Print 41 comment(s) - last by Gooberslot.. on Mar 13 at 10:38 PM

Toshiba and Canon claim SED TVs will be here in two years, but will the price be competitive?

Reuters reports that the joint surface-conduction electron-emitter display venture between Canon and Toshiba will have to wait an extra year or so.  At the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas two months ago, the two companies announced that SED displays are just inside a year for commercial use

With the cost of LCD and Plasma TVs in near freefall, for SED TVs to gain any market acceptance, the technology needs a dramaticly cheaper cost or dramatically apparent feature.  Right now, DLP and similar technologies dominate the high fidelity market while LCD and Plasma TVs have dropped so much in cost that SED has a difficult task ahead of itself to really unseat either technology. 

For example, low end 37" LCD TVs used to cost approximately $2,000 about this time of the year in 2004.  Today, you can walk into any Costco or Frys and pick up a 37" Syntax LCD for $1,300.  The price drop is even more dramatic for larger sized LCDs.  DLP prices have experienced similar drops, but have also increased resolution dramatically in the last two years.  For SED to really have a fighting chance out of the gate, Toshiba-Canon would need a 37" to 40" SED TV for under $1,500 to compete with sub-$1,000 LCD TVs of the same size. 

Toshiba and Canon have promised nearly $2B USD to keeping SED technology afloat, though Intel made similar promises in 2002 with LCoS technology. 

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: All these pixels...
By AlexWade on 3/12/2006 9:10:34 AM , Rating: 0
Classic chicken and egg. You won't buy a HDTV until there is more content; cheap lazy TV stations won't put more HDTV until more people have HDTV's. Ultimately, I blame the stations. HD has been defined for over 10 years. 2006 was supposed to be the cut-off date. But, commercial-laden TV stations balked. They rather spend money forcing another channel on us we don't want than upgrade the current ones and rather put 15 minutes of commercials per hour of programming all the while forcing cable and satellite to jack up their rates.

TV stations have less than 3 years now to go all HD. They will fail. They are too cheap to upgrade.

RE: All these pixels...
By masteraleph on 3/12/2006 9:23:06 AM , Rating: 5
Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

TV stations were supposed to have until 2006 (now '09) to go DIGITAL. This is NOT the same as HD. Yes, you can broadcast HD in digital, but you can also broadcast SD in digital. The requirement is designed so that the government can reclaim the spectrum of frequencies currently used for analog TVs.

Furthermore, it is only broadcast TV that has to change over. As in the rabbit-ears on top of your TV variety of broadcast. Stations on cable or satellite or what have you can stay analog to their hearts' content. And since something like 80% of people have either cable or satellite or some other variety of non-broadcast TV, it's actually going to be a relatively minor impact on the market as a whole.

Digital != HD. Remember it, love it, be aware.

RE: All these pixels...
By bigshooter on 3/12/2006 9:26:23 AM , Rating: 2
TV stations don't have to go HD, that would be expensive for the cameras/bandwith. They just need to convert over to a digital signal to free up the analog airwaves.

RE: All these pixels...
By bigshooter on 3/12/2006 9:26:59 AM , Rating: 2
Ooops... gues ssomeone beat me to it.

RE: All these pixels...
By spwrozek on 3/12/2006 9:39:54 AM , Rating: 2
You put it in such a better tone though :)

RE: All these pixels...
By GTMan on 3/12/2006 6:15:10 PM , Rating: 2
And then we just have to wait two years for the salespeople to learn how to use the technology.

I recently walked into a "The Source" where they had a nice HDTV showing a 4x3 letterbox stretched wide to fill the entire screen. I asked why there were black bars on the top and bottom and several salesmen said those bars would always be there because it was HDTV.

I asked why I should spend money on a TV that never uses part of the screen. They had no answer. I asked why I would want to watch everything squashed vertically on the screen and they had no answer.

Turns out they had the digital cable box set to output 4x3 letterbox and didn't know how to access the menu.

"This is from the It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh
Related Articles
SED Ready to Take on LCD and Plasma
January 9, 2006, 7:01 PM

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki