Slack LCD TV Market Means Cheaper Phones And Monitors

A user writes "CNN and Business2 are running a story about the apparent failure of LCD TVs to make a major market impact and what it means for you. Specifically for us geeks it means cheaper cellular phones and laptops due to an oversupply of LCD manufacturing. Does this mean I can finally afford that 21" LCD monitor I've always wanted?"

About time...

[jav1231]

$389 for a 15" LCD screen can hardly be justified when 19" CRT's are half that price. Glad to see this coming.

The Next Wave: Optical Interference Displays

[reporter]

$389 for a 15" LCD screen can hardly be justified when 19" CRT's are half that price.

You have captured the essence of the problem.

Further, when you look closely at an LCD television, you notice that the image quality is no better than the image produced by a CRT television. So, why would anyone the premium price for the LCD television?

People do want the convenience of an LCD, which uses much less space than a CRT. Yet, they also want improved picture quality in order to justify the price.

The answer is just around the corner: optical interference displays (OIDs) [economist.com]. They produce far sharper and brighter images than an LCD. The OID also consumes less power than an LCD.

Re:The Next Wave: Optical Interference Displays

[AaronGTurner]

The only real advantages of LCD TVs currently are:

• Being able to mount one on a wall (e.g. a bedroom) where you want to use a minimum of space.
• Reduced power consumption.

Negative points are:

• Viewing angles still limited
• Not necessarily as bright.

There are other thin TV techologies coming along, though, which may be better for TVs than LCD (but perhaps a bit too heavy for a monitor, compared to how useful LCDs are for monitors).

Re:About time...

[orasio]

That is not true.

$389 for a small, sleek, 15" flat, good at displaying text, reasonable power comsuming monitor, maybe digital capable.

half the price for a big, bulky (as in taking a lot of desk space) 18" (not 19", because black border takes at least an inch) spheric monitor (because trinitrons are not that cheap, and flat monitors are dim-or-expensive), fuzzy, power hungry monitor.

I believe many people believe it's a great deal. When it comes to 17 inchers, it's a non issue, if you can afford it.

I ca

You can't buy LCDs from newegg

[ivan256]

I love NewEgg, and I buy a ton of stuff from them. They're only slightly more expensive than the cheapest you can find, and they're super reliable. You can't buy LCDs from the though, and here's why:

Dead Pixels Policy: Replacement or Refund for 8 or more DEAD PIXELS ONLY!

I don't know about you, but even one dead pixel is unacceptable.

Re:You can't buy LCDs from newegg

[Erwos]

"I don't know about you, but even one dead pixel is unacceptable."

I used to think this, too, until I got a tablet with _one_ dead pixel. It's only 10 inches and 800x600, too, so "one dead pixel" is 1/800(600) of the display, rather than 1/(1600)(1200) of the screen you'd have with a large LCD. Yes, the screen is smaller, but you get the point.

I would NEVER have noticed it unless my parents had pointed it out. Frankly, one dead pixel isn't really that big a deal - maybe you've had experiences otherwise with "one dead pixel", though. If you haven't, though, I'd caution you from going a little too crazy on the score.

-Erwos

Re:You can't buy LCDs from newegg

[mrsev]

Ok, ehough speculation. The law is specific as to what contitutes a defective screen. The standard is ISO 13406-2. Toms hardware has a good review on the law. The link is:
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/2003 0319/ index.html

I suggest you go annd read it but if not...

In summary: There are 4 grades of LCD.....if they do not meet this standard then you have not bought an "official LCD display" and then it is defective , the official sales policy of the shop is not relevant. Just go and exchage. the rest is toms hardware quotes:

"Class 1, the highest, allows no defects at all. Class 4, the lowest, allows up to 262!"

If they do not specify, the monitor is Class 1 by default and you can have it changed at the smallest pixel defect.

The standard distinguishes four types of defective pixel.

* Type 1: number of always-lit pixels.
* Type 2: number of always-unlit pixels.
* Type 3: other defects, particularly on sub-pixels and the RGB cells making up pixels (lit or unlit). This means red, green and blue pixels lit the whole time. Experience shows that this is undoubtedly the most common defect.

For 15" LCD Panels
Native resolution is 1024 x 768 pixels, a total of 786,432 pixels.

Class 1 panels: this is the easiest - no pixel defects are allowed.

Class 2 panels are more complicated.

* Type 1: Lit pixels allowed = 2 x 786,432 / 1,000,000 = 1.57.
* Type 2: Unlit pixels allowed = 2 x 786,432 / 1,000,000 = 1.57.
* Type 3: Red, green or blue pixels allowed = 5 x 786,432 / 1,000,000 = 3.93.

If you refer to the standard, 2 always-lit pixels is >1.57. So this is over the top and the warranty comes into play. 15" ISO 13406-2-compliant panels may not allow more than: Type 1 + Type 2 + Type 3 = 5 defective pixels altogether, with a maximum of one lit, one unlit and three red, green or blue pixels.

17" Panels:

This is calculated the same way as for the 15".
Resolution = 1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels.

Class 1 panels: no pixel defects are allowed.

