8 times more expensive than millet! What does Mimi take to overturn the television industry?

With this trend, laser projection products, which were once silent, seem to be gaining some momentum. Some people even claim that laser televisions will replace traditional television sets as the primary form of entertainment in living rooms. However, I remain skeptical of this notion. Regardless of how advanced laser technology might be, there’s no denying the functional similarities between these products and traditional TVs. At this point, it’s premature to talk about complete replacement. The reasons for my skepticism are what we’ll explore today. Extended reading: "Shocked by 9,999 Yuan! Xiaomi's 150-inch Laser TV Network First Test" Projection products have become quite popular this year. Due to their compact size, large screen projection capabilities, and integration of excellent operating systems, companies like Xiaomi, Micro Whale, and many internet TV manufacturers have been attracted to this burgeoning market. Looking at the recent releases of laser light sources, it’s clear that one of the leaders in smart projection is making waves, but it’s interesting to note that most current laser projection products seem to be targeting the TV market. Why is that? Why do laser "theaters" deliberately target the TV market? The development of projection products is a fascinating journey filled with intense competition, and this remains true today. The core of this technology lies in the evolutionary history of “light sources.” Based on my observations, projection products still in use can be roughly categorized into three main types of light sources: lasers, halogen bulbs, and LED light-emitting diodes, each with distinct advantages. Currently, all three have their own specialized niches. So why is it that laser theaters seem to be particularly keen on competing with TVs? First, let’s consider the advantages of these three types of light sources. We all know that the most crucial characteristic of projection products is light efficiency, which refers to “the total luminous flux emitted by a light source divided by the electric power consumed by the light source.” In the current phase of DLP projection (digital signal projectors), I believe the ideal system light efficiency from high to low should be: “laser > conventional bulbs > RGB LED.” There are several reasons for this hierarchy. Firstly, laser light sources are more convergent and easier to collimate and reshape. This means that the resources consumed in the overall equipment system are relatively minimal. In other words, under the same electric flux, laser light sources have the highest light efficiency and potentially the greatest brightness. Secondly, traditional light bulbs can achieve nearly point-like light (millimeter-scale), which is relatively collimated, combined with color wheel splitting light and various RGBW, RGBYW light color combinations, so the system efficiency is decent, though not comparable to lasers. However, they excel in other areas (such as color accuracy). Thirdly, LEDs, while being the least efficient, are relatively affordable. However, LEDs are difficult to produce as point light sources (due to diode power being too concentrated, which risks burning out), resulting in poor beam collimation. In environments with longer light paths, LEDs suffer significant dissipation losses, leading to lower projection light efficiency. However, compared to traditional bulbs, they offer a longer lifespan. The advantages of laser light sources, along with their high refractive index, allow laser projection products to project screens with the highest brightness among the three projection light sources. Additionally, the laser light source’s superior collimation and shaping properties enable the projection of wider opening and closing angles for the light source, allowing for ultra-short focal length projections. The point light source characteristic also enables laser projection technology to achieve 4K resolution compared to the other two light sources. This is the fundamental reason why laser cinema products dare to challenge TVs. *However, all the clamoring aside, it might still take another 100 years for lasers to truly "play together" with TVs! And the reasons are... Laser projection is good, but TV always leads by 100 years! Let’s now delve into the origins of this situation. Throughout the development of projection technology, from the early days of “shadow play” to the current era of laser and RGB LED dominance, the essence of “light imaging” in projection technology has remained unchanged. In fact, we all know that the image quality of projection products isn’t great, but why is this the case? Few people have conducted a thorough investigation. So-called 4K laser products—can they deliver real 4K performance? In my opinion, it’s just a form of self-promotion. The reason is that the principle of “luminous imaging” in projection technology had already been developed in the world before World War I. This predates the advent of television by more than 100 years. One generation of projection products saw their biggest technological upgrades in the evolution of digital imaging and light sources. The ultimate goal of evolving light sources is the light efficiency and the “collimation” and “shaping ability” mentioned earlier. Speaking of resolution, a simple understanding is that the light points constitute the single pixel density of the picture, which directly relates to the “collimation” and “shaping power” of the light source. Both directly affect the pixel density and arrangement of the projection screen, but due to the diffuse reflection of light sources, halo interference will occur. This fundamentally affects the resolution of the picture. In summary, the 4K effect that lasers can bring may not be as good as the paper data suggests. *Product Function Has Common Technical Principles but Moves in Different Directions* In summary, the advantage of TVs in terms of definition is something projection products cannot reach at this stage. Even though the two products share commonalities in functionality, they have significant differences in technical principles. In TV products, different display technologies have unique characteristics, rooted in the core purpose of “imaging.” On the other hand, the light source of projection products must follow the “light-through imaging” law in its development. Without breaking free from the physical characteristics of “reflection,” projection products cannot compete with TVs in terms of brightness or clarity. Projection and TV Never Exist to Complement Each Other *While projection and TV look at each other, they can never be complementary.* Some argue that the advantage of projection lies in its larger screen size. I fully agree with this point. Projection products can indeed provide a bigger screen at a relatively low cost. If we don't consider brightness and picture quality, this is indeed something TVs cannot match. In terms of size, TVs look up to projection, while projection looks up to TVs in terms of picture quality. However, due to the differences in technical principles between the two, it seems impossible for them to complement each other. *Intensity of Laser Projection on Brightness and Image Quality* As I mentioned earlier, one of the factors that led to the emergence of micro-projection products was the change in light sources. It’s undeniable that lasers are excellent as a light source for projection technology, offering smaller heat output, smaller size, and a longer lifespan. These advantages are undeniable. With traditional large-volume projections like high-pressure mercury lamps and other light sources, the official logo data can reach 3,000 lumens or more, and the actual projection screen brightness is also around 300-400 lumens. Even with the current optimal laser light efficiency, the brightness of the screen can only reach around 500 lumens. Thankfully, as for the official logo data, it is well understood that manufacturers themselves dare not overstate the gimmicks. The brightness of natural products at this value is also quite limited. TV products and projection products have established two different lines of development at the current stage. Screen-supported TVs aim for the ultimate appeal of “bigger and clearer,” while screen-less projections emphasize “smaller, larger picture, and higher brightness.” Between the two sides, the two extremes of product development are set. *The So-Called Replacement of Television is Just a Joke* The fundamental difference between laser projection and traditional TV products is destined to place the two in different service domains. If some people insist on pushing an “alternative” effect, based on the current laser projection technology, looking at the results, at this stage it can only be a joke. In summary, if you need a bigger screen and have a dark light environment, laser projection will indeed give you a great experience, and it will be relatively cheaper compared to the same size TV. However, if you pursue the ultimate picture quality experience, or honestly buy a TV. Smart TV/box information can focus on smart TV information network sofa butler (http://), China's influential TV box and smart TV website, providing information, communication, TV boxes, smart TVs, smart TV software, etc.

Household Appliance Series Compressor Sealed Terminal Block

Household Appliance Series Compressor Sealed Terminal Block,Compressor Three-Phase Sealing Connector,Compressor Three-Phase Seal Terminal,Home Appliance Compressor Seal Terminal

Shenzhen Capitol Micro-Electronics Co.,LTD , https://www.capitolgtms.com