TCL Accused of Selling Quantum Dot TVs Without Actual Quantum Dots (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0175018629
- News link: https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/24/09/17/2058255/tcl-accused-of-selling-quantum-dot-tvs-without-actual-quantum-dots
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/09/tcl-accused-of-selling-quantum-dot-tvs-without-actual-quantum-dots/
> TCL has come [1]under scrutiny this month after [2]testing that claimed to examine three TCL TVs marketed as quantum dot TVs [3]reportedly showed no trace of quantum dots . [...] Earlier this month, South Korean IT news publication [4]ETNews published a report on testing that seemingly showed three TCL quantum dot TVs, marketed as QD TVs, as not having [5]quantum dots present. [6]Hansol Chemical , a Seoul-headquartered chemicals company, commissioned the testing. SGS, a Geneva-headquartered testing and certification company, and [7]Intertek , a London-headquartered testing and certification company, performed the tests. The models examined were TCL's C755, said to be a quantum dot Mini LED TV, the C655, a purported quantum dot LED (QLED) TV, and the C655 Pro, another QLED. None of those models are sold in the US, but TCL sells various Mini LED and LED TVs in the US that claim to use quantum dots. According to a Google translation, ETNews reported: "According to industry sources on the 5th, the results of tests commissioned by Hansol Chemical to global testing and certification agencies SGS and Intertek showed that indium... and cadmium... were not detected in three TCL QD TV models. Indium and cadmium are essential materials that cannot be omitted in QD implementation." The testing was supposed to detect cadmium if present at a minimum concentration of 0.5 mg per 1 kg, while indium was tested at a minimum detection standard of 2 mg/kg or 5 mg/kg, depending on the testing lab. [...]
>
> In response to the results from SGS and Intertek, a TCL representative told ETNews and The Korea Times that TCL is "manufacturing TV sets with QD films supplied by three companies" and that "the amount of quantum dots... in the film may vary depending on the supplier, but it is certain that cadmium is included." TCL also published testing results on May 10 commissioned by Guangdong Region Advanced Materials, one of TCL's quantum dot film suppliers. Interestingly, SGS, one of the companies that found that TCL's TVs lacked quantum dots, performed the tests. This time, SGS detected the presence of cadmium in the TV films at a concentration of 4 mg/kg (an image of the results can be seen via ETNews here). TCL also said that it "confirmed the fluorescent characteristics of QD," per Google's translation, and provided a spectrogram purportedly depicting the presence of quantum dots in its TVs' quantum dot films. [...]
>
> TCL obviously has reason to try to push results that show the presence of cadmium. However, some analysts and publications have pointed out that Hansol could have reason to push results claiming the opposite. As mentioned above, Hansol is in the chemical manufacturing and distribution business. It notably does not sell to TCL but does have a customer in TCL rival Samsung. Taking a step back further, Hansol is headquartered in Seoul and is considered a chaebol. TV giants Samsung and LG are also chaebols, and the South Korean government has reported interest in Samsung and LG continuing to be the world's biggest TV companies—titles that are increasingly [8]challenged by Chinese brands . It has previously been reported that the South Korean government urged Samsung and LG to meet with each other to help ensure their leadership. The talks resulted in a partnership between the two companies reportedly centered on counteracting high prices that Samsung was facing for TV components sold by Chinese companies. With this background in mind, Hansol could be viewed as a biased party when it sought testing for TCL quantum dot TVs.
"I'm really puzzled by Hansol's results," said Eric Virey, principal displays analyst at Yole Intelligence. "I have a very hard time believing that TCL would go through the troubles of making ... 'fake' QD films without QDs: this would cost almost as much as making a real QD films but without the performance benefits."
Ars Technica concludes: "As previously stated, it's possible that TCL is indeed using quantum dots but is using them in a small amount alongside phosphor. If true, the performance may not be as high as it would be with other designs, but it would also mean that TCL's quantum dot TVs aren't bogus. As it stands, the situation could benefit from more, preferably third-party, testing..."
[1] https://www.tomsguide.com/tvs/tcl-under-fire-report-suggests-its-qled-tvs-might-not-have-any-quantum-dots
[2] https://www.etnews.com/20240905000299
[3] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/09/tcl-accused-of-selling-quantum-dot-tvs-without-actual-quantum-dots/
[4] https://www.etnews.com/20240905000299
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_dot
[6] https://hansolchemical.com/en/f-chemi/
[7] https://www.intertek.com/testing/
[8] https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1709630956
Big Wall of Text. (Score:2)
why? it's a summary.
Hard to believe (Score:2)
> SGS, a Geneva-headquartered testing and certification company, and Intertek, a London-headquartered testing and certification company, performed the tests.
and
> Hansol could be viewed as a biased party when it sought testing for TCL quantum dot TVs.
I don't know about SGS, but Intertek is a very high profile certification company whose name appears on the labels of lots of electrical and electronics goods. I find it hard to believe that they'd be involved in any biased - or even questionable - testing activities.
Hansol may have a 'desired result', but I can't see well-known certification labs taking the risk of providing one that wasn't both legitimate and replicable by third parties.
I'll just stick with OLED.... (Score:2)
To date, I find that OLED is pretty much the best out there for TVs....
I loved my old Plasma due to the blacks it had....the OLED is the closest I've found to my old Plasma.....
I don't see getting any other type tv any time soon....only OLEDs in my house.
well the eula says you can't sue us and we can DMC (Score:2)
well the eula says you can't sue us and we can DMCA bad reviews if we want.
Imma gonna ask (Score:2)
If you can't tell if a display is using Quantum Dot technology without actually performing complex atomic/mineral presence tests on the films used, is the technology actually doing anything useful? I mean, if it is so great, wouldn't a trained eye be able to tell immediately between a QD and non QD display? Or at least an observational measurement from some device just looking at a standardized image would tell, right?
Re: (Score:2)
> If you can't tell if a display is using Quantum Dot technology without actually performing complex atomic/mineral presence tests on the films used, is the technology actually doing anything useful? I mean, if it is so great, wouldn't a trained eye be able to tell immediately between a QD and non QD display? Or at least an observational measurement from some device just looking at a standardized image would tell, right?
Nah, you see, the problem is they're plugged into "dirty power", which negates those Qs just like opening a box to reveal a dead cat does. Just install this Monster power bar and ALL your LEDs will be QLEDs in no time, without even any dead cats to deal with!
Re: (Score:2)
And therein lies the magic (otherwise known as the BS that gets served up in alphabet soup when trying to figure out TV features). It's today's version of measuring a CRT diagonally and claiming vertical height. Look at the screen playing something. If you like it, buy it. QLED, QD, OLED, HDMI, HD, 4K, ULED, SUHD, HDR, CCFL, LCD, QNED, AMOLED, AOI, DLP, FOV, HDR, HDTV, HUD, MLED, PDP, PPI, RGB, RLCD, TFT, VESA, WOLED be damned. (these are only the ones I can think of off the top of my head ... they're used
Well duh (Score:2)
Obviously as soon as you measure it the quantum state collapses. It was there before (or at least simultaneously existing, not existing, and only sort of existing like a sibling I have) but actually observing it caused it to settle into a state where it doesn't exist. This is a common problem with quantum. Now they'll need to hire a quantum mechanic to put the super back in their position.
Re: (Score:2)
..made me wonder if 'Quantum' dots actually have anything to do with quantum physics (or if it's more a marketing thing, like a [1]"turbo" EV [porsche.com])
Well what do you know, quantum dots actually rely on quantum physics:
> Unlike simple atomic structures, a quantum dot structure has the unusual property that energy levels are strongly dependent on the structure's size. For example, CdSe quantum dot light emission can be tuned from red (5 nm diameter) to the violet region (1.5 nm dot). The physical reason for QD colorati
[1] https://www.porsche.com/usa/models/taycan/taycan-models/taycan-turbo-s/
Re: (Score:2)
> Obviously as soon as you measure it the quantum state collapses. It was there before (or at least simultaneously existing, not existing, and only sort of existing like a sibling I have) but actually observing it caused it to settle into a state where it doesn't exist. This is a common problem with quantum. Now they'll need to hire a quantum mechanic to put the super back in their position.
Oh boy, my cat ate the TV.
Re: Cat ate my TV (Score:1)
To watch TV now you have to ask a Haitian to open their mouth ;-)
Re: as U measure, quantum state collapses (Score:1)
Would you like to buy some SchrodingerCoin?
> Now they'll need to hire a quantum mechanic to put the super back in their position.
But there's a shortage of flux capacitor replacements.