Class 2 panels:

* Type 1: Unlit pixels allowed = 2 x 1,310,720 / 1,000,000 = 2.62.
* Type 2: Lit pixels = 2 x 1,310,720 / 1,000,000 = 2.62.
* Type 3: Red, green or blue pixels allowed = 5 x 1,310,720 / 1,000,000 = 6.55.

If you refer to the standard, two always-lit pixels is 3>2.62. So, this is over the limit and the warranty comes into play.

17" ISO 13406-2-compliant panels may not allow more than: Type 1 + Type 2 + Type 3 = 10 defective pixels altogether, with a maximum of two lit, two unlit and six red, green or blue pixels.

Re:You can't buy LCDs from newegg

[Anonymous Coward]

That is why you zap the display with some ESD before you ship it back.

ZAP! lots of dead pixels!

Re:About time...

[Cereal Box]

That's still more than what a 19" CRT costs. And you STILL can't get an LCD that does 1600x1200 unless you buy a monitor that's 20" or larger or a laptop.

Speaking of which, if my laptop, which is at least three years old, can do 1400x1050 on a 15" LCD, why can't I buy a 17" LCD monitor that can do that resolution or higher? Why is the cheapest LCD capable of anything higher than 1280x1024 nearly $1000?

Re:About time...

[Lehk228]

probably because of randomly distributed bad pixels, if customers were willing to accept LCD monitors with two or three bad pixels LCD's would be a hell of a lot cheaper, but when a batch produces so much wasted area that is too small for a normal display costs of large, high-res units will be much more expensive than somewhat smaller, low-res units. the difference is that CRT technology, while fundamentally more complex overall, is less difficult to manufacture in moderately large sizes without picture flaws.

Re:About time...

[Tim C]

I can't speak for the US market, but here in the UK retailers make it plain that dead pixels on LCDs is normal, and that most manufacturers will only accept a return if there are more than some threshold number that are bad. Admittedly, this number is reasonably low, but I've never seen it quoted as being zero.

I have an LCD monitor at work - 21", does 1600x1200 native. It has one dead pixel (stuck red) roughly in the lower right-hand corner of the upper-left ninth of the screen (if you see what I mean). It's a little irritating when I notice it, but most of the time I don't.

My main concerns with LCDs, and the reason why I'm in the market for a new CRT rather than an LCD to replace my aging CRT, is performance for games, resolution, and price. As a programmer, I want as much screen space as possible, prefering to run at 1600x1200. As a gamer, I want the refresh rate up (no smearing once it hits 40 - 50 fps, please). As a poor guy with a car, mortgage, kid, etc, I want it affordable. Right now, that leaves me with no choice but a CRT. Still, I have a nice big desk, so that's not a problem.

No kidding!!

[itomato]

Where are the UVXGA++ panels?

WTF gives? A TV that does the same resolution (and image quality) as a laptop from 1996 that costs as much as a entire laptop in 2004?

Please - someone explain.

Re:Smoking and not sharing...

[strictfoo]

The problem is that I need the real estate provided by a 19in CRT running at 1600x1200. A 17in LCD at 1280x1024 just doesn't cut it.

A decent 20in LCD that gives you 1600x1200 is, what, $700-$800 at least.

So, a good/very good 19in CRT for $250-$300 or a decent 20in LCD for $700-$800 (yes, I understand the screen will actually be bigger, but they are both running at the same resolution and that's what really matters).

Until the prices come down, I won't be making the switch.

Re:Smoking and not sharing...

[attam]

I need the real estate provided by a 19in CRT running at 1600x1200. A 17in LCD at 1280x1024 just doesn't cut it

you are forgetting the first rule of lcd purchasing... why buy 1 when you can get 2 for twice the price!

Re:Smoking and not sharing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not set up dual monitors if space is what you want. You can get an nvidia gpu for $50 that lets you use dual monitors (even in linux) very easily, and you won't ever go back. It's great to be able to read data from one page while working on another instead of shuffling windows around all the time.

But now I want 3 monitors :(

Does the LCD account for a big chunk of the price?

[godIsaDJ]

Somehow I find it difficult to believe that the tiny LCDs that come with most mobile phones account for a big chunk of their price...

PDAs though must be another story.

Re:Does the LCD account for a big chunk of the pri

[Liselle]

What I've always been told about LCD tech (someone correct me if I am wrong) is that there is a reason why high-res LCD is so expensive: dead pixels. There are only so many that can be tolerated before the panel is useless, and they have to start over. The screens for phones are tiny, the chance of getting an unacceptable number of dead pixels (and increasing cost) is small.

Re:Does the LCD account for a big chunk of the pri

[Lehk228]

I'd like to add that when a small LCD is ruined by a group of bad pixels you have (assuming its a moderately large display, 128*64) just over 8000 good pixels wasted, not really all that many, but a 1280*1024 display, while still considered "damaged" with a few dead pixels you end up with over 1.3 million good pixels being "wasted"

Re:Does the LCD account for a big chunk of the pri

[Mateito]

There are only so many that can be tolerated before the panel is useless

And in my book, than number is 1.

