| | | in your own words "The patent chart below is quite impressive." you relied upon a total bullshit marketing companies paid research. Clean up your sources. You're impression was based upon a source with no integrity. I for one am not impressed by ANYTHING that firm produces as their motivation is suspect due to the very nature of their company.
Not to mention your earlier challenge of the integrity, reputation, accuracy, and reliability of an independent display research firm DisplayMate ...."its interesting" remark. Enough is Enough.
Overview:
DisplayMate is an industry standard for optimizing, calibrating, testing, evaluating and comparing all types of displays, monitors, projectors, mobile displays, HDTVs, and all display technologies, such as LCD, OLED, 3D, LED, LCoS, Plasma, DLP and CRT. DisplayMate is used by hundreds of publications for editorial testing and lab reviews. DisplayMate is used by every major manufacturer in their research labs, by hundreds of test labs and service facilities, by thousands of technicians, and by over 100,000 consumers and end users. Via DisplayMate's Consulting Services we assist many of the world's leading manufacturers in developing and producing the best displays and display technologies.
DisplayMate Technologies specializes in proprietary sophisticated scientific display calibration and mathematical display optimization to deliver unsurpassed objective performance, picture quality and accuracy for all types of displays including video and computer monitors, projectors, HDTVs, mobile displays such as smartphones and tablets, and all display technologies including LCD, OLED, 3D, LED, LCoS, Plasma, DLP and CRT. We guarantee to out-perform all traditional ad-hoc calibration methods and products that are used by many manufacturers, technicians and service facilities.
So what exactly did you consider so interesting all these years that they would conclude OLED the winner? The fact they are technically enabled to actually do scientific analysis and willing to share the results with the world? The fact they actually publish their data results (repeatable by anyone with the appropriate measuring equipment). IF you want to find their work so interesting why not explain in more clear terms what it is you find so interesting. Otherwise it just sounds like a sly underhanded suggestion along the lines of a conspiracy theory.
Your approach to research data today from 2 very diametrically different motivations to providing data is bizarre. You trust a paid marketer over a consumer reports style organization.
Ahem, I don't have a shred of respect for your Impressions or "interesting" concerns..based upon what you've demonstrated today. Perhaps provide the background of your sources to save us a few google clicks before we start to draw any conclusions of your wondrous findings. |
|
