backtop


Print 59 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Feb 13 at 7:27 PM

UHDs, on the other hand, seem to be more promising for right now

Samsung was one of the few hardware makers to offer OLED TVs 2013, but a top executive recently admitted that OLEDs aren't quite ready to be big sellers yet.
 
According to a new report in USA Today, Samsung's HS Kim, executive vice president of Visual Display Business, said that OLEDs would likely be a more consumer-friendly product in around three to four years. 
 
OLEDs, which provide a more dynamic viewing experience than Full HD TVs thanks to new materials in their composition, are not taking off quite yet because of their high prices, according to Kim. Last year, these TVs had price tags of $9,000 and up.
 
Samsung and LG were the only two electronics companies to offer them.
 
"Not many consumers tried to purchase OLED TVs at that price," said Kim. "Price was our greatest barrier. So our attempt to expand the market didn't really go well.
 
"I'm really, really terribly sorry to say this, but it will take more time. … I believe it will take around three to four years."
 

[SOURCE: The Verge]
Kim said that OLEDs currently have a pricey manufacturing process, hence the high prices on the market.
 
However, Kim sees 4K UHD (ultra high definition) TVs flourishing much sooner. UHDs, which have greatly improved sharpness over Full HD TVs because they possess at least four times the number of pixels, did well in sales last year and have more manufacturers onboard, such as Samsung, LG, Sony and Sharp.
 
The only thing that holds 4k back a bit is the lack of compatible content, and Kim made it clear that Samsung is no content company. Luckily, companies like Netflix are aiming to somewhat alleviate this problem.
 
In other Samsung TV-related news, Kim hinted at the possibility of an Android-based TV, but didn't confirm that such a thing was in the works.
 
"If Android TV can provide the best optimal viewing experience, then Samsung will provide that," said Kim.

Source: USA Today



Comments     Threshold


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

Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 2:19:19 PM , Rating: 1
How the vile patent trolls didst slay it.
The foul reprehensible Dragon of Applied Nanotech broiled its lifeblood in nasty glops of orange, searing flames. We lay here, crying for thee, what ye could have been but are oh so more. Now all we have is these LEDs and yet they, they beseech us to make way with our months pay to frolic upon their coloured pixels of life. Nay! We shall not! To our abodes we go, discontent with it all.

Oh SED, how we miss what thee could have been.




RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Mint on 1/10/2014 2:33:02 PM , Rating: 4
SED had no advantage over a good plasma, and would require a similarly complex manufacturing process, if not more so.

After Pioneer and now Panny shut down their plasma lines, it's clear that image quality just isn't enough nowadays, as most people see LCD as good enough.

SED will never approach LCD in cost. OLED is our only hope...


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 2:41:30 PM , Rating: 2
But it did. It was CRT per pixel and had phosphors!

For us oldschool gamers, that is gold. I love the way CRTs looked and still do. When it comes to running multiple resolutions on the same device, those phosphors did a great job helping everything blend together. SED might have a electron gun per-color, per-pixel, but at least the phosphors might help things.

See, many of us will spend hours, weeks or months trying to figure out how to emulate that CRT feel on our LCD monitors. Call us crazy or whatever... some of us just like it.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Flunk on 1/10/2014 3:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Even among the ranks of old-school gamers some of us don't care. I've got my Super Nintendo hooked up to my HDTV and while it might not look exactly the same as an old CRT it's not really quantitatively worse, just different.

So, as this applies specifically to me, it doesn't bother me. I suspect that the set of people who do care doesn't overlap with the set of people who would pay 10x the price of an LCD in great enough numbers to justify paying to develop the technology.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 3:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
SNES on a HDTV looks like crap. Terrible! I want to vomit when I see it.

Now, if you fire up Retroarch, apply some CRT filters that include the Halation effect + a good NTSC subfilter... well, then you have a great looking image. My SNES games look like they're on a giant CRT when on my HDTV.

When I'm really nostalgic I might run the image through additional software filters to simulate crap television sets with bleeding phosphors and ones that discharge slowly.