A hate working on a monitor that has a little black dot in the middle of the screen. This is one advantage that CRTs still have over LCD. Maybe when resolutions get so his that a single missing pixel is effectively unnoticable, it won't bug me so much.

There was a survey a year or so ago (I don't know by whom and I don't feel like googling.. was up all night watching the 70s cop movies I picked up for

Re:Does the LCD account for a big chunk of the pri

[b0bby]

From the article is appears that they've gone from $26 to $18...

yes

[mirko]

Does this mean I can finally afford that 21" LCD monitor I've always wanted?

As a matter of fact, I am looking for the 20" (because there are no smaller LCD monitors which do 1600x1200) to cross the CHF 1000,- limit to acquire one.
In June, these were 1400,-
Now, they reached 1100,-

This might be next month.

Re:yes

[alatesystems]

Get this one [dell.com]. It's awesome and $720.

Chris

Re:yes

[hab136]

As a matter of fact, I am looking for the 20" (because there are no smaller LCD monitors which do 1600x1200) to cross the CHF 1000,- limit to acquire one.
In June, these were 1400,-
Now, they reached 1100,-

Wow, Switzerland is expensive. The 2001FP mentioned below is $719.20.. or about CHF 908,- and have been about that price (on periodic sale) for at least a year.

Re:yes

[Paulrothrock]

Where the heck do you people get the money to drop $1000 on a monitor? I work, make okay money, and don't have the money to buy lunch every day, let alone drop a grand on a monitor.

Of course, I just got a $7,000 loan for a friggin' wedding.

Re:yes

[maxwell demon]

Where the heck do you people get the money to drop $1000 on a monitor?

Well, you don't have to do it all at once. Take a ten dollar note, drop it on the monitor. Then pick it up and drop it again. After 100 times dropping the 10 dollar note, you've dropped $1000 on your monitor.

However, CRTs are much better suited for this, since they are not so easy to miss on dropping.

I'd recommend against dropping coins, because if they fall into the monitor, they might cause a short circuit. But then, if they can actu

Re:yes

[Paulrothrock]

I don't want to. I love her, and she's nice to me. Besides, I get more inheritance when I get married.

Re:yes

[MikeBabcock]

Nicely said ... ... PS, go back through Slashdot and read the article about how to secure one's posessions in college and check if the same guy told the dude to just ignore his computer and go screw every girl on campus instead.

Yup yup, its that AC dude.

Re:yes

[MikeBabcock]

I've talked to my friends who have big screen TVs and huge houses and then find out they're a third of a million in debt and feel much happier with my 27" TV from six years ago and my townhouse.

Re:yes

[Buran]

Sadly, yes, there's a "charge it" mentality in a lot of the US, but I feel glad I'm not one of those people.

I have a 20" JVC flat tube (not LCD) TV that does just what I need, a Tivo, a $90 DVD player, a homebuilt Athlon XP 2200+ computer, a $500 19" LCD monitor (patience pays off when you watch for good deals), a 4.5-year-old (and paid off, and lightly modded, thanks to local VW club) 2000 VW Golf that I love to death and that looks like it's just-off-the-lot new, a G4 Powerbook obtained through work, a s

Re:yes

[Suidae]

I am looking for the 20" (because there are no smaller LCD monitors which do 1600x1200)

Why is that? You see them on laptops all the time, but never as stand-alone. Is the laptop market eating them all up or what?

for us geeks?!

[carrett]

Specifically for us geeks it means cheaper cellular phones and laptops due to an oversupply of LCD manufacturing.

I think LCDs are the kind of things that attract non-geeks too. I mean, we've been trying to use eye-candy to lure people into using linux for ages (and by ages I mean...a couple of years). So I think a lot of people are going to start buying LCDs if they become cheap. I mean, I know plenty of geeks who would love to have a 21" LCD too. Maybe I just hang around all geeks and so I have no true perception of what "normal" people are like. In any event it's good that the prices are being lowered.

Not surprising

[Dekks]

Its really not suprising they haven't really taken off, who wants to pay $500 for a 15 inch LCD television/monitor when they can get a 40 inch widescreen flatscreen tube for the same price? To be honest I can't see much of a difference between Plasma, Projection and Tube televisions when I'm just watching regular broadcast cable anyway.

Re:Not surprising

[pete-classic]

I can tell. The CRT is brighter and has a wider viewing angle.

-Peter

Re:Not surprising

[ePhil_One]

I can tell. The CRT is brighter and has a wider viewing angle.

Its also heavier (important for the younger crowd thats likely to move two more times in the next 10 years), has an unweildy depth (about 3 feet versus 6" thus occupying more square footage, big for us in expensive urban areas), and consumes far more power, which generates far more heat (higher bills).

The problem I have is prices are falling rapidly and the tech keeps improving. (In 1 year the Dell 30" LCD TV I'm eyeing has fallen 30%, to abo

Re:Not surprising

[starbird]

Thats how I see it. Unless your living in an apartment the size of a jail cell, there doesn't seem to be much incentive to buying an overpriced small tv.

Plasma Rocks

[Silver Sloth]

I agree about LCD and Projection but I've just paid 1000 UKP for a 26" plasma and it's stunning. It reminds me of how I felt when I replaced my vinyl with CDs. The jump in clarity, specialy when watching DVDs, is exceptonal. The only problem, and I guess that I'm agreeing with your 'broadcast cable' comment, is that you become very aware of the broadcast quality.

They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[garcia]

They were stupid if they thought they were going to make money on them. Have you seen an LCD TV? They are very very small and they are very expensive. I have seen them side by side with standard TV sets and the newer plasma and other expensive alternatives and they just don't look good.

I myself was suckered into buying a low-end 27" TV from Apex. It's only needed as a secondary TV but the price was right. Why should I spend $1000 on a 15" LCD when I can spend $200 on a 27" with DVD built in?

Re:They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[jumpingfred]

I don't know where you are finding $1000 LCD TVs. A year ago I got a 17 inch LCD TV/monitor for $600.

Re:They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[Neil Watson]

It would be interesting to know what the power consumption costs are over the life of the CRT versus the LCD TV. As I understand it, LCD's use much less power.

Re:They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[aardvarkjoe]

I was just pricing this out this morning. My conclusion: Given my typical usage, a new 17" LCD (to replace my 17" CRT) would save me $10-$15 per year in electricity costs. (This is figuring about 5 hours of usage a day; probably a bit on the high side, when I remove sleeping, eating, and work time, though I know that many people are at their screens 24/7.) Certainly not enough to justify buying it based on energy costs alone.

Re:They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with this... I also did the calculations and the power savings do not really justify the higher costs for the LCD screens.

Right now I have two 19inch screens, they cost me about $133.144 per year in electricity. LCD screens would cost me about $43.574 per year. Saving me about $89 per year. Given that CRT screens are about $250-290, and LCDs are $760-790. It's not really worth it.

Darn!

Re:They underestimated the price/size/quality.

[Ralph Wiggam]

CRTs do use more juice than LCD screens. But your home electricity usage is dominated by your air conditioning. Turning your thermostat down two degrees will save more eletricity than than any LCD could in 100 years.

Do an experiment. Turn everything in your house off and go find the electricity meter. Turn on each thing in your house individually and check the speed of the dial in the meter for each one. An electric dryer sucks down juice, but it's only in use a fraction of the ammount of time your A/

Still waiting...

[aquadood]

I purchased my first 15" LCD monitor over 2 years ago, and I'm still shocked how the prices have not changed all that much from then. Any price drop to get me a new 19" LCD is more than welcome with me.

What does it mean?

[Anonymous Coward]

the apparent failure of LCD TVs to make a major market impact and what it means for you. Specifically for us geeks it means cheaper cellular phones and laptops due to an oversupply of LCD manufacturing.

Hmmm, oversupply of lcd manuf due to lack of interest in lcd tv's? Sounds like it means that cell phones with 15" lcd's will be on the market soon. Now you can really see how crappy your cell phone camera is.

What impact were they expecting?

[sxltrex]

At >$5,000 for a 40" LCD TV, exactly what market impact were they expecting? There are not too many folks out there with that kind of disposable income. I'd love to have a large, widescreen LCD TV, but I'm waiting for a good quality 42" model for $3,000. If another technology wins out because the LCD TVs can't find the right price/performance ratio, that's fine. It doesn't change the amount I have to spend on toys.

Re:What impact were they expecting?

[base_chakra]

For years now we've been hearing that increased production volumes and market competition would drive down prices (oh, like the compact disc market?). Needless to say that the price drops have been less than phenomenal.

As a funny aside, a recent episode of the hilarious Scottish TV comedy Still Game [tvtome.com] had Winston shopping for LCD televisions. After finding that they cost about £2000 more than the £80 he expected, he mail-orders one of those DIY projection TV kits, which summarily sets his livin

Re:What impact were they expecting?

[LetterJ]

Exactly. I find it strange that a general public who wasn't willing to pony up $2000 for 50" rear projection TV's which we've had a while, is expected to fall all over themselves to pay $5000 for 40" LCD Tv's. Or people who've gotten used to $300 27" CRT TV's are suddently supposed to be excited about paying $800 for a 19" LCD widescreen?

Repairing/Replacing LCD Screens

[goldspider]

When is this going to become a viable reality? I really hate knowing that I will have to replace my laptop (column of damaged pixels), because there is no justifiably-priced means to simply replace the screen.

Perhaps a market for aftermarket LCD screens could taqake advantage of the surplus.

Re:Repairing/Replacing LCD Screens

[mopslik]

no justifiably-priced means to simply replace the screen

If you're in no rush, scan eBay for "parts" laptops. Once in a while, you can find your model with a broken motherboard/case/hard-drive/etc. If all you're after is the LCD, it's a good place to try. Most laptop manufacturers have repair manuals buried somewhere on their sites.

Of course, having said that, the screen is usually the thing that's broken in 90% of eBay auctions...

Laptop prices affected?

[kbahey]

I am not in the market for a cell phone, nor an LCD monitor.

But I would be very interested if this lowered the prices for laptops.

However, laptop prices depend on many other things (being a business tool for managers and such, rather than a consumer one, other expensive components, the aura of commanding a premium on the price, ...etc.)

The day I upgrade...

