Is the Set-Top Box Going Away?

May 31st, 2011

“Evolve or Die…” the famous words uttered by Michael Powell at NAB more than half a decade ago (April-2004) continue to haunt broadcasters as they struggle for ways to avoid trading “TV advertising dollars for Internet pennies” in the inevitable move to Over the Top (OTT) or IPTV delivery. In a world where the Internet is “changing everything…”, some believe one of the biggest casualties will be the humble set-top-box (STB) as IPTV-ready and Wi-Fi enabled TVs gain in popularity. They see analogies to the impact “cable-ready” TVs had during the height of the analog era. Others aren’t so sure.

“Set-tops are clearly moving to the point where they are either a piece of software that lives in another device or they’re virtualized totally in the cloud,” said Ken Morse, Cisco’s CTO in the service provider technology group, at his keynote address a recent (April-2011) Light Reading event in New York City. In 2006 Cisco purchased STB provider, Scientific Atlanta.

The STB device has been around since the 1950’s, but first entered the mainstream in the US along side cable TV (pay TV.) They were more commonly known as a cable converter box and were primarily used to bridge the inbound cable signal from the “cable head-end” to an analog RF signal required by the subscribers TV set.

Companies like Motorola, General Instruments, and Scientific Atlanta were major providers of these STB solutions as well as innovations like digital cable that enabled 2-way communication (for VOD services) and dramatically extended channel range delivered to subscribers using data compression.

As traditional broadcast distribution is undergoing a sea change, the slack is being taken up by a host of new Internet providers. Recent analysis from media information providerSNL Kagan (Charlottesville, VA) indicates broadcasters are now having to contend with a global move towards IPTV service adoption, which is being driven by a handful of telcos. The top five operators account for 44.3% of the global IPTV subscriber base at year-end 2010. In fact, ten years after the Powell warning to broadcasters, IPTV subscriptions are expected to grow to over 70M (by 2014) with adoption increasing at a whopping 92.4% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) over the past six years.

SNL Kagan’s media and analyst, Julija Jurkevic, said: “Telcos often provide the spark igniting consumer interest in multi-screen services, HD and VOD, generating in parallel support for investment in next generation broadband networks.”

“Spark” indeed, word on the street is new Android powered STBs were the hot item at the CeBIT show in Hanover Germany this past spring. More important, the Android platform can help existing IP-STB companies like Seagate, WD or Roku offer “…a platform that’s far more extendable than their current media player offerings, and it could help them to sell inexpensive devices that go far beyond what Apple TV & Co. currently offer,” according to Janko Roettgers of Gigaom.com.

So is the traditional STB really on its way out? Even with “cable ready” TVs there was still a market for hybrid devices that added services like VOD and later, cable cards for security. The popularity of AppleTV is another example of a new age STB deployment strategy that includes a wireless mini-computer that links content back to the TV, from diverse sources like PCs, iPods, -phones and -pads. As evidenced above at CeBIT, the trend in China and other regions also seems to be moving in the direction of more advanced (computer sans keyboard) STB to extend TV connectivity.

While the STB may be changing it still has a long healthy life ahead. As long as consumer’s TVs keep their extended lifecycle, the changing pace of technology will continue to drive demand for the STB, offering the hottest connectivity options to broadcast programming distribution du jour. – Steve Sechrist

Note: for expanded version of this story, see the upcoming June issue of Large Display Report.

Technology and the Evolution of Audience Behavior

April 26th, 2011

From the early days of Vaudeville to today’s multi-screen, over the top Internet viewing, the delivery, accessibility, and richness of human entertainment continues to evolve-and has always been closely linked to technology. Even the French term Vaudeville (voix de ville or “voice of the city”) has its roots in reflecting and delivering the popular sentiments of the day in its great theatrical palaces with that era’s cutting edge acoustics, stage lighting and design.

