IN the last year or so, Sony introduced its OLED  Display system . Cost here was $3000+ for a 55 inch TV. 

I'm nota techie, so don't understand exactly how it works. This what I understand: OLED stands for Organic Light Emitting Diode. Each pixel produces a colour AND its own light, or none. This means total black, the basis of TV brightness.. There is no back light.


Samsung's reply is QLED; Quantum Dot Light Emitting Diode.   I bought a 55 inch TCL QLED  on Ebay for $1400; Android Smart TV, UHD 4K, and it's terrific. Don't understand how it works

  QLED is NOT a new display system as far as I can tell. It is still essentially an LCD TV with a backlight. (which the OLED doesn't have)

Now I've had it for awhile ,and done some comparisons, I'm left with the impression that what I bought is simply a very good LCD TV. That I fell for hyperbole. 

Be most interest in opinions about the QLED TV .

I believe you did. I believe QLED TV still uses a liquid crystal screen to block off light from a uniformly lit LED light source behind it to produce different levels of screen brightness. LCD screens still can not be completely opaque, and so can not produce true black. So QLED screen is still just an LED illuminated LCD TV, and suffer from the same problem as all LCD TVs. The “quantum” part refers to quantum confinement, which allow the screen to compensate for the deficiencies in the color properties of light emitting diodes, but does absolutely nothing to address the shorting comings if LCDs.

But look on the bright side. You saved $1000-1500.

I too did the comparison and decided what else I can do with my $1000-1500 is worth more to me than blacker blacks on a TV screen.

(February 16, 2019 at 7:10 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: I believe you did.  I believe QLED TV still uses a liquid crystal screen to block off light from a uniformly lit LED light source behind it to produce different levels of screen brightness.  LCD screens still can not be completely opaque, and so can not produce true black.   So QLED screen is still just an LED illuminated LCD TV, and suffer from the same problem as all LCD TVs.   The “quantum” part refers to quantum confinement, which allow the screen to compensate for the deficiencies in the color properties of light emitting diodes, but does absolutely nothing to address the shorting comings if LCDs.

But look on the bright side.  You saved $1000-1500.

I too did the comparison and decided what else I can do with my $1000-1500 is worth more to me than blacker blacks on a TV screen.

Thanks so much for the swift reply.

Although I lack your technical expertise, it seems we each  reached the same conclusion; A vey goodTv for the price.. I'd go further; I still have an older Samsung 50 inch plasma. The picture from  TCl is simply better, producing a brighter,  crisper image.

I love new technology, so I usually get a new computer very 3 years, and new TV every 4 years.  so, I've had a few flat screens. From memory, the only  TV I've had which comes close to the TCL was a 32 inch Sony LCD.  Not sure bigger LCD TV's were  available then.


TCL seem to be rapidly growing company. I suspect that is due in large part because they're cheap and the quality is pretty good. We won't know their life span for sometime, I hope.

I'm delighted with all the improvements in television technology.  Clearer, sharper, more highly defined crap programming is what I live for.

Boru

(February 16, 2019 at 7:41 pm)fredd bear Wrote:

(February 16, 2019 at 7:10 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: I believe you did.  I believe QLED TV still uses a liquid crystal screen to block off light from a uniformly lit LED light source behind it to produce different levels of screen brightness.  LCD screens still can not be completely opaque, and so can not produce true black.   So QLED screen is still just an LED illuminated LCD TV, and suffer from the same problem as all LCD TVs.   The “quantum” part refers to quantum confinement, which allow the screen to compensate for the deficiencies in the color properties of light emitting diodes, but does absolutely nothing to address the shorting comings if LCDs.

But look on the bright side.  You saved $1000-1500.

I too did the comparison and decided what else I can do with my $1000-1500 is worth more to me than blacker blacks on a TV screen.

Thanks so much for the swift reply.

Although I lack your technical expertise, it seems we each  reached the same conclusion; A vey goodTv for the price.. I'd go further; I still have an older Samsung 50 inch plasma. The picture from  TCl is simply better, producing a brighter,  crisper image.

I love new technology, so I usually get a new computer very 3 years, and new TV every 4 years.  so, I've had a few flat screens. From memory, the only  TV I've had which comes close to the TCL was a 32 inch Sony LCD.  Not sure bigger LCD TV's were  available then.


TCL seem to be rapidly growing company. I suspect that is due in large part because they're cheap and the quality is pretty good. We won't know their life span for sometime, I hope.

TCL is a Chinese company that use to produce components for major consumer electronic brands, including Samsung.    When Samsung decided to tout QLED as its answer to LG’s OLED, both Samsung and LG decided the key to winning their contest with each other is market presence and name recognition.  So they both went about recruiting other major brands to use their technology and trade mark.   LG scooped big and got Sony onboard OLED, probably because OLED was a better technology and probably had more future.    Samsung decided to leverage its supply chain in China and get its subcontractors to sell TV under their own names using the Samsung QLED TTADE MARK, since they were making QLED TVs for Samsung already.

With Sony onboard, and the technical superiority of OLED, I think QLED’s days are numbered.

(February 16, 2019 at 8:59 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I'm delighted with all the improvements in television technology.  Clearer, sharper, more highly defined crap programming is what I live for.

Boru

We have a large TV in the family room. I don't recall much about it except that it was only a few hundred dollars, US. I don't watch it except for when walking through the room and asking WTH IS THAT? How many languages has Gilligan's Island been translated into? Subtitles, of course. It wasn't all that funny when it was new.

I just bought a 65" UHD TV for about $500 US including wall-mount installation. They claim to have used Samsung panels, and the picture looks pretty good. Is it the best family unit? Probably not. But for my business, it's so cheap I can buy a few, and replace them once in a while if I need to.

/irrelevant comment

YUGE advantage to being a late adopter.

(February 16, 2019 at 6:39 pm)fredd bear Wrote: IN the last year or so, Sony introduced its OLED  Display system . Cost here was $3000+ for a 55 inch TV. 

I'm nota techie, so don't understand exactly how it works. This what I understand: OLED stands for Organic Light Emitting Diode. Each pixel produces a colour AND its own light, or none. This means total black, the basis of TV brightness.. There is no back light.


Samsung's reply is QLED; Quantum Dot Light Emitting Diode.   I bought a 55 inch TCL QLED  on Ebay for $1400; Android Smart TV, UHD 4K, and it's terrific. Don't understand how it works

  QLED is NOT a new display system as far as I can tell. It is still essentially an LCD TV with a backlight. (which the OLED doesn't have)

Now I've had it for awhile ,and done some comparisons, I'm left with the impression that what I bought is simply a very good LCD TV. That I fell for hyperbole. 

Be most interest in opinions about the QLED TV .

Sounds like fancy language to get more money out of you. I paid $200 for mine I think it is only 45, and it works fine. 

Just like calling fish eggs caviar makes you more money.

I have no problem with supply and demand, or new inventions making human's lives better. And I don't have a problem with price differences or even quality differences, to some extent. But the reality increasingly with global marketing, it isn't about problem solving, but gaining shareholders. Cheap products are simply made to be thrown away. Problem is they don't last long, and that produces more pollution worldwide. The problem with "luxury" items, is that the more they charge for those things, the more it prices everyone else out of affordable living because that drives the makers of the cheaper stuff to charge more too. 

Marketing works, otherwise businesses wouldn't us it. The real problem globally is that you have 62 uber billionaires in the world that have the combined wealth of 3 billion of the rest of the planet.

(February 17, 2019 at 9:50 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: YUGE  advantage to being a late adopter.

Yeh.  For the price of my cousin's early UHD TV, I can make a 2*2 grid that covers most of my bedroom wall.  Do my taxes while playing League of Legends while watching the Matrix while surfing Brazilian butt porn sites?  Don't mind if I do!