[British]

...from my 17 inch CRT to an LCD is when it offers a higher resolution, at a low price. Right now all the LCD monitors I see offer nothing in terms of "upgrades" to resolution, etc. I can't justify spending $300 to get some room behind my monitor that was otherwise not there and to have to downgrade resolutions. Its not like I'll find some use for new space behind a new LCD monitor, and my computer desk wouldn't work with said LCD on a wall.

Re:The day I upgrade...

[Xugumad]

I think this is a good point. I love LCDs, but that's because I live in a small flat (if laptops were good at gaming, I wouldn't even have a full size PC, to save space).

[Insert rant about the UK housing market and, despite working full time as a developer, having to share a 2 bedroom flat to make ends meet]

I haven't replaced the TV yet, but that's more because I don't watch enough TV to make it worthwhile, than anything else.

Back to the topic at hand, if the space isn't important to you, there's very li

Re:The day I upgrade...

[Dusabre]

I wouldn't buy a LCD TV, the prices are absurd - even compared to LCD monitors. A LCD costs on average 2 times more than a monitor.

On the other hand, LCD monitor prices are not insane compared to CRT prices. A 15" LCD monitor has a screen comparable in size (from a user perspective) to a 17" CRT so that's the comparison that should be made as regards price. I went from 17" inch CRT to 15" LCD with no ill effect. A LCD monitor has no glare - very easy on the eyes. A LCD monitor has gorgeous crisp colours. A

Re:The day I upgrade...

[roach2002]

I just bought a Dell 1701 FP (17" LCD). I had a Samsung 955DF (19" CRT). I was planning on running a dual monitor setup, but I realized how horrible the CRT was next to the LCD and sold the CRT. The CRT lacked crispness and brightness. I didn't even want to just have my playlist on the second monitor. Granted, the monitor was 2 years old and I didn't have it on the highest resolution.

If you stare at a $500 monitor for 4 hours a day, 365 days a year, for 2 years, it costs $.17 an hour. The difference is a

That would be one hell of a belt clip.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't a phone with a 21" display be a bit cumbersome?

On the other hand...

"What's that in your pocket?"

"Twenty-one inches of pure happiness! Want to see it?"

it doesn't work that way..

[Suppafly]

Somehow I don't think it's as easy as turning unused tv lcd producing factories into monitor and cell phone producing factories, but I may be wrong.

Re:it doesn't work that way..

[drinkypoo]

The difference between an LCD TV and a LCD Monitor is the logic board stuck to the back of the panel, or even connected to it with a flexible circuit. Sometimes they handle NTSC video, for example; sometimes VGA or DVI-Analog; sometimes DVI-D. That and the buttons/display on the front panel (I'd hope that a LCD TV would use OSD, though) are the only real difference. In fact most LCD Monitors are designed such that they can have different boards fitted to them without case modification, so they can use one c

LCD prices

[osu-neko]

It seems to me this may be good for the short-term, but it's bad for the long term. Things become cheap (a stable cheap, not a short term cheap) because they're produced in massive quantities. If LCD TV's actually took off, you're see dramatically lower prices in LCD monitors over the long term. If LCD screens stay confined to the computer market, and don't become mainstream there, they'll remain relatively expensive over the long term. So this looks like bad news to me...

How bout cheap DIGITAL displays?

[caveat]

I've been looking at 17" LCDs quite a bit lately, but all the inexpensive ones only have analog in - sort of defeats the purpose. I'd really like a 17" Apple LCD to match my G4, but those are still going for ~500 on ebay. Anybody know of any sub-$400, 17" LCDs with digital inputs?

Re:How bout cheap DIGITAL displays?

[SLot]

You can get a NEC/Mitsubishi LCD 1760VM-BK-1 with analog and DVI interfaces for $466.

The Samsung Syncmaster 910T is $545 at NewEgg.

Re:How bout cheap DIGITAL displays?

[chefmonkey]

Have you looked at an LCD monitor hooked up to an analog output? I have a couple at home (1024 x 768), and can't tell the difference from an equivalent laptop screen. There's no bleeding over from one pixel to the next, and response time is up there with every other LCD screen I've ever seen.

Next time you find yourself in Fry's or an equivalent store, seek out the analog LCD screens, and try to find some quality difference between them and the digital screens. You'll probably be surprised.

And they will keep dropping

[auzy]

With the advent of new technologies like OLED screens, amongst other things, I'm surprised companies aren't eager to release them.

One reason I'd imagine there are so many LCD's overstocked is that LCD screens might have nice refresh rates, but the monitors which dont suffer excessive blurring which is bad for gamers, tend to be the ones which cost a few grand. And while LCD screens best benefit the development of large monitors, large LCD monitors cost so much barely anyone has one these days (I still know people using ancient 15" CRT monitors.. I'm one of them).

Maybe if they helped companies like Nvidia to work on algorithms which would help reduce the blurring effect by adjusting the brightness of a colour which only gets drawn for a milisecond to help reduce the blurring), or something better, it could give them a killer market.. Every gamer on the block would want one.

