MovieChat Forums > Displays and Projectors > Samsung is trying to fool us

Samsung is trying to fool us


I have noticed lately in Samsungs marketing strategy with their new "Samsung LED" displays is that they fail to mention that their LED TVs are just a different version of LCD technology and not a brand new technology in itself. I think they are trying to fool people into believing that their TVs are the new OLED displays which they aren't. There website used to say that the LED TVs are "40% less power consumption than CONVENTIONAL LCDs" which indicates that they are still based off of LCD technology and not OLED.

reply

Eh...they're not claiming it's an OLED, and Joe Schmo doesn't know what OLED is, so Samsung can't be really said to be misleading the public. It'll be up to Sony or even Samsung itself when they start to mass-market OLED TVs to convince the public that OLED is a completely new and different technology.

The technology behind these Samsung LED displays is basically replacing the single uniform backlight on most LCD displays with a grid of dynamic LED lights, which means a higher contrast ratio--e.g., when showing a picture with light and dark sections, the LEDs in the dark sections can dim, making the blacks blacker.

reply

and unfortunately, edge lit LCD technology, which is what samsung is using in these models has uniformity issues. Back lit (like previous Sony models and I believe the highest line from last years Samsungs) is a better technology.

reply

The uniformity issues are what kept led backs from getting past prototype, but them there Koreans at Samsung are pretty freakin' smart and once they set on a problem they don't quit till they figure it out. Samsung has a great semi-conductor division - one of the best in the world, if anyone can manufacture to a batch emission tolerance below detectable ranges, it's them.

We'll be landing under fire gentlemen. Men will die.

reply

Thanks for clarifying the distinction--I presume these edge lit LCDs, then, don't have the selective dimming that I mentioned in my post.

reply