Sure, I had to run a long HDMI cable through my floor and basement ceiling from my PC to my TV but it was worth it. My daughter can enjoy oldschool goodness the way they were meant to be played in--and legally.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By TheDoc9 on 1/10/2014 4:36:05 PM , Rating: 2
You'll never convince a Nintendo exec that running Retroarch is legal. Not saying it shouldn't be, it's a grey area.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Guspaz on 1/10/2014 10:10:24 PM , Rating: 2
Luckily, I don't need to convince a Nintendo exec that running Retroarch is legal, because their opinion is irrelevant. Only the courts matter, and at least in the US (where I admittedly don't live), the courts have made clear rulings on this. Sony sued Connectix over their Playstation emulator (Virtual Game Station). Sony lost. The precedent being clear, I don't think anybody has tried to sue over a game emulator since.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By B3an on 1/11/2014 3:52:37 PM , Rating: 2
So you basically want everything to look like crap again? With a blurry halation effect and all the other flaws. Nostalgia is bad, it messes up logical thinking and progression. You literally want the image to have imperfections. Bizarre.

Luckily most people actually want good image quality. I'm glad SED went nowhere. High res LCD displays with high PPI will also greatly reduce the problem of content not looking so good at non-native resolutions. But OLED is the future and has the potential to be the best in pretty much all areas (manufacturing cost and complexity, image quality, response times, display thinness and weight).


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By FaaR on 1/12/2014 12:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
Don't underestimate the power of nostalgia. I don't know how old you are, but for many of those who were young in the 80s, blocky 8-bit graphics on imperfect displays have a special place in our hearts. Blocky 8-bit graphics on 'perfect' displays don't really look any better TBH, and in some cases worse, as all the inherent limitations of those old machines become painfully obvious.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By jmunjr on 1/12/2014 2:36:39 PM , Rating: 2
Like he wrote, nostalgia messes up logical thinking. Having a special place in your heart doesn't mean anything other than an emotional reaction on your part. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make the game any better, it just makes it have a little more meaning for a few people.

FYI I grew up playing Pong on both a coin-op and on the home units. I have MAME on my system with 99% of all coin=op games every made int he 80s and have longed for a full bore MAMA upright cabinet. Thus, I understand your sentiment, though I do think it is just emotional.

For me the experience of playing an old game is good enough. If I want genuine nostalgia I'll get the real thing and but myself some original arcade games and/or original home consoles with a CRT TV... :)


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Schrag4 on 1/13/2014 12:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like he wrote, nostalgia messes up logical thinking. Having a special place in your heart doesn't mean anything other than an emotional reaction on your part.


I think maybe you're missing something. Who's going to have more to spend? An 80's kid who has 10 or more years into a career by now, or a highschooler? Also, part of the messing up of logical thinking involves the opening of wallets.

How else do you explain all the 80s Saturday morning cartoons that have turned into movies during the last decade? People certainly didn't watch them because they were good movies.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/13/2014 9:33:37 AM , Rating: 2
Imperfections? Heretic! Burn!

LCD TVs introduce imperfections into my classic masterpieces! Stuff like sharp corners, clear lines and solid colors. That is imperfect!

Many of those old games were designed with the display in mind. If you go back and play even old computer games, you'll see this.

Take 4-color graphics back in the 80s. PCs (and the C-64, Apple II etc.) had this standard called CGA. It was designed to be output via a composite cable to a color display. Game designers discovered that if they output the image in a particular way with patterns/colors on the screen, they could effectively quadruple their color output from the 4 colors the video adapter would provide to 16 colors on the real display. If you go back nowadays and try and display these games on a LCD monitor, they'll look like total poo with only four colors.

Newer is not always better! Especially when it comes to art.

You must always look at the medium, tools or canvas an artist used to experience it how it was intended.