Personally, the dead pixel problems some of the Manufacturers have on their monitors is one thing that makes me highly cautious about the cheap LCD screens

Now don't get all excited

[DaoudaW]

This is _normal_. New technology is always relatively expensive and many manufacturers try to get in on the ground floor to capture market-share and enjoy the relatively large per unit gross profit. Then, whoops, we've made too many, there's a market glut, inventories are growing, gotta mov'em out so drop the price and oh, there _are_ a lot of consumers out there who'll buy them at the new improved price, so more get manufactured, economies of scale take the price even lower, and the cycle continues.

Happens every time....

Huge Margins

[vasqzr]

The margins on the larger LCD TV's are HUGE.

A friend of mine works at Sears, doing commission sales on home entertainment products. He'll make $300+ on the sale of 1 big LCD TV

Why would you want one?

[GreatDrok]

I'm a bit of a videophile (audiophile too but lets not get into that).

Currently, the best available picture quality for direct view is still the venerable CRT. LCD and Plasma screens need video scalers to map the input signal to the display and these are rarely any good, certainly not in the consumer level equipment. Also, LCDs have very poor black level so the picture often looks rather grey. Plasma screens often have poor colour characteristics and also suffer from short lifespans. If you are considering one though, make sure you buy the Video Essentials DVD and learn how to use it so you can test any prospective purchase.

For projection systems the situation is somewhat different, a CRT projector while often capable of staggering picture quality is much harder to set up than an LCD or DLP projector and vastly more expensive. LCDs are generally less good than a DLP projector. DLP has better contrast ratio but may suffer from rainbow fringing if you get a single chip example. Correct calibration will fix this. LCDs have been much harder to calibrate well compared with a DLP in my experience and often suffer from uneven colour: several examples I tested looked slightly green on one side of the screen and blue on the other. Yuck.

There are other technologies coming along (OLED for instance) that look likely to change the landscape dramatically. I certainly wouldn't plunk down any money on an LCD TV. A plasma screen would also not be on my list as the picture just isn't big enough for movies IMHO. A good DLP based front projector supplemented by a standard CRT for normal TV will be far cheaper, and likely better quality than a plasma screen of half the size. The video scaler (Faroudja DDI) in my little DLP projector is much better quality than any of those I have seen in LCD or plasma screens and the projector cost a fraction of the price of the 40" examples.

I would certainly recommend buying a 16:9 set though (I got my first one back in '92 and people thought I was mad) but look at direct view CRT or rear/front projection DLP for the best bang for the buck I think.

Re:Why would you want one?

[Alioth]

I certainly agree with you on CRTs. I won't be giving up my 21in. Sun (Trinitron tube) monitor any time soon - there's nothing even vaguely good-value-for-money which will do 1600x1200 and look good at all other resolutions as well. The only problem with the monitor is it's getting a little bit older and it's not quite as pin-sharp as it used to be (although once fully warmed up it's not bad, and DVDs look superb).

Quick question though: when I walk down the street, I see people with widescreen TVs in their

Re:Why would you want one?

[realmolo]

Regarding the "Fatvision"-

People watch it that way because they're idiots, basically. I actually had this discussion with a guy I know who bought a Gateway LCD TV (which is truly a piece of shit, by the way).

Me: "You know, you can set it so that the picture isn't stretched out like that."

Him: "Yeah, but then I get those black bars, and I didn't pay all that money to not use all the screen."

Me: "But it looks pretty awful"

Him: "Oh, I've gotten used to it."

So this guy spent a couple thousand

The problem is...

[NitroWolf]

What the heck are they expecting when they sell LCD TV's for two to three times the cost of the SAME SIZE LCD monitor?

I can walk into Best Buy, buy a cheap 17" monitor for $250 - $300 after rebate, and put a TV tuner box from Viewsonic on it for $150, that's $400 for a 17" TV. If I walk over to the TV sections, the CHEAPEST 15" TV is almost $500. The 17" LCD TV's are between $650 - $900... one is priced over $1000. So what's the deal? Why the hell would I EVER buy an LCD TV? There's absolutely no reason to pay as much as they want for an LCD TV. They are overcharging something fierce, when LCD monitors are cheaper, it's obviously not the LCD that's costing more for the TV... it's just plain corporate greed.

So no... I sure as hell won't be buying an LCD TV anytime soon.

Re:The problem is...

[NitroWolf]

We're talking about a commodity item that is intended for every household in the US. Not a server that's intended for a niche market.

I don't consider plugging 1 extra wire into an LCD monitor a "Do-it-yourself" project. Regardless, ALL of the parts in an LCD TV are in the monitor + viewsonic box combo... and it's almost HALF as cheap as an equivilent TV. Not $100 cheaper, not even $200 cheaper, but $450 cheaper.

THAT is corporate greed, my friend. They are marking up the TV by ridiculous numbers, and t

how much cheaper?

[xot]

Cheaper does not neccesarily mean affordable.For eg. If it falls from $500 to 400-450 , I still cannot afford it.
Don't we all want lovely 21" LCD's to watch our collection of DivX movies?? or play doom3. :-P

HOW much?? whither content....

[spoonyfork]

While a 42-inch Sony Wega LCD TV retails for $10,000, a 42-inch plasma set can be had for about $4,500. LCD TVs accounted for a measly 3 percent of all sets sold in the United States in 2003.

I am a well-documented TV hater. One thing I could never understand were all the ads for TVs that cost $2k, $5k, and even $10k for the last couple of years. I thought that if they are advertising them people must be buying them. I'm interested to read that this isn't the case. But still, $4.5k for a TV? OMGWTFBBQ. Is Joey [nbc.com] that much funnier on a $4.5k or even a $10k set?

No? Now I get the real joke.

price difference

[cybpunks3]

The problem is that there is a 200+ dollar price difference between an LCD computer monitor and an LCD TV at the same size. This is ridiculous since the only real difference may be the addition of cheap speakers and a TV tuner.

You can get a 14" LCD monitor for less than $300 but the TV version is over $500. It's just not worth it. And of course price increases geometrically with size.

Economy of scale has not worked its magic the way it has with tube TVs (tube TVs are dirt-cheap these days).

Fat chance

[Rich Klein]

Are these the same people who told us in the 80s that CD prices would come down as production ramped up?

over manufacturing

[digitalgimpus]

IMHO It's just more lax production quality standards.

I *think* there are more dead pixels per 1000 units now than there were just a few years ago. I don't know many with an LCD that didn't ship with one. All brands. I don't remember that just a short while ago.

I personally would perfer some better quality. Ideally give me a choice: 0 dead pixel guarantee and I'll pay extra. If I don't care, I'll take the damaged goods and pay less.

I just don't think it's fair to be paying so much for damaged goods. These dead pixels are annoying. And you often need several to qualify for a replacement, regardless of position on the screen.

Was my post informative? Help me get a free flat screen [freeflatscreens.com] by completing 1 silly little offer. I need one to go with my free iPod.

Slack or Suck!

[webzombie]

Lets see

19" LCD monitor $1000
20" LCD TV $1600
The look of the faces of the tards that don't know there is NO difference...PRICELESS!

Hey, maybe we need a colour coded scale which consumers can use as a quick reference guide to commercial terrorism.... ah forget it just invade!

Physical volume...

[genixia]

It's just not worth spending the extra money on a 15" LCD television. Consider the market - most small televisions are put in the kitchen, a bedroom, or a utility/exercise type room. People don't really want to spend much money on such televisions. Furthermore, the space savings of a 15" LCD over a 15" CRT television isn't that huge. A 15" CRT will happily sit on a dresser or a shelf.

The real market for LCD televisions is for the large televisions. The difference in physical volume between a 34+" LCD and a 34+" CRT television is significant. And you can wall mount an LCD - the CRT will need some form of stand.

begs the question...

[mshiltonj]

While a 42-inch Sony (SNE) Wega LCD TV retails for $10,000, a 42-inch plasma set can be had for about $4,500.

Why don't they make plasma computer monitors?

Cost of manufacturing

[multimed]

I don't know if this is just myth/urban legend or not and I haven't been able to find anything to support it either way. My brother told me that it is now actually cheaper to manufacture LCD flat panel screens than it is to make CRTs. Not that it really matters because the costs are more tied to supply & demand than actual cost of production but still, I'm curious if it's true or not. Personally the skeptic in me is torn--on one hand, if it's true, than there must be collusion and price fixing going on by the big evil companies. But on the other, if it were true, if I ran a company that made LCDs, I'd slash the prices and sell so many of them that the huge gross profits would make the smaller margins irrelevant, and since no one is doing this it must not be true.

Why aren't customers buying LCD TVs?

[AnalogDiehard]

Because the more channels the cable companies shove into our homes, the less there is to watch.

Because the more crap that Hollywood puts out (Gigli anyone?) the less there is to watch on HBO/Cinemax/Showtime/et al.

What's the point of spending four digits when there isn't anything on worth watching?

Is there marketspeak for "DUUUH"?

LCD tv reviews

[kallistiblue]

The digital tv [lcd-tv-reviews.com] interest remains high. The problem is that the $3000 is still a lot to pay for a tv, even if the picture is incredible.
There are several tv's including new Syntax Olivia tv is a good value. Dell also seems to be aggressively trying to drive price down. Coming OLED technology and the prices should be very reasonable in 3 years or so.

So the future looks good.

21" LED screen?

[CrazyJim0]

Sounds like a gaint light bright.

God exists, he spoke to me:

www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA

Re:Probably not.

[Pieroxy]

Hmmm. You don't know much about business, do you?

Re:Probably not.

[Beatbyte]

I don't think corporations can do much about supply and demand...

they want more money per unit so they adjust the supply (dump a bunch of at a cheaper price).

then the supply is down and the demand is down and the price is higher

Re:Probably not.

[rwven]

Not really... Supply and demand say that the price will go down... That's the way it works for EVERYTHING. LCD's aren't going to be some special case... and dropping the price will not make them lose anything. Those things are so stinkin overpriced compared to what they cost to produce that even a 50% price cut would still turn a pretty high profit...

Re:Probably not.

[AaronGTurner]

It's excess capacity, not execcess supply. I.e. excess potential to build LCDs. If you could break up a 17 inch LCD into 100 smartphone LCDs then the argument would be more directly one of supply since you could simply break up existing LCD stock. However instead excess LCD TVs will simply not be built.

