back to article Sharp pitches 'world's largest' LCD screen

Not happy with the size of your 32in LCD TV? If money's no object, get on phone to Sharp, which is now taking orders for a monster 108in screen ready for connection to your HD kit. Sharp's not saying how much the beast will set you back because it's offering the display entirely on a built-to-order basis. It's really aimed at …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wouldn't a Plasma look better and cost less?

    Small LCD TV's look bad enough but magine 108 inches of grey blacks and uneven backlighting! Woop!

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Stop

    Wall space isn't the issue ....

    .... it's the length of the room. Of course, like the 50"+ screens already available, it's not really an issue of space for the actual screen, it's that you need to be sitting 20 feet away to avoid looking at a mess of pixels.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Too small

    I'm waiting for 120" before I replace my CRT

  4. Paul Naylor
    Thumb Up

    WANT ONE!!

    The only problem is that this beatie is probably bigger than the largest wall in my front room! S'pose I'll have to make do with a LOTR extended edition marathon on my pitiful 28" Sony...

  5. Secretgeek
    Heart

    I want one.

    Please?

  6. Greg

    Awwww

    "Sharp's not saying how much the beast will set you back because it's offering the display entirely on a built-to-order basis. It's really aimed at businesses who want enormo-screens for conference rooms, shopping centres and the like."

    But I want one!

  7. Greg

    Price

    Just after I posted that, I found a website quoting the price as $100k. Ouch.

  8. mark Silver badge
    Coat

    projector

    save 2K , get a projector instead

  9. Alexandre Swioklo

    Wrong size.

    2160 x 2460mm = 5.316 m², not 3.2m²

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @Alexandre Swioklo

    read it again.. largest screen cut from 2mx2m panel not the size of the manufacterd panel!

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Stop

    @projector

    Save £2K? Try nothing. When flat-screens were £3K, fair enough. Can this comment be filed in the folder marked "Valid arguments 8 years ago" please? Many thanks.

  12. Quantum
    Boffin

    A Projector is Better

    For several years I've enjoyed a high-def projector shining on a 10' screen in my living room. I can see every hair on Charlize's head!

    I went with a projector when the size of these new TVs just got out of hand. It cost me $5,000 and the screen is a sheet of formica from Home Depot ($75).

    Only catch is, you mist be able to completely shut out light entering the room, and preferably have dark walls. But man, is it worth it!

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Pointless picture...

    ...surely we all know what a TV looks like?

    What we need to know now is how big it is -- we need someone standing next to the TV.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    Electric

    How many Nuclear stations do you need to run it?

  15. Davy
    Flame

    Sci-Fi

    Fahrenheit 451, anybody ?

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @@projector

    You can find a 10' wide flat-screen for $4k?

    And @Wall space... if you're running 1080p, or even 720p, the rule of thumb is 1.5x screen width at the outside. A lot of people like 1.2x screen width. A 108" screen is only somewhere around 8' wide (ish) so you're looking at 12 to 15' seating distance. I've got an 80" wide projection screen in my home theater, and the room's only 14' deep. Looks great. If you're in a theater sitting in the middle/middle, you'll get about the same field of view.

  17. eddiewrenn

    @Valid arguments 8 years ago

    There's a folder for that? I've been wondering where all my posts have been going!

  18. ian
    Unhappy

    Just what I wanted

    To be able to watch crap-o-vision in eye-filling surroundo-view! For a mere fortune!

    Oh God, we're doomed (with hyphens).

  19. Christian Berger

    Reason for not Plasma

    The reason for not using Plasma here is fairly simple. Those screens will end up displaying static images for most of their lives.

  20. Antoine Dubuc
    Paris Hilton

    But short lived

    4x 1080p is set for late next year....

    Paris, because she'd looked nice humping on 108 inch! lolll

  21. Greg Andrews
    Boffin

    Rather old news

    Sharp displayed one of these at the CES show in Jan 2007. The column where I first read about the beast decided that it wasn't intended to be a consumer product. Rather it's a demo of Sharp's glass fabrication prowess. Sharp makes displays for a lot of other companies who slap their brand name on the front, and the 108-inch is intended to attract their OEM business rather than purchases from the average consumer.

    For those who wanted someone standing next to it:

    http://tv.about.com/od/manufacturers/ig/2007-CES-Top-Models/Sharp-spokesmodel-Alisha-Jones.htm

  22. heystoopid
    Alien

    @AC

    @ac surely you must have a direct connection to a power sub station for Plasma units similar to that size would consume upwards of 750 watt hours or for 5000 hours of usage some 4000 KwH give or take and an estimated MTBF of between 30,000 and 60,000 hours to reach half light power output . This would equate to life time power consumption of ouch ! , I did not need that wallet load of cash to fund the kids private schooling to pay for it's 15 year working life cycle !

    As for an LCD unit they would average power consumption would be approximately half as much again for the same MTBF of 30,000 hours , but the question remains unanswered is how cheap or dear are the rare and uncommon lamps used in these units or is it cheaper to land fill it and buy a new replacement !

    Strangely no mention on all units as to the relatively constant colour purity drift either (LCD's are truly a nightmare to colour balance for correct colour temperature in photography as for the newest low res 20" colour Mac well forget about that one!) !

    Projectors LCD/DLP units have two problems involving the coolant condenser lens bath water suffering from bacterial bloom and lamp life is any where between 400 to 5000 hours if fitted with a special cold current inrush limiter/lamp filament pre-warmer device/half light output , the replacement globes start at $400 and rapidly climb higher as they have a very specific tight tolerance colour spectrum output . Literally one can say the incandescent lamp may work for five hours at full output or may be not (Murphy's dog would say one never has a critical replacement globe that fits and mysteriously globes of course always tend to die when the store is closed for the long holiday weekend and one must also be reminded that filament globes are the least effective in that they generate ninety five percent consumed energy as heat and need large cooling condenser lens to provide even light output per unit area from a point source as the transmission LCD's tend not to like very high operating temperatures from the illuminating lamp as their liquid changes density with temperature and switching times also change as well !

    As for the CRT undoubtedly my old 30kg HP 22" 1000 series Colour Monitor will still be going strong long after any of the above flash new units have turned up their toes , lost the colour purity balance and gone to the great maker in the sky , whilst still saving a small fortune in power bills and generating far less carbon emission green house gas as well !

    Alas , no technology is perfect but have you got a big enough wallet to fund the blood out of a stone kilowatt hours thus , that be the question for the new kids on the block ?

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Turn the TV on

    Robin: Atomic batteries to power, Turbines to speed ...

    Batman: Ready to watch Cartoon Network ...

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021