Look no further than classical music. In many works from the 18th century, they were written for quirks in the instruments of the time... and in others, with unspoken acceptance that everyone knew background instruments would be provided--without the sheet music indicating such. There's this part called the "continuo" which is basically a bass melody supporter, commonly filled by the harpsichord. Yet, if you were to perform a symphony from say Haydn, it would be absent. In the real day, however, it would be and many purists seek to find conductors that provide this missing link. If you listen to one of his symphonies on modern instruments, it just sounds wrong. Throw in old instruments + that unspoken harpsichord continuo and you have brilliance again.

The same holds true for say the early 19th century pieces written for the piano. If you toss in a modern grand, they sound off. This is because in those times, the piano used was smaller and shaped differently. Perform them with a proper early 19th century piano and they sound lively, rich and harmonic.

Don't ever tell me or anyone that newer is always better. That's crap and you should know it after reading above.

These old games were written to utilize imperfections in these displays to compensate for hardware limitations either it be video output, disk space or processing. The designers counted on those display anomalies being present to enhance the image and you would only know this if you're old enough and had played enough of these back then.

I'm not just nostalgic, I'm a purist. I want it to be as it was intended by the original artist. There's nothing wrong with that, at all.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By ven1ger on 1/13/2014 2:16:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm not just nostalgic, I'm a purist. I want it to be as it was intended by the original artist. There's nothing wrong with that, at all.


That's kind of an odd thing to say. The original artist probably wanted better colors, etc, but that was what they had to work with back then. I can understand if an artist wanted to represent their work in older formats, but I seriously don't believe that if they had the capability to offer better visuals, that they wouldn't use it. If a game was created in current tech, and they wanted to be nostalgic and represent their games with older capabilities, that I can understand, but this is just sort of odd.

Hey, but each to they own, if it satisfies your nostalgia requirement that's fine, don't know if I'd want to look at a C-64 screen again...ugh.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By BZDTemp on 1/10/2014 9:41:50 PM , Rating: 2
:-)
For sure in many ways LCD's have been a step backwards.

It was only last year I quit having my trusty Sony F520 as my primary gaming screen. It cost me $2500 back in the day and it was just as fine when I hauled it out to the curb, but even with it's 2048x1436 resolution @85 Hz it could not compete with a dual 2560x1600 setup in the long run.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By therealnickdanger on 1/10/2014 3:02:28 PM , Rating: 2
You're painting the picture a tad bit. SED had amazing potential, but it was brought down by its own cost to manufacture during an extreme rut in the global economy. The "patent trolls" may have slowed the process, but they certainly didn't kill it. It just wasn't economically feasible.

Look to FED, it's still alive and kicking.

-FW900 Gamer


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 3:12:28 PM , Rating: 2
Shhh!!!!!

I'm waxing nostalgia. ;)

I bet if they had kept at it they would have figured out a way, eventually, to bring costs down. I'll have to keep an eye on FED.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Spuke on 1/10/2014 3:46:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm waxing nostalgia. ;)
You're waxing something! LOL!


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 3:48:00 PM , Rating: 2
Oooohh come here, honey. ;P


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By TakinYourPoints on 1/10/2014 6:57:45 PM , Rating: 1
Nice monitor!

I didn't let go of my G400 until I picked up an NEC 2490WUXi LCD, back in the days when IPS cost at least a grand. The move from CRT was (and in some ways still is) a downgrade in image quality and responsiveness on the desktop.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By milktea on 1/10/2014 3:03:28 PM , Rating: 3
I would go for OLED instead of SED. It much faster and thinner than SED. And it doesn't project radiation into your face like CRT/SED does.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/10/2014 3:17:18 PM , Rating: 2
Oh hogwash.

Electrons fly through my body all day long. Neutrinos go in one side of the Earth and out the other, blasting all of us every second. Muons occasionally hit us.

And that "radiation" from a CRT? The electrons hit the phosphors, charging them and then give off... photons. Harmless photons for the most part. A very small, miniscule amount are x-rays which, in those quantities, are harmless.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By milktea on 1/10/2014 8:08:02 PM , Rating: 1
CRT TV must meet FDA radiation standards. You can google that standards, if you feel like reading.

That means that the CRT radiation is not neglible! And if the radiation shield is damage during usage, it would be hazardous.

And having no radiation is better than having little.

I was glad that LCD TV came along. Even when the LCD panel is damage, I know we're still safe. And OLED will soon to be the final perfection of image display to date.

And on the side, since magnet distorts CRT, I would guess that same applies to SED panels. But OLED would not be affected.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By captainBOB on 1/10/2014 10:58:54 PM , Rating: 2
You should really read up on the subject instead of jumping to conclusions based on nothing more than assumptions.

CRTs produce X-ray radiation far below the FDA standards, the standards were created for several reasons, one of which was to keep companies from increasing the radiation produced to actual harmful levels as a result of cost cutting.

Plus those regulations are decades old, CRT tech has come a long way since then.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By milktea on 1/11/2014 3:31:28 AM , Rating: 1
Don't know why people get some caught up with the old tech. But that doesn't matter. You still can't denied the fact that LCD is much safer than CRT.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By pandemonium on 1/11/2014 6:53:25 AM , Rating: 2
I'd love to see some statistics on CRT deaths due to their emissions...because I can't seem to find any. At all.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Gondor on 1/11/2014 1:01:12 PM , Rating: 2
How would you tell damage from ionizing radiation from a CRT TV from damage caused by radiation from other sources ? The fact is that ionizing radiation (an example of which are x-rays emitted by a CRT) does cause changes in tissue which can and does lead to uncontrolled cell growth (tumor/cancer).


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/13/2014 9:37:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And on the side, since magnet distorts CRT, I would guess that same applies to SED panels. But OLED would not be affected.


Not at all.

That rainbow you refer to is due to the magnets interfering with the shadow mask. SED does not have a shadow mask.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By bug77 on 1/10/2014 3:52:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
See, many of us will spend hours, weeks or months trying to figure out how to emulate that CRT feel on our LCD monitors.


Oh how we choose to forget the issues with geometry and getting all 3 colors to focus in the right place...


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/13/2014 9:58:43 AM , Rating: 2
But that color bleed adds character. :P


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By Mint on 1/10/2014 8:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that plasma displays use phosphors too, right?

SED could do no better than a top quality plasma. There was a time that plasma didn't have very good blacks due to the precharge, and back then SED was seen as the solution, but once Pioneer's Kuro came along, SED became pointless from an image quality perspective.

As for CRTs, while their variable resolution was great, they had pretty bad ANSI contrast. I put modern plasma above even the best CRT in image quality, and leagues above CRT projection.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By tastyratz on 1/13/2014 1:04:31 PM , Rating: 1
SED no advantage over a good plasma? I love my plasma tv however I would drop it in a heartbeat if SED ever went to production.

Left Plasma, middle SED, right LCD
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20040914/se...

Advertised spec's are useless to everyone now, but actual measured specs and side by side comparisons put SED way ahead of that pack.

Now - that was a technology cut off in infancy from patent wars and it held up well 8 years ago. Imagine where it would be today as a mature competitor?
OLED looks the best but comes with it's own woes and uneven phosphor wearing.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By melgross on 1/10/2014 7:17:24 PM , Rating: 2
You do know that you're not on a fan fiction site, right?

Anyway, there have been a number of apparently interesting technologies that haven't made it. SED is one of them. It had promise, but unless it's revived, we will never know if it was really all that good.


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By MrBlastman on 1/13/2014 9:59:31 AM , Rating: 2
Considering how long I've been posting here, yes. ;)


RE: Oh woe is SED...
By 3DPro on 1/16/2014 12:48:08 PM , Rating: 2
Simply awesome post... loved it; I have no idea why you were rated down.

Thanks for the hyper creative read this morning, brother... priceless! :)


4k isn't breaking new groun
By Nortel on 1/10/14, Rating: 0
RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By ArcliteHawaii on 1/10/2014 3:30:26 PM , Rating: 3
It's not only that there's no content, it's that you have to be within 4 feet of a 60 inch display to tell the difference betw 1080P and 4K. Who watches TV like that? 4K is just electronics marketing departments trying to sell more TVs.


RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By Spuke on 1/10/2014 3:48:11 PM , Rating: 2
I can tell the difference at quite a bit more than 4 feet. It's glaringly obvious to me but I understand not everyone's eyes are the same.


RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By TheEquatorialSky on 1/10/2014 7:04:58 PM , Rating: 3
TV manufacturers are running low on innovation.

From a consumer perspective, we're hitting a point of diminishing returns.

VCR -> DVD (Wow!)
DVD -> Blu Ray (Nice.)
Blu Ray -> 4K (Meh.)


RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By inperfectdarkness on 1/11/2014 12:26:56 AM , Rating: 2
Don't confuse the media with the output medium. VHS and DVD both had the same crappy 480i output for a LONG time. Only with Blu-Ray is 1080p truly the standard definition. The problem is, 1080p (at least for videophiles like me) a crying shame, considering I was gaming on a higher resolution in 2002 (1920x1440).

While I grant you that there is a visible quality difference between DVD and Blu-Ray, the issue ultimately comes down to the fact that most consumers feel that DVD is "good enough"--especially when DVD still costs roughly half what Blu-Ray does (or less). There's really no justifiable reason for this discrepancy--since the medium itself does not carry that kind of premium. Then again, it might just be that DVD resolutions are much smaller and easier to rip/cram onto an external hard-drive for a digital library--versus all Blu-Ray. Even a 2TB drive doesn't go a long way when each movie file is 30GB.


RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By probedb on 1/11/2014 8:32:36 AM , Rating: 2
VHS could resolve maybe 240 lines.


By Captain Orgazmo on 1/11/2014 8:37:25 PM , Rating: 2
D-VHS could hold 4 hours of 1080i; of course discs are superior to magnetic tapes, and solid state storage far superior to discs (movies could easily be distributed on flash drives or sd cards).


RE: 4k isn't breaking new groun
By bug77 on 1/10/2014 3:48:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2560x1600 30" monitors have been around since 2004 and earlier (Cinema 30" 2560x1600 display released June 28, 2004). Thats a decade ago.


However, the Samsung representative was clearly talking about TVs (as in, not monitors).


Netflix?
By vortmax2 on 1/10/2014 3:15:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Luckily, companies like Netflix are aiming to somewhat alleviate this problem.


Netflix has a hard enough time displaying HD content (whether it's an ISP issue or not is still in question). Unfortunately, Sony has a corner on the 4K content market and will take full advantage of it until the government steps...




RE: Netflix?
By Nortel on 1/10/2014 3:22:05 PM , Rating: 2
Netflix will be heavily compressing 4k into a bitrate suitable for mass streaming. Currently watching 1080p on Netflix compared to watching the blu-ray should be an adequate analog to my statement.


RE: Netflix?
By TakinYourPoints on 1/10/2014 7:08:17 PM , Rating: 1
My biggest worry with h.265 is that it won't be used to improve image quality, it will be used to get smaller bitrate files streamed with comparable image quality to what we have now.

4K will almost certainly be a mess. Current day compression artifacts and color quality will remain but OMG IT'S 4K.

Bleagh.


RE: Netflix?
By Concillian on 1/13/2014 4:18:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
My biggest worry with h.265 is that it won't be used to improve image quality, it will be used to get smaller bitrate files streamed with comparable image quality to what we have now.

4K will almost certainly be a mess. Current day compression artifacts and color quality will remain but OMG IT'S 4K.

Bleagh.


There is approximately a 0.01333 (repeating) percent chance that h.265 will be used to improve image quality.

It's going to be used to save money for the content providers, not provide fewer compression artifacts. Yay for "digital" TV.


RE: Netflix?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/13/2014 7:27:48 PM , Rating: 2
I know, it sucks. :(

Get more streams using less bandwidth, quality be damned. The same thing that happened with digital cable and satellite is going to continue with online streaming.


