[incrudible]

Emissive means additive, not averaging. Cyan, magenta and yellow are not primaries here. Red and green light adds up to perceptual yellow. Red, green and blue adds up to perceptual white (or grey, at very low luminance). Treating each of these pixels like subpixels (which is arguably a form of dithering) will produce a full color image (at a lower resolution), but given that they did not demonstrate it, color reproduction and/or luminance likely is far from competitive at this point.

[cubefox]

That's not true. Dithering can be used in emissive screens, but dithering is not additive. If you mix red and green with color blending (e.g. by dithering), you get less red and less green in your mix, and therefore the resulting mix (a sort of ochre) is different from additive color mixing (yellow), where the amount of red and green stays the same. Or when you mix black and white, you get white with additive color mixing, but grey with blending. You also get grey when blending (dithering) red, green and blue. You can test this in software like Gimp, you won't be able to dither a full color image without at least the eight colors I mentioned.

[incrudible]

I am not saying you can use the exact same math as in an image manipulation program, these work with different assumptions. Mixing colors in those is usually not correct anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKnqECcg6Gw

I am saying you can think of subpixels, which already exist, as a form of dithering. Most displays use just three primaries for subpixels - red, green and blue. Their arrangement is fixed, but that is not a limitation of this new technology.

[cubefox]

Well I disagree with that. It's two different ways of mixing colors (additive vs blending), with different results and different requirements.