I'm all about technology; love it. I blow money on it when it is totally not necessary, but I don't kid myself that I need a $5000 road bike and related gizmos. I know it is a want; I could have the same fun on an aluminum frame. It is cool. Nothing more or less.
David DiLaura wrote a wonderful editorial for the IESNA's Leukos in January of 2007 that questioned just this:
"What is disconcerting is not the waiting - any technology must be worked on and pass through initial and difficult problem-solving phases - but rather the untoward hype, promotion, and public policy influence the the promise of LEDs has generated."Uh, almost 4 years later, I don't see that anyone could argue with that today anymore than they could in Jan 2007.
With the never ending blather on the promise of LED, why don't I see it moving more rapidly to being a truly valid solution for general area lighting? Haitz's Law doesn't apply to the actual release of product from manufacturers in an $8BB industry? Not that there aren't products. Gotham just today released a 4" downlight with 1800 lumens; that sure beats the snot out of what you get with any 4" CFL.
Sure, sure, there are myriad specialty applications that make sense, but if this thing is truly what "they" say it is, don't we need to have more progress than we have had over the last 4 years?
On the other hand, maybe the slow progress will stem the tide of fanaticism and we can settle into the reality of a 50,000-hour T8 lamp being just as good as an LED ... at 1/6th the cost.
No comments:
Post a Comment