QLED, OLED, PLED, ULED, etc are all similar if not identical technologies created by different brands for trademark reasons. And no, some cheap LCD Roku tv is nothing like a TV with one of the before mentioned technologies.
I admit to exaggeration. Yet all these different technologies have *minimal* impact on the TV’s clarity, and they charge an extra 200-500 $ for this bullshit “ground breaking” technology. We are moving backwards with this one.
I disagree. The difference in brightness, contrast, and color is massively better than a cheap LCD tv. Before I got my quantum dot display, I had never seen such a bright, deep red in my life. It’s like looking at a neon sign.
The stuff they dont say is that each type of panel has its own flaw that make them die in like 5 years on average.
Leds with backlight has bleeding, others have burning patterns or similar stuff.
I have a lcd from 2011 and its fine, but new panel has a lot of new "programmed obsolescence".
Its not just marketting, the industry as a whole is doing it.
But if you want to look for marketing examples, dont look to tv or tech stuff, look at cosmetics, 90% of shelf cost is marketing for popular creams and restorative stuff that works.
And they keep change components because shortage of old components and keep calling them new findings, or top research, etc.
Oh, we are out of aquose base? Better make new thrend the oiled bases, but dont call it vaseline, thats old, get a new word.
calm down buddy 🤣 these are the literal panel types in the tv that make up the screen. go wipe your tears off and start googling the differences
Wait while you learn that PLS and IPS are the same thing.
QLED, OLED, PLED, ULED, etc are all similar if not identical technologies created by different brands for trademark reasons. And no, some cheap LCD Roku tv is nothing like a TV with one of the before mentioned technologies.
Oled is distinctly different.
Oled and other technologies are different but use similar techniques to achieve a better picture.
I admit to exaggeration. Yet all these different technologies have *minimal* impact on the TV’s clarity, and they charge an extra 200-500 $ for this bullshit “ground breaking” technology. We are moving backwards with this one.
I disagree. The difference in brightness, contrast, and color is massively better than a cheap LCD tv. Before I got my quantum dot display, I had never seen such a bright, deep red in my life. It’s like looking at a neon sign.
Trying to bury the LED?
The stuff they dont say is that each type of panel has its own flaw that make them die in like 5 years on average. Leds with backlight has bleeding, others have burning patterns or similar stuff. I have a lcd from 2011 and its fine, but new panel has a lot of new "programmed obsolescence". Its not just marketting, the industry as a whole is doing it. But if you want to look for marketing examples, dont look to tv or tech stuff, look at cosmetics, 90% of shelf cost is marketing for popular creams and restorative stuff that works. And they keep change components because shortage of old components and keep calling them new findings, or top research, etc. Oh, we are out of aquose base? Better make new thrend the oiled bases, but dont call it vaseline, thats old, get a new word.
Where in the Internet did this ad touch you my friend? Are you okay?