Talk:Liquid crystal on silicon

Canon Projectors
Canon makes LCOS projectors. Supposedly, they have some kind of patent that allows them to make LCOS projectors much smaller and cheaper than their competition. Not sure if there is any reliable material out there to reference this fact. They market their LCoS technology under the name AISYS. They're main claim over LCD projectors is that the "screen door effect" is minimized. This is the effect where you can see a black outline of each pixel. They have a big demonstration on their website (canon.com) 74.92.147.125 18:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup
This page needs cleanup.

"If the frequency of the color fields is lower than about 540 Hz" - statement needs citation.

It's not clear that the color fields discussion should even be in this article, as LCOS devices (that I'm aware of, at least) do not use a single panel and color wheel. Jonabbey

There were two single-panel LCOS sets in production. One by Philips, and one by Uneed Systems. Both of those use color wheel, and optical engines that look very similar to the TI engines.

In addition, this page is seriously outdated, neither JVC nor Sony make LCoS rear-projections anymore.

Inventor of LCoS?
I came here looking for who invented LCoS technology. DLP is obviously a TI thing, and while it does say that JVC, Sony, etc. have marketed the technology, it doesn't say who first came up with it. That would be nice to know if anyone out there knows... -KC
 * Intel. Kenimaru 08:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Pros and Cons Section
I'm suggesting that we form a pros and cons section addressing the LCoS like that of the DLP and LCD. Kenimaru 08:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How do you pronounce "LCoS"?

It's "el cahs".

SXRD
I would like to suggest that Silicon X-tal Reflective Display be redirected to this article once again, in the very same way that D-ILA is. SXRD is not notable on its own, particularly as it is merely Sony's brand name of their variant of an established technology. 64.170.149.61 (talk) 05:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

NTE
In this article NTE is defined twice with two different meanings, "Near to Eye" and a link to "New Technology Embedded". I don't know which is the correct one, but I reverted the second one made, until this is resolved. --Muhandes (talk) 10:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Other applications
This article references display applications only but there are others (ROADMS for example) which should be included. Madgenberyl (talk) 23:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Missing picture
A picture is still missing! See "A sketch of a Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS) Cell is shown in Figure 1 (to be uploaded)". 217.109.123.82 (talk) 09:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Coming up on a year later. Please resolve.Landroo (talk) 17:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liquid crystal on silicon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141018065638/http://www.compoundphotonics.com/products/light-engines to http://www.compoundphotonics.com/products/light-engines

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:11, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Edits by 180.178.141.45 -- AI-generated content? also spam links
I noticed while reading the page that some sections read a lot like they were AI-generated. As an example, the paragraph starting with "Overall, the history of LCos projectors is one of innovation and improvement." is a dead ringer for how ChatGPT usually finishes its answers.

Did a bit of digging into the edit history, and found two edits by the mentioned IP that were responsible for these changes. Also noticed that as of their edits many paragraphs now start with an embedded link to some external comparison site, regurgitating a bunch of generic info while peppering in affiliate Amazon links throughout.

Note also that the writing style in the actual edits is VERY different from their edit descriptions, with the former being written in perfect English and the latter very much not.

I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia's etiquette and handling of these issues, and don't want to start an edit war. May be worth looking into, though? 77.251.223.229 (talk) 13:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)