Think of the icons of bygone radio and early TV days who started in Vaudeville and later the Borscht Belt. Jack Benny, Kate Smith, Bob Hope, Milton Berle, Judy Garland, Sammy Davis, Jr., Red Skelton, Burns and Allen, even the Three Stooges; many of these (older) entertainers had to evolve their entertainment and delivery from “a billing at the Palace,” then, the pinnacle of any performers career, to films, radio and eventually the small screen, TV. All mediums enabled through technology breakthroughs that changed the dynamic of the entertainment content to the audience forever.

We (the audience) continue to evolve our consumption behaviors in direct response to the technology of the day. And today that behavior is a “fragmented viewing experience.” Here’s how a recent Accenture report puts it; “There is no longer any delivery channel or device that receives the uninterrupted attention of viewers. The viewing experience is now made up of an ever-changing mix of different devices for different reasons, all at the same time.”

And what is the Holy Grail “most appealing” to consumers? According to the Accenture numbers; “Catch-up TV to pause and watch at leisure.” They say a full 40% of respondents worldwide identified this feature as the Most Important Video-Over-Internet service in their 2011 Consumer Usage Survey. By geography, the US, UK and Australia were all at or near 45% in this category. And to underscore its importance, the secondary feature of PVR (time shifting, including storing and watching whenever) was rated at number two, at 24%. Web surfing, Device shifting and Interactive social networking access all followed at 14%, 12% and 11% respectively in the worldwide totals looking at the top video over internet service features.

Here’s the point, as technology continues to empower consumers, the “empowered” TV viewer wants that same experience, freedom of choice, and access to content on a schedule of their choosing. Also, viewers are using secondary devices (the second screen or personal on-line device) to augmenting broadcast TV content during the show.

And that is what’s challenging entrenched broadcasters today, whose value to their customer (the advertiser) is delivering the ad message to the “uninterrupted attention of viewers.” It’s technology that has drastically eroded these audience numbers.

But we think broadcasters are finally getting it and here’s the evidence. At NAB this year the key messaging was about, “…bringing content to life on any platform.” In fact, show organizers now describe the event as the “…worldwide gathering place for broadcasters, digital media and entertainment professionals,” and even the conference program began to reflect that insight with two days dedicated to “content” and a full day to “content in the cloud.” These are promising signs of evolution-but challenges have just begun.

We’ll have more on this and further insights from NAB in this months coming issue of Large Display Report, so don’t miss it. – Steve Sechrist

NBC Live Looks to “Bust DVR Viewing”

April 19th, 2011

We got wind of a Friday memo from NBC Universal Senior VP of Affiliate Marketing and Development Scot Chastain to all NBC Affiliate stations in the US. According to sources familiar with the e-mail, the group launched the beta version of its interactive web site NBC-Live offering social networking with friends and fans in the same time zone while the program is airing. Chastain believes the iPad application “…busts DVR viewing,” with an offer that “…will entice television fans to watch our key shows as they air live. In an environment overloaded with social media, we all know what a challenge it is to get those eyes tuned into any show while it’s happening.”

In the press release, Vivi Zigler, President of NBCUniversal said of NBC-Live, “It creates a live viewing experience that they can’t get anywhere else.” NBC-Live site is described as a having special attractions where:
* Fans interact with fellow fans and the NBC Live staff
* Moderated social stream
* Fans share comments across Facebook and Twitter
* Fans “follow” other users
The site/app also offers enhanced content that features:
* Polls, trivia, insider commentary, fun facts
* Character quotes that run synced to the (live) broadcast
* Actors, writers, and other insiders will host special events
* Users will be able to vote for their favorite contestants on another program called “The Voice”

This sounds like NBC is building a shadow social networking site, built on its popular shows fan base. But will the strategy work? Or to put it another way, will “fans” of a popular TV program, some who view via DVR and a growing percentage over the web, change viewing habits to get what the site is offering beyond just real-time viewing?

First, we think the term “challenge” used to characterize the network TV environment, is putting it mildly. Network TV has been eroding viewership since the good old days of the big three (NBC, ABC, and CBS) and a September 2010 valuation of the NBC/U empire placed the network piece at a negative $600M. Wunderlich Securities analyst Matthew Harrigan called it, “the weakest among its peers.” Facebook on the other hand is valued by some estimates at somewhere north of $50B (WSJ Blog-Jan 2011.) And if that’s not enough to show Chastain is swimming up stream of the trend, ABI reported today by 2016, more than 3B Internet connected devices will have shipped-adding to network TV’s “challenge” to bust DVR viewing habits.

More importantly, the DVR viewing that Chastain is looking to “bust” is just the tip of the viewership iceberg. His future key demographic is not really DVR users anyway, but the teens who mostly access TV programming over the top, like the NBC Hulu site. They NEVER see a program when it airs. Most of NBC (and all other network’s) future viewers want al la carte viewing on their schedule, not a return to the glory days of viewing based on a schedule designed by network executive.

But not all is wrong-headed about the NBC-Live web site. First, they are doing something right by acknowledging the importance of the second screen (iPad and hopefully other tablets) to engage and interact. They recognize the social networking component, and its value to viewers. And they are looking to broaden the viewership experience with added content from show stars, writers and others in the pipe.

We think this is a good first-step for the company looking to figure out their place in the Web-connected world. More importantly, Chastain is genuinely looking for feedback both from viewers, and the network affiliates, an excellent sign of a willingness to improve through iteration. Also, the site is in Beta, perhaps a long way from being officially launched.

We think long-term, most of the NBC-Live content will migrate to Facebook either with or without the help of NBC, and the company will eventually get back to focusing on the creative side of programming, rather than go head-to-head with social networking sites. To paraphrase Brian Cooley of CNET in his recent NAB presentation at the Radio Luncheon last week, he said …be the subject of discussion on the social web sites, lead the parade with your content, don’t try to be the social networking site. – Steve Sechrist

The Golden Age of Television Once More…

This is one of those “how to boil a frog” stories-you know, try to put a frog into boiling water, and he’ll jump a mile-but place him a nice cool bath and gradually increase the heat, and you get him every time. Now imagine the subscriber TV space is trying to get consumers to pay for content that over-the-air broadcasters have been providing free for decades. I’m old enough to remember the pre-cable days (yes that really dates me) when hoards of door-to-door sales folks were unleashed on neighborhoods with the promised nirvana of pay-TV. No more commercials, was the mantra and not four, but a whopping 30 channels of programming including full-run movies-every night, all for less than one dollar a day. For the record, John Walson started one of the first cable systems in the US at a cost of a $100 hook-up fees and just $2/month.

Well the cool sweet water of cable was simply too much for us frogs (uh… consumers) to resist. Fast forward to today’s subscriber TV market and you have the boiling water of an ARPU (average revenue per user) of closer to $79, not 30-channels but 130 (too much of a good thing?) And, we still have to sit through commercials – in fact, much more than in pre-1972 regulated TV era (but that’s not cable’s fault.)

What this move to subscriber TV did, among other things, was change the dynamic of TV program funding. The original over-the-air (OTA) broadcast networks were built on the economics of free. That is, free TV programming paid for by advertisers. The system worked – people were entertained and informed through a very narrow pipe of the three major networks plus local affiliates. There was plenty of choice, (i.e. 1972, Thursday night prime time: The Mod Squad, The Waltons or Flip Wilson) and a regulated system that included protection for children (caps on sex and violence) and limits on time dedicated to TV ads.

But the biggest change for content providers was the move away from advertisers to an affiliate fee-based system, fed by the boiling water of subscriber monthly fees from pay-TV. Just how big is this? Well, Business Week covered this space last Spring and recons the number is somewhere around $32B / year. Here’s how Bill Gruley put it in his abovethecrowd.com blog last April. “Over the past 30 years, these fees have become the lifeblood of the TV content business – affecting how the major aggregators think and operate, and also affecting how content is produced, financed, and packaged.”

Enter the age of the Internet and IPTV. The so-called over-the-top delivery of video provides a different viewing experience, essentially removing the traditional broadcaster from the content-viewer equation. The only problem is, content providers are hooked on the $32B entitlement. This is the real reason why Silicon Valley icons like Apple and Google had problems signing up content providers to their respective IPTV solutions. The promise of click-through ad-based revenue simply doesn’t match the enormous revenue generated by Affiliate fees. In fact, past IPTV deals with Netflix, Hulu and others exempted them from paying these Affiliate fees, prompting the big boys, like Comcast to recently cry foul-as Netflix and Hulu subscribers grew, while concerns over cord-cutting began to materialize.

And that’s the whole point. IPTV offers the return to Ad-based TV programming, now on the viewer’s terms. Unlimited choice via video streaming with the promise of well crafted ads, tailored to a specific demographic. The advertisers now know exactly who they are talking to, and specifically what message I want to see-to motivate a transaction. In fact, a transaction I can initiate right on the screen, as I continue to view the program-if I wish.

The problem is how to get programmers to the party? Can they be weaned from the monthly cable / satellite revenue? I say, it’s time to take back TV and jump out of this boiling pot of water-that we ourselves are fueling. How about a mass appeal for national Cord-Cutting month? Help programmers kick the Affiliate fee habit… Cold Turkey. Let’s reclaim our TV and show the network bosses who’s really in charge. Cut your cord and send a message to the entrenched media that you want TV delivered over the top, …the alternative, 130 channels and still nothing to watch. So what do we really have to lose? Who knows, maybe united, we can change the world-or at least this small part of it… – Steve Sechrist

3D for the Small Screen Coming in View

It’s not here yet but some of the thunder from the upcoming Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Barcelona Spain was unleashed last week. LG officially announced the “World’s First 3D Smartphone,” the LG Optimus 3D, that will be shown at the February 14th confab on the Iberian Peninsula. The device promises “a full 3D experience right in the palm of the hand,” according to the Feb 1st press release, and offers a glasses-free autostereoscopic (AS-3D) display to deliver this.

But LG isn’t alone, and not the first to offer an AS-3D Smartphone. Sharp’s Android-based Galapagos (003SH and 005SH) both offer an AS-3D display using a 3.8-inch LCD. The devices were first shown in Japan in November 2010, and like the LG, will be on hand at MWC this month.

Long-time readers of the Display Daily know we’ve been writing about small AS-3D displays, many of which have been used in handsets, particularly in Japan. As early as 2003 Sharp and wireless carrier NTT DoCoMo partnered up to launched an AS-3D enabled cell phone, long before those devices got “smart.” But while the device sold 2.8M units in Japan, the product was discontinued, reportedly because “…the carrier didn’t make money selling related services and products” according to Arthur Berman’s coverage in our July-07 issue of Mobile Display Report (p. 32).

But all this begs the issue, do consumers really want a 3D Smartphone to begin with? Back in 2007 NEC did a study on its prototype 2D/3D cell phone showing users various applications empowered by 3D. The study found the top cell phone applications desired by consumers included 3D “photo-mail,” 3D movie, and 3D gaming. Of the group of 345 participants, NEC reported 86% could see the stereoscopic image, 77% considered this a display advancement, and 46% said they wanted to use the technology.

Since the top consumer interest in 3D was “Photo-mail,” LG did the right thing and included two cameras in the Optimus 3D so users can take 3D photos of themselves, view them on the phone and e-mail them to friends.

Since the Sharp/NTT DoCoMo 3D experiment in 2003, we’ve seen a complete revolution in the wireless/handheld space, with advances in virtually every aspect of the technology. Perhaps like the Apple Newton, (pre-cursor to the iPad) and the early days of pen computers, 2003 was simply too soon for 3D technology to deliver all that was required for a rich user experience. Lack of content in 2003 and other ecosystem improvements since then like connectivity to a larger 3D display and the processing power and battery life to render mobile 3D games and other Apps fun and useful come to mind.

We think the time is ripe for AS-3D handhelds. Unlike the early 3D phones launched in Japan, LG and Sharp are offering full-blown, hand-held computers by comparison, which come with HDMI and DLNA connectivity. And perhaps more importantly, the Optimus 3D comes equipped with a dual-lens 3D camera allowing users to create their own content for viewing on the small screen, or easy connectivity to a larger 3DTVs. And the only thing more compelling than one’s own image on a display just may be that image in 3D. – Steve Sechrist

 

Moving Toward a Ubiquitous Software Platform

November 23rd, 2010

Earlier this month in our Mobile Display Report, we covered Google’s Android smartphone O/S and its stellar worldwide market growth hovering around 1,300% (Q/Q) and unit penetration that moved from 1.4M units last year (in Q3) to a whopping 20M units today (25% market share.) Android-based smartphones have left even the mighty iPhone in the dust, but even though Android is considered a smartphone O/S there are implications for displays far beyond just the small screen.

eBooks at the Tipping Point Over Hard-cover

August 3rd, 2010

OK it’s the digital age and we’ve been told time and again that now—everything is different. Sometimes this is hard getting used to, particularly when we are talking about the digital age coming up against the most important invention of the modern era—printed books of the Gutenberg type.

Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor

But the world has indeed changed (again) this past July when Amazon.com (one of the top book sellers) reported that Q2 2010 sales of electronic books for the Kindle, Amazon’s e-reader, outnumber sales of hardcover books for the first time. Then on Sunday, the company announced its first “Million copy e-book seller Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo making the book a charter member of the “Kindle Million Club” with other top sellers, closing in on that number fast.

The details of the Amazon announcement said in Q2, the company sold 143 e-books for every 100 hard-covers, and the trend is growing. Amazon reported in the month of June (Summer reading month) that number jumped to 180 to 100 e-books to hard-cover editions. Add to this the fact that e-books only represent 630K vs. the untold millions of hard-cover books available for purchase, and you may agree with Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos. He calls this “…astonishing when you consider that we’ve been selling hardcover books for 15 years, and Kindle books for 33 months.”

Apple Sees “Duct Tape” to the Rescue…

July 13th, 2010

It seems that even the highest of high-tech gadgets can gain from a little duct tape now and then. The super strong, polyethylene, reinforced, reusable tape with its pressure sensitive adhesive almost sounds like it’s made for use with a display. Now Consumer Reports (CR) is making that a reality as the group that praises the iPhone4 on all other features says that until it gets it’s antenna reception fixed, (beyond a temporary duct tape kludge), it can no longer recommend the top selling smart phone product from Apple as a “recommended buy.”

 

Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor

Seems that CR confirmed “…the [iPhone4] reception problem in its own independent lab.” The findings showed that when a user’s finger or hand covered the lower left side of the phone, signal strength degraded enough to result in a dropped call. The magazine said it tested three separate devices purchased at three separate retailers. According to a report on MarketWatch.com, in a move to remedy the problem, CR researchers were able to prevent signal loss by using duct tape over the lower left corner of the phone.

But the iPhone is in good company. Duct tape has been used in mission critical high-tech situations for over forty years (and probably a lot longer as the sticky tape was originally invented for use during World War II.)

On the Apollo 13 space craft mission, (popularized by the Tom Hanks film of the same name) duct tape was so critical that the use of it saved the lives of the three crewmen on board after the explosion and subsequent aborted moon landing in 1970. A Wikipedia article reports that NASA ground crew engineer Ed Smylie designed a CO2 scrubber to filter the air in part, using duct tape. Here’s the submission: “…he knew the problem was solvable when it was confirmed that duct tape was on the spacecraft: ‘I felt like we were home free’, he said in 2005. “One thing a Southern boy will never say is, ‘I don’t think duct tape will fix it.’” And beyond the aborted Apollo 13 mission, duct tape was also used to repair a damaged fender on a lunar rover (moon buggy vehicle) on the Apollo 17 mission. The substance is even reserved for use as a restraining device in the event “acute psychosis” ever strikes an astronaut on the space station (nice to know).

But for Apple’s newest technology marvel, the flaw in the external antenna design was confirmed by CR labs and is not associated with a faulty signal strength indicator, as previously reported by Apple on July 2nd. “The signal problem is the reason that we did not cite the iPhone 4 as a ‘recommended’ model, even though its score in our other tests placed it atop the latest ratings of smart phones that were released today,” the CR Electronics Blog stated.

What was particularly embarrassing for Apple was a continuing series of circulated YouTube videos documenting reception drop by simply picking up the phone and holding it over the sensitive left corner of the iPhone4 where the two contact points are bridged by the human hand. The CR Lab group also said an iPhone protective cover or case would most likely remedy the problem as easily as the duct tape.

Beyond the glitch, CR said it rates the iPhone smart phone at the top of its smart phone ratings (for AT&T phones), with a score of 76 in eight separate categories. The next closest non-iPhone contender is the Android O/S based Motorola Backflip with a score of 69. That model ranks third, behind the gen2 iPhone 3G S (predecessor to iPhone4) that scored a 74 in the CR testing table.

No official word yet from Apple, but the word on the street is that this may be the reason some folks on the wait list for the coveted device have been “waiting longer than usual.” Finally, just so you know, when it rains it pours! Information Week is reporting that a series of actions against Apple are being consolidated into a class action suit against the company and carrier AT&T for violating anti-trust regulations.

 

3D Glasses Poised for Mainstream

April 27th, 2010

Want some real proof 3D technology is here to stay? Just type in “3D Glasses” into Google and take a look at the hits… One favorite is 3dglassesonline.com with a “nifty fifty’s” take-out menu (web page genre) and the classic headline borrowed from McDonalds, claiming “Over One Billion Served!” That’s billion with a “B” and that’s just the anaglyph version of 3D Glasses from companies like American Paper Optics, Berezin and 3D Glasses.net, some selling the paper cut-out types in catalogues along with rainbow makers and other novelty toys.

Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor

But the real story is that non-cardboard-based 3D glasses makers now include some of the biggest names in consumer electronics. Just look at the current list of 3D Glasses purveyors we’ve assembled to date. Top brands like Panasonic, LG, Samsung, Sony, and Viewsonic, plus Dolby, Pentax, and NVIDIA. Then there’s the 3D Cinema technology companies like XpanD, RealD, Master Image (and Dolby mentioned above) all looking for a foothold in the consumer space. But that’s not all, there’s also the premium glasses suppliers looking to open new 3D niche markets, some with a high-fashion spin (and high price tag to boot), with others offering unique technology. San Diego based iZ3D and Gunnar Optiks (Carlsbad, CA), offer one such solution. MicroVision Optical 3D (San Diego) is sticking to “fashionable” passive glasses in theater market for now–selling in the $30 to $40 range. Bit Cauldron (Gainesville, FL) uses a ZigBee interface to connect its glasses with the 3D source device.

The big name CE makers are in the space with some interesting offerings. LG’s 3D glasses have been around since 2007, and include rechargeable batteries (model AG-S100.) They currently sell (retail) for $199 a pair the same MSRP as the Samsung glasses that also ship with its current 7000 series 3DTVs in both (LCD and PDP) vintages. Panasonic’s 3D Glasses (model TY-EW3D10U) can be found at BestBuy for $149 and it has a new deal with nVidia which will allow their glasses to view content on the Panasonic 3DTV.

For its part, front 3D projection maker Viewsonic just announced a new pair of active-stereo 3D shutter glasses (PGD-150) selling for $99 retail. They are designed to work with Viewsonic’s latest TI based DLP Link 3D Projector (120Hz “3D Ready”) and will probably extend to any DLP Link projector brand.

Viewsonic currently has nine different 3D enabled projector models for sale, all for under $1K, (the PJD6251 XGA is the most expensive at $877.) Most all are XGA with two exceptions, the WXGA (PJD6531w) sells for $714 and the SVGA (PJD45112) is a $460 box from Viewsonic. The company is targeting the classroom with the relatively low cost 3D projector / glasses combination, according to our recent conversation with product manager Erik Willey.

The bad news is that there is very little compatibility from one set of glasses to any 3D display. CEA has a task force to start to address this concern and Insight Media recently provided a report on 3D glasses to 3D @ Home Consortium, for use by CEA in their standardization effort.

Nevertheless, as home 3D technology adoption continues this year and beyond, we think the 3D Glasses space is destine to develop into a full-blown CE category, and from the looks of the web, and companies listed here, we are not alone in this belief. So get ready as a new class of electronic eyewear that just may be poised to dominate the TV accessories category as we move into our second decade of the new century (…forget losing the remote, where in the heck are those 3D glasses?)

Ed. note: Look for a more complete rundown of the 3D Glasses offerings in this month’s Large Display Report that ships on May-Day.

 

End of an Era at Kodak

December 8th, 2009

They pioneered a totally new display technology in the 1970’s, developing it over the course of the next 30 plus years. They hold hundreds of patents that are licensed by dozens of manufacturers, and trained a cadre of display engineers that now span the globe, developing what may prove to be the central display technology of the next several decades. Yet in the end, it only rated a couple of lines in a corporate press release from Kodak last week – but it was a bombshell announcement; The company would sell its OLED business “…to a group of LG companies.”

Steve Sechrist
Senior Analyst and Editor

From Kodak’s corporate halls, it was the right thing to do, and the market agreed giving the stock a slight bump last week on the news. Simply put, the technology was going to cost too much to develop. Here’s how Kodak put it, in their curt 185-word press release:

“OLED is one of the businesses we wanted to reposition to maximize Kodak’s competitive advantage at the intersection of materials and imaging science. This action is consistent with that strategy. Our OLED intellectual property portfolio is fundamental; however, realizing the full value of this business would have required significant investment.”

Not that the company wasn’t making progress with OLED. At SID the company was working with Montreal based Ignis Innovation and its MaxLife backplane technology, and showed a new 5-inch AMOLED display using white OLED with an RGBW matrix color filter and the Kodak deep blue phosphor. Ken Werner noted in his July-09Large Display Report write-up that, “The pixels in this display had the same size as a 32-inch FHD (1920 x 1080) TV (370 micrometer pitch.)”

There was progress on the solid state lighting front as well. As recently as May-09, Kodak received a $1.7M US Dept. of Energy (DOE) contract for solid-state lighting development and commented on the progress of manufacturing, stating “Vapor Injection Source Technology allows manufacturers to significantly reduce unit-manufacturing costs, with high manufacturing throughput and material utilization that initially exceeds 50%, and could be greater than 75% in future manufacturing applications.”

DOE even gave Kodak an award for excellence in project execution, stating; “Kodak exceeded the project efficacy target of 50 lm/W, developing an Energy Star color and efficacy compliant OLED that delivers 56 lm/W, 10,000 hours life, color rendering index of 83.6, and a color temperature of 4,000K.” Dr. James Buntaine, CTO and vice president at Kodak OLED Systems was also quite bullish on the future potential of its technology, “OLED solid state lighting has tremendous potential to transform the future of the lighting industry – enabling future lighting systems that are significantly lower-cost and more energy-efficient.”

But perhaps most telling is this; after all the progress, research and development invested in the technology, Kodak was still selling its top-of-the-line 7.6-inch AMOLED display based photo frame for just under $1,000 and well out of the reach of mainline consumers.

Ken Werner said it best in a recent Display Daily, “As has been true for all display technologies, the path to high-volume manufacturing and larger sizes for AMOLED has been slower and harder than anticipated. That has… left most of the serious development to large corporations with deep pockets and patient corporate cultures.” So after 30 years, Kodak’s patience has finally run its course and the banner for continuing its OLED development is now passed to LG, where the new “K” in Kodak OLEDs now stands for Korea. – Steve Sechirst