Yes, I talked about that aspect of it, and mentioned the efficiency hit from downconversion. Also, since they're still polarization devices, you get another 50% brightness hit. Which, when you're starting with a blue OLED, the type that has the fastest decay rate, is a major problem.
Manufacturing RGB OLED subpixels is no harder and likely easier than manufacturing quantum dot conversion subpixels, so you don't actually reduce overall complexity. The color patterning still has to happen, it just happens at a different stage.
The most efficient way to do color displays is to pattern the emitters. That's what RGB subpixel OLED does. That's not what QD-OLED is going to do. Yes, it will still achieve good black levels because you get subpixel intensity patterning, but the brightness will be abysmal. And because of the abysmal brightness, you'll have to crank up the OLED to levels where longevity will suffer. Burn-in would be the logical result, spots of your TV where the absolute intensity has to be higher are going to decay faster than the rest. It's taking an existing issue with OLED and making it worse.
It's that last line on the chart that's a legitimate competitor to OLED. Electroluminescent displays might get there, as but they don't have the brightness yet as far as I know. Maybe in that 2021-2023 timeframe they will have improved to the point of being an alternate emitter type.
As far as the holy grail, that's a fully inorganic display. Inorganic RGB-patterned emitters will be the best display technology we can get, and people have done it. Micro-LED devices are already being used by helmet-mounted displays, for example. The problem is that manufacturing costs are enormous, even for a few square inches, so only the military can afford it. And it's completely out of the question for TV sizes as a commercial product.
Last edited by Mand12; 05-14-2019 at 11:53 AM.