What you have is excess capacity of the creation of LCDs, and so the LCDs created will simply be ones for a different purpose. The production of LCD TVs will simply be lowered to match the demand such that price levels are approximately maintained. On the other hand production of LCDs for other gadgets for which the demand outstrips supply will be increased. This may lead to these items becoming slightly cheaper but there are many other factors involved in the pricing of a PDA or a phone (especially the latter given deep discounting already) that the price of these may not be greatly affected by a reduced screen cost.

It is worth remembering that very few manufacturers make LCDs for computer monitors, even though there are very many brands. In terms of the retailers they will only wish to drop prices if it leads to such additional sales that it increases their profit. However they would rather sell more items at their current profit level. Market saturation and distinguishing your product on the basis of cost from a competitors comes into play here. Sometimes cutting the price of your monitor may not only reduce the profit margin but harm sales if your brand is considered to be a premium one. There are a lot of complex factors at play here.

Re:Probably not.

[4of12]

Supply and demand say that the price will go down.

The free market works great if

1. there are many buyers and many sellers in the market,
2. buyers or sellers don't collude with one another (effectively reducing the number of buyers or sellers), and
3. there is free exchange of truthful information and a dearth of powerful and effective deceptive information.

There are various examples where those conditions are not met.

There are also a few other singular cases where the elasticity in the market can become strained, such as healthcare provision. If you're hurtin', you might be willing to pay a lot to feel better, not die, etc.

On the LCD issue, I'm looking at big LCD TVs, like the Sharp Aquos 45" [cnet.com]. I like the native hi-res and the tolerably good pixel response time, but they're only just beginning to come onto the market and I'm not sure how expensive they are - the mentioned projected intial retail prices around US$10K are too steep for me, but if the price goes down 30% I'd probably get one. Samsung also has a big LCD [cnet.com] in this size range.

Anyone out there with either of those?

Re:Probably not.

[lpangelrob2]

Umm... in general, corporations also want to dump inventory and take the loss now. Inventory is a bad thing... it's supply that you spent money to make and are spending money to keep. If you lose the inventory at a discounted price, at least you take in revenue and don't incur storage costs. See "Memory in the late 1990's" for another example.

As opposed to individual people...

[raehl]

Corps HATE losing money.

Right, because individuals just LOVE to lose it.

Re:Speaking of LCDs...

[alatesystems]

Dell 2001FP [dell.com].

That is almost half of the price you said and a VERY awesome monitor. I work at a healthcare facility and several of our physicians have this monitor and it is awesome. Great response time as well. Very crisp.

Chris

Re:Speaking of LCDs...

[hab136]

Dell 2001FP [dell.com]

That is almost half of the price you said and a VERY awesome monitor. I work at a healthcare facility and several of our physicians have this monitor and it is awesome. Great response time as well. Very crisp.

Let me second that. With a 25% off coupon plus pre-Christmas sale, I spent like $700 on mine a year ago, and it's the best computer purchase I've ever made. 20.1", 1600x1200, DVI, VGA, S-video, composite, and Picture-in-Picture. Oh, plus it rotates, so you can do the portrait thing

Re:Speaking of LCDs... -- 25% off?

[scovetta]

25% off coupon?

Where at?

Re:Speaking of LCDs... -- 25% off?

[scovetta]

Ohhh, i see:
DELL
UltraSharp 2001FP 20.1-inch Flat Panel LCD Monitor with Height Adjustable Stand
$899.00
$719.20
[You Save $179.80]

Re:Speaking of LCDs...

[hab136]

I just got one of those monitors, and I was curious if there was any way to have the monitor detect that you put it in portrait mode?

No. I looked for a long time. I originally thought that it might give feedback through the USB connector, but that really is just a hub, nothing more.

On the bright side, Nvidia and ATI both have quick-profile modes, so it should only be two clicks (or a hotkey) away.

Way expensive in Canada

[Chirs]

Dell Canada charges 1350 CAD for that thing. The US price, converted, works out to under 1000 CAD.

I'm not impressed.

Re:Way expensive in Canada

[jargonCCNA]

Plus shipping, plus customs, plus (probably) tariffs.. yeah, $350 can come up out of nowhere like that.

Re:WHO CARES?!

[Jeff DeMaagd]

They still need to be stabilized. I'm not sure if the colors are acceptably accurate. Polymer OLED has the better colors, but the different colors decay at different rates. IIRC, Monomer OLED lasts much longer, but the colors suck.

Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic...

[rueger]

Just a guess, but it was more a Photoshopped image of the future. Didn't that big ol' Electrohome hanging from the ceiling look just a tad suspect?

Most likely a fake

[kbahey]

And the steering wheel! That was never in any computer, business or home.

Looks suspect alright.

Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic...

[AKAImBatman]

Hmm... seems you're right [manalang.com]. Must have been a troll trying to see what kind of silliness they could get Slashdot to put on the front page.

Re:What it RETAILS for...

[JawzX]

that 60" sony WEGA was rear projection LCD... they don't even MAKE a 60" LCD PANEL