OLED
By flyingpants1 on 1/10/2014 3:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
For once I agree with Brian Klug of Anandtech. OLEDs are almost universally inferior to LCDs.

Short lifespan and color degradation over time, ridiculously bad color accuracy and oversaturation. Pitifully low brightness.

What is the appeal of having an OLED TV?




RE: OLED
By TakinYourPoints on 1/10/2014 7:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
Hopefully these all get addressed by the time OLED panels go wide. Degradation is something that has slowly but steadily improved.

Re: color, just because Samsung can't set a good image on their TVs or phones to save their life doesn't mean that OLED is completely incapable of having a properly calibrated image. Color accuracy and oversaturation can be addressed by good calibration. If it isn't Samsung doing it then it will certainly be someone else. Even with current 4K LCDs you have Sony delivering significantly better image quality than Samsung.

Like it or not, OLED is the best shot we have at quality on the level with what we have with plasmas right now. Color degradation with OLED will hopefully be fixed over time and calibration is something that can be taken care of, whether it is better set at the factory or professional calibration at home.


RE: OLED
By Pneumothorax on 1/12/2014 10:55:10 AM , Rating: 2
Sad thing that Panasonic killed their Plasma line so early...

Looks like we're still at least 5 years away from affordable/long-lasting OLED

Guess I'll just have to bite the bullet now and get a 65" ZT or VT plasma before they're all gone. In my dark HT, LCD can't compete with plasma.


RE: OLED
By CSMR on 1/12/2014 10:15:18 PM , Rating: 2
Echoing what the previous poster said, color accuracy and oversaturation cannot be problems. That is just an issue of calibration. A wide gamut is ideal if there is content for it.

Color degradation is an issue.

The advantage of OLEDs is true blacks.


Oculus Rift to use OLED
By ArcliteHawaii on 1/10/2014 3:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
The OR team said they'll use an OLED display. So, yeah, not ready for big screens, but lots of little ones have been / will be using them for years.




RE: Oculus Rift to use OLED
By piroroadkill on 1/10/14, Rating: 0
RE: Oculus Rift to use OLED
By SunLord on 1/10/2014 6:51:32 PM , Rating: 2
The OLED tech in TV is not the exact same one used in AMOLED based phones


Quantum dots
By Chriz on 1/10/2014 6:53:00 PM , Rating: 2
I am hoping that quantum dot LED backlights will catch on soon until OLED is fully ready. From what I understand (and I may be wrong), quantum dots can be used as a LCD backlight or on its own similar to OLED. I know they had QD TV's demo'd at CES, surprised we haven't heard more about it. The quality is supposed be so much better than LED, and reduce power as well.




RE: Quantum dots
By pandemonium on 1/11/2014 7:01:24 AM , Rating: 2
I'm still waiting for LPD (Laser Phosphor Display). Screw everything else, this will kill once it's proprietary hands finally let it go (Prysm).


Samsung's AMOLED failure is widespread
By GeneMosher on 1/11/2014 5:04:07 AM , Rating: 2
I have a $600 Samsung Galaxy S4 with a hairline crack across the AMOLED display underneath the gorilla glass which renders the device totally useless. Samsung voided my 12 month warranty on my 5 month old device and said they would fix it for $200. Going online I see that there are perhaps hundreds of thousands of us who have this same broken AMOLED display. It seems to me it is either a design or a manufacturing defect but Samsung alleges abuse, even though there is no damage to the gorilla glass in all of these cases. The AMOLED simply cracks. Buyer Beware!




By milktea on 1/11/2014 1:10:45 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the heads up. I'll be extra careful with my S4. And hopefully, it could last 2 years before my next upgrade.
:)


He should know
By Sivar on 1/12/2014 8:41:46 PM , Rating: 1
Samsung Exec: OLEDs not ready for prime time.
Samsung customers: Samsung not ready for prime time.




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki