Yeah probably cheaper, but you're not replacing a dozen CFLs with a dozen LEDs. Maybe a dozen CFLs for a few hundred, or maybe thousand, LEDs. I'm sure these are surface mount type LEDs, not the larger types you'd find in your mouse.
Also, using the LEDs the way they do would add a level of complexity to the system. It would need another controller to translate the the brightness of the picture and then turn on the individual LEDs on or off.
I don't see a problem if they make a bit more money on a TV. It looks like they are giving better picture, possibly a more energy efficient TV, for the same price as before. I like that.
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
aren't LED's less expensive to manufacture than CFL?
but they charge more for them? just asking
Yeah probably cheaper, but you're not replacing a dozen CFLs with a dozen LEDs. Maybe a dozen CFLs for a few hundred, or maybe thousand, LEDs. I'm sure these are surface mount type LEDs, not the larger types you'd find in your mouse.
Also, using the LEDs the way they do would add a level of complexity to the system. It would need another controller to translate the the brightness of the picture and then turn on the individual LEDs on or off.
I don't see a problem if they make a bit more money on a TV. It looks like they are giving better picture, possibly a more energy efficient TV, for the same price as before. I like that.