provides for a more realistic user experience.

Specifically, 3D displays with passive glasses (or no glasses) remove the requirement for syncing up with more expensive, active, shutter-based glasses. Naturally, this will lead to cost savings.

In contrast, reel-to-reel manufacturing enables the continuous building of glass panels. This will represent a dramatic reduction in costs, which can be passed along to the customer and allow for more competitive pricing.

According to industry insiders, Samsung has taken the decision to close down its last LCD production lines, coming into effect six months sooner than expected. According to industry insiders talking to the Korea Times, the June closure has been hastened due to the precipitous fall of LCD pricing driven by competitors based in China and Taiwan. As the news comes via unnamed "industry insiders", take the news with a healthy amount of salt until an official statement is made.

The apparent sudden change of heart by Samsung needs little supplementary explanation if you cast your eyes over the chart above. The chart, courtesy of Display Supply Chain Consultants (DSCC), shows the TV panel price index plotted against year on year change from January 2015 to today. The steepness of the decline seen from late 2021 is enough to give an analyst vertigo. It may show some signs of bottoming out now, but please note that we are in negative territory, approaching -60% pricing YoY.

Samsung Display is an important player in the business of making flat panel displays. The South Korea-based firm makes some of the best screens for devices spanning tiny wearables to full wall-sized modular TVs. Some of its displays go into PC monitors that are own branded, and others will be used by partners like Asus and Alienware.

It is expected that employees who were part of the LCD business operations will be reallocated to Samsung Display"s quantum dot (QD) and organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen production. Hopefully the removal of the LCD lines, and rebalancing into QD and OLED, will bring economies of scale to Samsung"s operations and help make these vibrant modern screen technologies more accessible.

Long-time display manufacturer Samsung Display will likely stop the production of LCD displays this year. A recent report says several factors have influenced the South Korean firm’s decision.

Samsung has been a reputed LCD display manufacturer since 1991. It manufactures panels for its own devices and also works as a supplier for several other Big Tech firms, such as Apple. Its displays are used in virtually all products, ranging from foldable smartphones to televisions and tablets.

Despite the company’s successful business, a recent report from The Korea Times suggests Apple is exiting the LCD production business for good. One of the biggest reasons cited for the decision is the increased competition from Chinese and Taiwanese display manufacturers in the recent past.

Samsung wanted to shut its LCD production late in 2020 and its move was on the cards for a while now. Samsung probably kept its LCD manufacturing facilities operational during the pandemic due to the sudden and unprecedented spike in demand. However, LCD technology has been eclipsed by OLED and QD-OLED technologies on most mainstream devices in the last few years. This is another reason why Samsung will probably shutter the business later this year.

Moreover, research firm Display Supply Chain Consultants (DSCC) believes the average price index of LCD panels measured as 100 in January 2014 will drop down to just 36.6 in September 2022. The figure is indicative of the demand for LCD panels and it plummeted to a record low of 41.5 in April this year. The April figure is a whopping 58 percent lower than the record-high index value of 87 in June 2021 when the pandemic was raging. This reduction in demand and price could also be detrimental to the company’s plans to soldier on producing LCDs.

The report says that in the future, Samsung will remain focused on manufacturing OLED panels and more advanced quantum dot OLED displays. LCD division staffers will likely be transferred to the QD-OLED division. Meanwhile, Samsung Display did not respond to the Korea Times’ request for comment.

The stock market isn"t the only thing in a free fall. Flat-panel monitor prices are plummeting yet again, bringing the largest displays within reach of many consumers" budgets.

Liquid-crystal displays (LCDs), also known as flat-panel monitors, started their price plunge before the winter holidays, making 15-inch flat panels one the of the hottest-selling peripherals of the season.

By summer, Haruki predicts, bargain-basement 15-inch displays will fall below $350, and "the name-brand guys will definitely plummet into the $400 range." He predicted that 17-inch and 18-inch flat-panel displays could dip as low as $700.

Once again, swelling inventories are to blame for the fire sales, which benefit consumers but hurt manufacturers. Analysts have traced last year"s price plunge to an increase in manufacturing capacity. A shortage of LCD glass, partly driven by growing demand for notebooks and handheld devices in the late 1990s, prompted manufacturers to invest in glass plants in Taiwan and Korea in 1998 and 1999. Those factories turned a shortage into a glut in late 2000.

But the slowing economy and weak PC sales have exacerbated a serious oversupply, leading some LCD monitor makers to cut their losses by slashing prices.

"If you have a lot of inventory at the old price, a lot of manufacturers will just dump it out on the market at whatever price they can get for it," he said.

