Hi
I=92m thinking of a hypothetical monitor for a TV/computer. This display does not use plasma, LCD, or a backlight to any extent. Instead it relies purely on ILEDs for emission of light, colors, and images. As with most screens, each pixel contains a red, green, and blue subpixel. However, in this hypothetical monitor, each subpixel consists of a single ILED.
ILED =3D Inorganic Light Emitting Diode
Each pixel =96 and its respective subpixels =96 are as small as physically- possible given the state of today=92s technology. The screen contains as many pixels per area physically-possible with today=92s technology. These specs ensure that highest possible image resolution.
What would be the disadvantages of this purely-ILED monitor =96 besides the cost?
Would refresh rate apply to this type of monitor? If so, what would be the maximum refresh-rate possible with this monitor?
I think this type of display is the most energy-efficient possible considering today=92s technology. Am I right?
ILED kicks LCD=92s butt anyday.
These so-called =93LED TVs=94 in the current market as simply LCDs with LED backlights. These evil marketers are so manipulative and the customers who fall for them are so unwise.
LCDs reek. When an LCD monitor is turned on, it required more watts to stay dark than to be bright. My hypothetical ILED monitor does the exact opposite and is more eco-friendly because it doesn=92t waste energy using a backlight.
My ILED screen totally kills both plasma and LCD technology. ILED also is significantly more energy-efficient than OLED.
OLED =3D Organic Light Emitting Diode
Any chance of my theoretical ILED display appearing in department stores in the next year?
Thanks,
Green Xenon