The bigger picture: TCL on how all-day screentime is reshaping display tech
Why manufacturers are moving beyond spec races to tackle real-world problems like eye strain.
For a long time, the display industry felt like it was mostly working on a job it had already finished.
The big leap came when bulky CRTs gave way to flat panels and screens stopped looking like furniture. After that, the innovation cycle settled into something more familiar: higher resolutions, richer colours, slimmer bodies, faster refresh rates, and ever-larger panels.
Useful improvements certainly, but mostly incremental ones. Even the industry’s periodic attempts to make 3D happen again felt less like the future and more like a trade show dare.
But the last five years or so have felt different to me and I wanted to see if that was just a personal opinion or an observation based in reality.
So, I reached out to TCL and spoke to David Derrida, and what came out of our conversation was not simply a pitch for one product line or one panel technology, but a view that the display industry has started tackling a broader set of problems.
New ideas on display
As Derrida put it, “it’s not only about TVs”. That is probably the most useful place to start, because for years, the television has dominated the display conversation.
It makes sense - it is the flashy bit of the market, the place where manufacturers can wheel out ever brighter panels and larger screen sizes under trade show lighting. But the screen doing the heaviest lifting in most people’s lives is not the one mounted in the lounge. It is the phone, the laptop, the tablet, the in-car display, the watch, and whatever else pings, glows and nags at us between breakfast and bedtime.
That changes the kind of innovation that matters.
TCL is known for its NXTPaper device, a full-colour display designed to mimic real paper and reduce eye strain.
Derrida said NXTPaper work came from the fact that “these days we spend more and more time on displays”, putting average screen time in the Western world at around seven hours a day, while admitting his own is north of ten.
Once you accept that screens are no longer occasional devices but permanent fixtures of daily life, the old display arms race starts to look a bit narrow. Yes, brightness matters. Yes, contrast matters. Yes, people still like massive TVs. But if we are spending half our waking lives squinting at some form of glowing panel, then comfort, glare, fatigue and adaptability stop being niche concerns and become core parts of the category.
READ MORE: Battle of the dual-screen laptops: Asus Zenbook Duo vs Lenovo Yoga Book
That is why the recent burst of eye-comfort and paper-like display tech feels more significant than yet another bump in refresh rate. For years, there was a pretty obvious split in the market. If you wanted something easy on the eyes, you could buy an e-note or e-reader device that was lovely for reading and writing, but about as lively for video or general use as a haunted Etch A Sketch.
If you wanted full-fat tablet or phone performance, you got the usual bright, glossy slab and all the eye strain that can come with it. The interesting bit now is that companies are trying to close that gap.
Derrida was unusually candid about the problem. Early NXTPaper displays, he said, were designed to reduce blue light and support a kind of “digital detox”, but because they were still LCD-based, they had “some weaknesses in terms of the brightness, the contrast ratio, and so on.”
In a retail comparison, consumers would simply look at a NextPaper screen next to an AMOLED one and think: this one is dimmer. End of sale. TCL’s latest move is to combine those eye-comfort ambitions with AMOLED, which Derrida described as bringing together “the best of both worlds” - high brightness, stronger contrast and colour fidelity, along with low blue light and anti-glare properties.
That is a much more interesting challenge than merely making a screen prettier. It is the difference between chasing specs and trying to solve an actual problem.
Asked how TCL decides where to place its bets, Derrida kept returning to the same filter: “how can we make it useful in everyday life?” and whether a product can “solve a real problem”. That may sound like the sort of thing every consumer tech executive says before wandering off to launch a concept device nobody asked for, but here it does get at something real.
Calling a truce in the OLED war
The display industry has spent years flirting with foldables, rollables and various other expensive curiosities that make for a good CES demo and a less convincing case at a Currys checkout. Derrida’s line was that TCL wants “affordable innovation” rather than niche products that are still half concept, half flex.
It is in this context that Derrida also frames mini-LED. He is obviously not going to pick a public fight in the eternal OLED war, but his argument was basically pragmatic: if you want very large screens with premium-looking image quality, mini-LED is one of the technologies making that possible without requiring a second mortgage.
TCL, he said, has spent nearly a decade pushing mini-LED and sees it as a way to deliver “exceptional picture quality” on extra-large displays at “much more reasonable pricing.” Fair enough. TV innovation still matters. It is just no longer the whole story.
The more interesting shift may be in software. A display used to be judged mostly on what it was: LCD, OLED, brighter, darker, faster, sharper. Increasingly, it is also about how it behaves. Derrida said AI is taking “a bigger role every day” in image processing, from managing more than 20,000 dimming zones on flagship TVs to adjusting colour temperature on phones and tablets based on lighting conditions and time of day.
In other words, display innovation is becoming less static. The panel is still crucial, but the intelligence behind it matters more than it used to.
READ MORE: reMarkable Paper Pro Move review: Great for handwriting, terrible for multitasking
That shift will annoy a certain kind of enthusiast, obviously. Derrida himself joked that there will “always” be experts who think they are smarter than AI, which should cover roughly everyone who has ever posted a TV calibration thread online.
But he also made a fair point: the next big question is not just how AI tunes picture quality, but how it changes the user’s interaction with the display itself. Once screens become more context-aware - of content, time of day, ambient lighting and eventually user intent - the whole experience starts to look less like fiddling with presets and more like a system adapting in the background.
Then there is the next wave of actual display tech. Derrida highlighted inkjet-printed OLED as one of TCL’s next major bets, saying mass production starts this year. That may not be the sort of thing normal buyers will get excited about down the pub, but it matters.
The pitch is that printed OLED can improve yield, reduce waste and bring down the manufacturing pain that still dogs conventional OLED production. In other words, one of the next big display breakthroughs may not be a sexy new form factor at all. It may be a more efficient way of making the stuff we already know people want.
And then there are the glasses. Of course there are the glasses. AR and XR eyewear has spent years bouncing between promising, silly and overhyped, sometimes all in the same demo.
But Derrida’s examples were refreshingly mundane: live subtitles when someone is speaking Chinese, or menu translation while travelling, without having to pull out your phone and wave it about like a confused tourist. That is probably the right way to think about wearable displays.
Not as sci-fi theatre, but as a way of shaving friction off little everyday interactions. Derrida argued that glasses could be one of the technologies that changes “the way we interact with the display we know today in our everyday life.” That sounds grand, but the best use cases are stubbornly ordinary. Which is usually a good sign.
Widescreen innovation
The most revealing bit of the interview, though, came right at the end when Derrida returned to the question of eye care and how you validate claims around it.
“This is a tricky one,” he said, and he’s not wrong. Brightness is easy to measure. Resolution is easy to measure. Saying a display is kinder to your eyes is much murkier territory.
Derrida’s answer was that credibility has to come in layers: subjective user experience, third-party certifications around low blue light, flicker-free and anti-glare performance, plus what he called the “last mile” of a more medical-grade approach involving hospital research and doctors analysing results.
That, more than any one product, feels like the real sign of a maturing category. The display industry is finally talking about problems that are more human than “this one has more nits”. It is grappling with the fact that screens now shape not just how we watch films, but how we work, read, travel, translate, focus and gradually sandpaper our retinas over the course of a normal Tuesday.
More pixels still matter. Better colour still matters. Giant TVs will continue to sell. But the more interesting thing happening in displays right now is that the industry has finally stopped acting as though its only job is to make the rectangle nicer than last year.
That was enough for a while. It probably is not enough anymore.
