backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 65 comment(s) - last by crystal clear.. on Jul 30 at 5:11 AM

Extreem Close-up of Telescopic Pixels  (Source: Anna Pyayt)
Technology is based on telescopic pixels

For a number of years now, the LCD display has all but made the older CRT displays extinct. While LCD screens are still being improved on by making them thinner, brighter, and produce better image quality, researchers are always on the lookout for the next technology breakthrough.

Microsoft announced that a pair of its engineers and a graduate student from the University of Washington, Anna Pyayt, have invented a new type of display technology that is much more efficient with energy than current LCDs. The new technology uses optics that are similar to those used in telescopes.

According to IEEE Spectrum, a typical LCD in use today is backlit and less than 10% of the light produced by the backlight is transmitted to the surface of the LCD screen. The polarizing layer alone absorbs 50% of the light output from the backlight.

The telescopic design on the other hand is able to transfer about 36% of the light produced to the surface in prototypes using reflective optics. The telescopic pixel has a tiny primary mirror facing the backlight with a hole in the middle. A smaller secondary mirror located 175 micrometers behind the primary mirror faces it and reflects light making it though the primary mirror back. When voltage is applied to the primary mirror it turns into a parabola and allows light to be focused on the secondary mirror and onto the screen.

The researchers say that in theory, as much as 75% of the light in the telescopic pixel display could reach the surface of the screen. Another benefit of the design is a much higher rate of speed at which the pixels can be turned on and off. The telescopic pixel can go from dark to light in 1.5ms.

Research of this type is not commonly done at Microsoft; the company is much more known for its software products like Windows Vista, Windows Home Server and Office. Anna Pyayt led the research team as part of her Ph.D. thesis and Microsoft has applied for a patent on the technology. IEEE Spectrum says that Microsoft will likely partner with a LCD manufacturer to build displays using the technology rather than build the displays themselves.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
patent
By Screwballl on 7/25/2008 2:42:27 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Anna Pyayt led the research team as part of her Ph.D. thesis and Microsoft has applied for a patent on the technology.


and a bright young student gets shafted out of millions once again...
I hope she at least gets 20 years of 10% royalty payments for letting MS patent this.




RE: patent
By nerdye on 7/25/08, Rating: 0
RE: patent
By FITCamaro on 7/25/2008 11:39:15 PM , Rating: 5
Don't act like it'd be different anywhere else.


RE: patent
By vapore0n on 7/25/2008 3:13:23 PM , Rating: 5
Back when I was in college, we had to sign a waiver stating that anything we created as part of a project was owned in total by the university.

Now that I work in the real world I also had to sign a waiver stating that anything I create is owned by the company.

So I guess she is missing out on a multi-million dollar deal, only if she had done it in her garage.


RE: patent
By Biodude on 7/25/2008 3:37:49 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah, having that entire lab, and all the equipment, and all that other talent around to collaborate with, didn't have anything to do with her invention.

Lesson for the day: If you want to invent something cool, make sure you work for a company that states ahead of time that they will cut you in on the profits/patents/loot. Or, quit your whining.


RE: patent
By Parhel on 7/25/2008 6:04:35 PM , Rating: 3
We had to also. In fact, a friend of mine had a pet project he wanted to write as his senior project, and was unable to do that as the school would have then owned the rights to his idea.

It's funny . . . people here will call someone a "patent troll" if they invent something useful, patent it, but don't intend to manufacture it themselves. Yet, if a company sponsors development of an idea and patents it with the full intention of bringing it to market, that company is "shafting" the inventor.


RE: patent
By Oregonian2 on 7/25/2008 8:41:32 PM , Rating: 5
Only if it's Microsoft. Had it been Apple, the Apple employees would have been praised with honors for such earth shattering brilliance and the student who did the grunt work be said to be lucky in getting a bit of the honors and recognition due to having been associated with Apple.


RE: patent
By teldar on 7/26/2008 10:03:36 AM , Rating: 2
That wouldn't have been sarcasm, would it?


RE: patent
By jmunjr on 7/26/2008 3:40:01 PM , Rating: 5
Does Apple actually invent anything? I don't recall much. They design products using other technology and write software... Their employees are too right-brained to do any real engineering..


