HDIEngadget visits HDI...03/14/2010Engadget has visited HDI, and has posted a great post with lot's of info about this interesting company (whom we talked to just a couple of week ago). Here's the most interesting parts of that post:
Interview with HDI's CEO, promises first 103" laser 3D HDTV samples in June03/07/2010HDI is based in California, and is working towards a laser-based 3D HDTV. Their TV will be large (100"), with 1920x1080 resolution and a fast response rate. The TVs will cost between $10,000 to $15,000. HDI's CEO, Ingemar Jansson, was kind enough to answer a few question we had. He also sent us the spec of their upcoming TV that includes a comparison to other 3D display technologies. Q: Ingemar, thanks for answering this. You are building a Laser-LCoS based 3D TV. Can you tell us a bit about the technology? Who are your business partners? (for the lasers, LCoS panels, etc)?Yes we are building laser/Lcos stereoscopic 100" display, it is our own developed technology both with the lasers and the Lcos chip. HDI's 100" 3D Laser TV will cost $10,000-$15,000, first units available in May12/12/2009HDI says that they will begin production of their 100" 3D Laser TVs (1920x1080) in May. Mass-production will take a bit of time - hopefully by Christmas 2010. They also say that the TVs will cost between $10,000 to $15,000. The TVs are 10" thick, and weighs about 75% less than normal 100" LCDs or Plasmas. They also draw 80% less power than a 100" plasma. According to HDI, they do not contain any harmful chemicals, either. HDI's laser-based 3D TV will be released in 201010/31/2009HDI announced that their laser-based 3D HDTV has reached the manufacturing stage, and will be released in 2010. The TV sports 1,920x1,080 resolution, and can handle 2D images too. It uses twin RGP LCoS microdisplays. Via Engadget HDI demoes 100" 3D laser TV09/17/2009HDI, a california-based started is working on a laser-based 3D HDTV. It's a 100" TV, with 1080p resolution (1920 by 1080). They say that the response rate on the TV is exteremly fast and so there's no need 'fhasl from one eye to the other' - which results in better image quality and less headaches. Via ABCLocal |
Popular stories: |