Because of ongoing stock pileups, some manufacturers are tightening inventories and offering dealers incentives to move product more quickly. Some may also begin selling some products directly, cutting dealers out of the equation, said distribution sources.

Market researcher Stanford Resources predicts that 2001 will witness LCD monitors" first hard push into the mainstream. With prices falling rapidly, sales are surging. This year, manufacturers are expected to ship 12.2 million flat-panel monitors, worth $6.6 billion and bringing the segment to 9.4 percent of the worldwide monitor market.

NEC-Mitsubishi Electronics Display ranked No. 1 in LCD monitor production last year, shipping 1.1 million units, or nearly 9 percent of the worldwide output.

Despite gains, flat-panel displays are expected to reach only a 39 percent worldwide monitor market share by 2007, in part because of the price gulf with cathode-ray tube (CRT) models.

Manufacturers and analysts say that despite rapidly falling prices, LCD displays simply still cost too much to overtake CRT models. The breakthrough point is expected to be about two times the cost of a comparable CRT display. Many 17-inch CRT displays, which offer viewing space comparable to 15-inch LCD models, sell for below $200. That works out to be $300 less than the cheapest flat-panel displays.

"If you"re just trying to justify it on sex appeal alone, it"s still a little bit expensive," Berkwits said. Despite the price difference between LCDs and CRTs, there are still good reasons to consider flat-panel monitors. "Total cost of ownership, how long they"ll last, and how much easier they are on the eyes are important factors," he said.

Brett Faulk, Compaq Computer"s (cpq) director of retail desktop product marketing, agreed that two times the price is the magic number, but said that is a long way off. And more important, he emphasized, is that recent technological advances for CRTs, such as flat-screen designs, are breathing new life into sales.

"The most eye-opening new development is flat-screen monitors," he said. "You"re really going to see those take off. We"re having great success with them."

Flat-screen monitors use a flat tube, instead of the round tube in typical CRT displays. The approach reduces the size of the display, but nowhere near that of svelte LCD monitors.

Until late last year, LCD monitors were beyond the reach of most consumers, particularly given the even lower prices of CRT monitors. But LCD prices have steadily declined since the monitors first reached the mass market in 1997.

Compaq was one of the first PC makers offering a branded LCD display. In June 1997, the company introduced its first commercial flat-panel display, the 15.1-inch TFT500, for $3,799. Eleven months later, Compaq had reduced the price to $1,599. Now the Houston-based company sells consumer and commercial LCDs for as low as $699.

Until recently, prices of larger displays remained fairly hefty. When Compaq introduced its 18.1-inch TFT8020 monitor about a year ago, the flat-panel display sold for $3,399. Although that monitor still sells for $2,499, Compaq offers a streamlined 17-inch version, the TFT7010, for $1,000 less.

Other PC makers have been even more aggressive in LCD display pricing. Gateway, for example, cut the price of its 18.1-inch LCD monitor by $500 in mid-February to around $1,400.

Dell is one of the cheaper vendors. A check of online retailers shows that most manufacturers" 17-inch LCDs still sell in the $1,200 range, while many 15-inch panels go for $726 to $750.

Online retailer PC Mall sells Acer"s 18.1-inch LCD for $999 and Samsung"s SyncMaster 770TFT for $999 new or $899 refurbished. Rival PC Connection offers comparable prices, with the Princeton Graphics LCD17 selling for $929.

Haruki said Costco carries the Princeton model for $899, while the name-brand 18.1-inch Acer and IBM T85A can be found elsewhere for as little as $999. Second-tier manufacturers such as Xenon will likely be priced lowest, while Samsung, LG Electronics and Viewsonic typically run $100 to $200 higher on both 15-inch and 17-inch LCDs.

How low the prices will ultimately go is uncertain, but PC Connection spokesman Matt Cookson said the estimate of $700 17-inch flat panels by summer could be overly conservative.

In January 2010, Taiwanese AU Optronics Corporation (AUO) announced that it had acquired assets from Sony"s FET and FET Japan, including "patents, know-how, inventions, and relevant equipment related to FED technology and materials".Nikkei reported that AUO plans to start mass production of FED panels in the fourth quarter of 2011, however AUO commented that the technology is still in the research stage and there are no plans to begin mass production at this moment.

IMOD displays are now available in the commercial marketplace. QMT"s displays, using IMOD technology, are found in the Acoustic Research ARWH1 Stereo Bluetooth headset device, the Showcare Monitoring system (Korea), the Hisense C108,Freestyle Audio and Skullcandy. In the mobile phone marketplace, Taiwanese manufacturers Inventec and Cal-Comp have announced phones with Mirasol displays, and LG claims to be developing "one or more" handsets using Mirasol technology. These products all have only 2-color (black plus one other) "bi-chromic" displays. UniPixel"s TMOS and Pixtronix"s DMS display technologies utilize vertically and horizontally moving MEMS structures to modulate a backlight, respectively.

The technology is still in its nascent stages, and the project is unusual for Microsoft, which is not in the display business. There is a possibility that Microsoft will collaborate with a display manufacturer, but commercial production will not begin until at least 2013.

Although MicroLED displays have not been mass-produced for home use, after pioneering the technology in 2012,China Star Optoelectronics Technology (CSoT) demonstrated a 3.3" transparent microLED display with around 45% transparency, also co-developed with PlayNitride.Plessey Semiconductors Ltd demonstrated a GaN-on-Silicon wafer to CMOS backplane wafer bonded native Blue monochrome 0.7" active-matrix microLED display with an 8-micron pixel pitch.Ostendo Technologies, Inc. demonstrated a vertically integrated LED that can emit light from red to blue, including white – from a monolithic InGaN-based LED device.

Many expect that quantum dot display technology can compete or even replace liquid crystal displays (LCDs) in near future, including the desktop and notebook computer spaces and televisions. These initial applications alone represent more than a $8-billion addressable market by 2023 for quantum dot-based components. Other than display applications, several companies are manufacturing QD-LED light bulbs; these promise greater energy efficiency and longer lifetime.

Besides the incumbents, LCD and OLED, the display industry has recently been peppered with new, and sometimes confusing, terms such as quantum dot (QD), mini- and microLED. Some of these are entirely new technologies and some of these are enhancements to existing technologies.

Take, miniLED, which provides a way to improve the picture quality of traditional backlit LCD and better compete with the impressive contrast ratio of OLED displays. The way it works is an array of extremely small LEDs – usually less than 0.3mm in diameter – make up the display’s backlight. This enables much more localized dimming zones, which results in blacker blacks and brighter whites on screen. MiniLED backlights can be considered an enhancement to LCD and are quickly becoming the latest trend in premium applications.

There are several opportunities for precision glass in these types of displays. The thermal and dimensional stability of glass, as well as the highly engineered optical characteristics enable the efficient management of light as well as extreme narrow bezel. For example, our diffuser glass was recently extended to Samsung’s flagship zero bezel 8K QLED TVs with miniLED backlights. This is a third piece of Corning glass in an LCD TV, which is an exciting development for us.

But don’t confuse miniLED with microLED, because, just like LCD and OLED, these technologies are quite different. Like OLED, microLED is an emissive display. In this design, small-sized LEDs of red, green, and blue are used to create an image with high brightness, enhanced color gamut, and very deep blacks. By most definitions, for a display to qualify as microLED, it must use <50μm chip, be package-free, and mass transferred onto the substrate. It involves a complex production process, so we’ve been expecting the technology to enter in the niche premium segment. This is proving to be the case with early market launches in unique sizes and high price points for now as companies improve the overall manufacturing cost.

An interesting aspect of microLED technology is its ability to be pieced together like a mosaic to create very large-size displays. Think airport arrival/departure signs or advertisements in Times Square. In this format, glass plays an important role in enabling an essentially seamless viewing experience. Glass and glass processing can allow the electronics that drive the panel to be printed along the edges, enabling larger viewing experiences in the tiles. For more on this, see Corning’s research on wrap-around electrodes on glass presented at SID Display Week 2020. Corning’s proprietary fusion process creates glass that provides a very smooth and dimensionally stable surface on which to transfer these microLEDs, which greatly improves the manufacturing efficiency.

LCD TV Panel Market is 2022 Research Report on Global professional and comprehensive report on the LCD TV Panel Market. The report monitors the key trends and market drivers in the current scenario and offers on the ground insights. Top Key Players are – Samsung Display, LG Display, Innolux Crop., AUO, CSOT, BOE, Sharp, Panasonic, CEC-Panda.

Global “LCD TV Panel Market” (2022-2028) the report additionally centers around worldwide significant makers of the LCD TV Panel market with important data, such as, company profiles, segmentation information, challenges and limitations, driving factors, value, cost, income and contact data. Upstream primitive materials and hardware, coupled with downstream request examination is likewise completed. The Global LCD TV Panel market improvement patterns and marketing channels are breaking down. In conclusion, the attainability of new speculation ventures is surveyed and in general, the research ends advertised.

Global LCD TV Panel Market Report 2022 is spread across 117 pages and provides exclusive vital statistics, data, information, trends and competitive landscape details in this niche sector.

The information for each competitor includes – Company Profile, Main Business Information, SWOT Analysis, Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin, Market Share.

LCD displays utilize two sheets of polarizing material with a liquid crystal solution between them. An electric current passed through the liquid causes the crystals to align so that light cannot pass through them. Each crystal, therefore, is like a shutter, either allowing light to pass through or blocking the light. LCD panel is the key components of LCD display. And the price trends of LCD panel directly affect the price of liquid crystal displays. LCD panel consists of several components: Glass substrate, drive electronics, polarizers, color filters etc. Only LCD panel applied for TV will be counted in this report.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the global LCD TV Panel market size is estimated to be worth USD 53490 million in 2021 and is forecast to a readjusted size of USD 53490 million by 2028 with a CAGR of 2.2% during the review period. Fully considering the economic change by this health crisis, by Size accounting for (%) of the LCD TV Panel global market in 2021, is projected to value USD million by 2028, growing at a revised (%) CAGR in the post-COVID-19 period. While by Size segment is altered to an (%) CAGR throughout this forecast period.

Global LCD TV Panel key players include Samsung Display, LG Display, Innolux Crop, AUO, CSOT, etc. Global top five manufacturers hold a share over 80%.

The global LCD TV Panel market is segmented by company, region (country), by Size and by Application. Players, stakeholders, and other participants in the global LCD TV Panel market will be able to gain the upper hand as they use the report as a powerful resource. The segmental analysis focuses on sales, revenue and forecast by region (country), by Size and by Application for the period 2017-2028.

Global LCD TV Panel market analysis and market size information is provided by regions (countries). Segment by Application, the LCD TV Panel market is segmented into United States, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia, India and Rest of World. The report includes region-wise LCD TV Panel market forecast period from history 2017-2028. It also includes market size and forecast by players, by Type, and by Application segment in terms of sales and revenue for the period 2017-2028.

The report introduced the LCD TV Panel basics: definitions, classifications, applications and market overview; product specifications; manufacturing processes; cost structures, raw materials and so on. Then it analyzed the world’s main region market conditions, including the product price, profit, capacity, production, supply, demand and market growth rate and forecast etc. In the end, the report introduced new project SWOT analysis, investment feasibility analysis, and investment return analysis.

LCD TV Panel market size competitive landscape provides details and data information by players. The report offers comprehensive analysis and accurate statistics on revenue by the player for the period 2017-2021. It also offers detailed analysis supported by reliable statistics on revenue (global and regional level) by players for the period 2017-2021. Details included are company description, major business, company total revenue and the sales, revenue generated in LCD TV Panel business, the date to enter into the LCD TV Panel market, LCD TV Panel product introduction, recent developments, etc.

The report offers detailed coverage of LCD TV Panel industry and main market trends with impact of coronavirus. The market research includes historical and forecast market data, demand, application details, price trends, and company shares of the leading LCD TV Panel by geography. The report splits the market size, by volume and value, on the basis of application type and geography. Report covers the present status and the future prospects of the global LCD TV Panel market for 2017-2028.

Global LCD TV Panel Market report forecast to 2028 is a professional and comprehensive research report on the world’s major regional market conditions, focusing on the main regions (North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific) and the main countries (United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea and China).

The recent COVID-19 outbreak first began in Wuhan (China) in December 2019, and since then, it has spread around the globe at a fast pace. China, Italy, Iran, Spain, the Republic of Korea, France, Germany, and the US are among the worst-affected countries in terms of positive cases and reported deaths, as of March 2020. The COVID-19 outbreak has affected economies and industries in various countries due to lockdowns, travel bans, and business shutdowns. The global food and beverage industry is one of the major industries facing serious disruptions such as supply chain breaks, technology events cancellations, and office shutdowns as a result of this outbreak. China is the global manufacturing hub, with the presence of and the largest raw material suppliers. The overall market breaks down due to COVID-19 is also affecting the growth of thebaconmarket due to shutting down of factories, obstacle in supply chain, and downturn in world economy.

To Know How COVID-19 Pandemic Will Impact LCD TV Panel Market/Industry- Request a sample copy of the report-https://www.researchreportsworld.com/enquiry/request-covid19/21019731

The report offers exhaustive assessment of different region-wise and country-wise LCD TV Panel market such as U.S., Canada, Germany, France, U.K., Italy, Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, Taiwan, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam, Mexico, Brazil, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, etc. Key regions covered in the report are North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East and Africa.

For the period 2017-2028, the report provides country-wise revenue and volume sales analysis and region-wise revenue and volume analysis of the global LCD TV Panel market. For the period 2017-2021, it provides sales (consumption) analysis and forecast of different regional markets by Application as well as by Type in terms of volume.

What are the market opportunities and threats faced by the vendors in the global LCD TV Panel mark