RE: patent
By spluurfg on 7/27/2008 4:20:55 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Does Apple actually invent anything? I don't recall much. They design products using other technology and write software... Their employees are too right-brained to do any real engineering..


I think it's just a business model, otherwise we could complain about hotel companies hiring architects and designers or commercial airline manufacturers for using off-the-shelf technology, or, say, OEM manufacturers following reference specifications. You can't do everything, and Apple's willingness to simply license the right technology rather than try and develop it has clearly been a big part of its success in the last several years.


RE: patent
By xphile on 7/27/2008 9:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
Come on now - this is going to be VERY difficult for Microsoft.

Someone somewhere is going to have to sit in a meeting and try and explain to Steve Balmer that Microsoft owns the rights to an emerging technology and they haven't actually had to BUY it.

Could delay the to market by anything up to 12 months just trying to get him to come to grips with the concept...


RE: patent
By Adonlude on 7/28/2008 3:53:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's funny . . . people here will call someone a "patent troll" if they invent something useful, patent it, but don't intend to manufacture it themselves. Yet, if a company sponsors development of an idea and patents it with the full intention of bringing it to market, that company is "shafting" the inventor.


This seems to be human nature, at least for some. Hating the big guy, loving the little guy, counter culture, renaissance, and all that jazz. As soon as people start to forget Apple's underdog times and Apple dominates long enough it's public opinion will fall the same way. Some people will always think this way. The same people who think war is unnecessary, that we should all just get along, that there is plenty of room for imigrants in all the major countries, that we don't need firearms, that we should sing Cumbaya, sit in a drum circle, and vote for Obama.


RE: patent
By Rugar on 7/25/2008 3:53:31 PM , Rating: 2
I suppose it depends on the University. For us, co-investigators split 50% and the University gets the other 50% of any royalties.


RE: patent
By Steve Guilliot on 7/26/2008 1:06:43 AM , Rating: 4
You make it sound as if she stumbled into a MS lab, developed the technology one afternoon alone, then got scooped by cloaked MS fiends who immediately ran to the patent office.

The rights to the patent were certainly arranged in advance, so she knew what she was getting into.


RE: patent
By Steve Guilliot on 7/26/2008 1:08:57 AM , Rating: 5
BTW I also note that here MS innovates, and instead of getting a hint of credit, it gets twisted on them in a negative light. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.


RE: patent
By EricMartello on 7/26/2008 5:05:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
and a bright young student gets shafted out of millions once again... I hope she at least gets 20 years of 10% royalty payments for letting MS patent this.


It's fair game. She was only able to do what she did using resources that she herself did not procure or establish. If you invent something on "company time", it belongs to the company paying you (or providing your resources) at that time. In this case, she used Microsoft's resources to do her work - therefore, she has no claims to the technology. If a person wants to profit from their efforts, they gotta establish themselves without hand-holding from other corporate entities.


Could be promising
By William Gaatjes on 7/25/2008 3:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
The 1 reason i have not yet bought an lcd is because of lousy contrast values and no real black. And the typical artefacts and moiré of lcd monitors.
And i have to buy a device to color correct the lcd.

I could just save for a long while and buy a 2000 euro lcd and be done with it. But for that kind of money i rather wait for something that really outshines my good old industrial grade crt monitor.
Cause i have not seen 1 lcd monitor that outshined a good crt monitor except for size and power usage.




RE: Could be promising
By geddarkstorm on 7/25/08, Rating: 0
RE: Could be promising
By Hakuryu on 7/25/2008 4:09:23 PM , Rating: 3
I have a friend who is a graphics designer, and he will not buy a LCD either. It has to do with graphical work - imagine getting a hardcopy picture of something, and you need to replicate the exact color match for a logo on new work you are creating... LCD's are sub-par to CRT's when trying to accomplish this (brighter and dimmer parts of the screen make colors look different for example).


RE: Could be promising
By William Gaatjes on 7/25/2008 4:10:51 PM , Rating: 5
A good crt with a high refresh does not flicker. I have minimal 85 and i can go up to max160Hz but 100Hz is enough for me.

I sit approximately 50 cm minimal distance away from the screen.

And i never keep it that high in light output. I have brightness and contrast at 60 percent for years now and i am fine with it. And as i sad it is a industrial grade monitor. It's shielded in every way. Back in the days these babies would go for about 1600