LCD picture quality can not be as good as 'obsolete' plasma.

Only now is LED picture quality approaching (not surpassing) 'obsolete' plasma.

So now it seems when it comes to PQ, it's a choice between 'obsolete' tech and 'lousy-PQ' tech.

The way I looked at it, those who buy TV for picture quality goes for 'obsolete' tech Plasma.

Those who buy TV to show friend they have big TV goes for 'lousy-PQ' tech. Never mind picture quality not nice. It's the size that counts.

---

Added on January 21, 2011, 4:49 pmSure everything in this world will past. Even the mighty "the sun will never set" British Empire had passed. It's a matter of when.

The way I looked at it, for big sized TV, Plasma's cost:performance advantage will be around for quite a few more years.

BTW, LED will pass....it will be replaced also by something newer in time to come. Just don't know when



This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 21 2011, 04:49 PM

Going by that argument, the best car in Malaysia is the Kancil simply because there are more of those on our Malaysian road. And by that same argument, Ferrari and Rolls Royce are the lousiest car because people don't buy them and they must be 'obsolete' tech.

But I do agree that LCD/LED outsell Plasma not because Plasma is lousy but rather a lot of consumers are ignorant and hoodwinked by salesperson and people like yourself. And yes, Plasma has it's drawback and so do LCD/LEd. Go into any showroom and the vast majority of salesman repeat the same urban myth of "plasma is obsolete" without explaining to the consumers the pros and cons of both technologies. These salesperson are simply one-sided 'know nothing' idiots. The truth of the matter is, if PQ, size and money is at the top of your list, then Plasma is very competitive and should not be dismissed simply because some idiot say "it's obsolete" tech,.

Now here is some food for thought for those with brain. Why is it that, in Western market, Plasma is doing very well. Are the Westerner stupid or are Malaysian consumer stupid?

For me, my main complaint about Plasma are the reflective screen. I can live with the other cons of Plasma like increase power consumption (but then, I am not so poor as not able to afford a few cent more per day higher electricity bills). As for the greater weight, I do not have the habit of dong weight lifting with it on daily basis so I can live with it also.



This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 21 2011, 05:03 PM

Obsolete = don't look at it = don't buy = lousy = you will regret = whatever. Different wording. Same meaning.

As for the way it's being displayed. Go check out a Full HD version. When watching at near distance, I do see line scan on HD Ready version. For big screen, Plasma is the most cost effective solution, assuming you can accept it's other fault but obsolete tech shouldn't one of the reason to reject.

Unfortunately some people mistakenly thought the reason why LCD outsell Plasma is due to Plasma being older technology. IMO, the main 2 reasons why Plasma sell less:

1. People with not enough money will buy the smaller screen and smaller screen are all dominated by LCD. On the other hand, bigger screen (read....expensive) are mainly dominated by Plasma
2. Lots of people spreading half baked ideas that Plasma is old technology.

some people need holes drilled into their heads...

This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 21 2011, 08:44 PM

Listen to a good turntable (a really really old obsolete technology) and you will know what's being produced is true music. In comparison, some newer technology digital CD are merely notes and sound in comparison.

Unfortunately many people are being seduced by the term "digital" and "newer technology" and "perfect sound every time" advertisement slogan of Philips and never mind the inferior sound.


This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 21 2011, 08:49 PM

Hope this kills the myth that Plasma is on the way out and all those 'obsolete' tech rubbish once and for all. As far as PQ is concern, Plasma is still top dog.

"Plasma televisions have seen a major decrease in pricing. The price difference and aggressive LCD TV marketing has given the illusion that plasma televisions are on their way out. But that's not true. Plasma televisions are known for their true-to- life picture quality and affordability over the alternatives."

http://www.ehow.com/about_5379396_plasma-vs-led-tvs.html

So do you get to see those lines you mentioned earlier? And which model did you check out?

And yes, I think you are right to say it's possible to tell which is which. For me, watching LED for any length of time literally brings tear to my eyes because they are far too bright/harsh for me.

To me, the LED pictures are very sharp and in fact, can be excessively sharp sometimes to the point of being artificial and watching Transformer2 is pretty obvious. For that, I think LED super sharp image would be more suitable to those playing video game or watching cartoons. But when it comes to watching human skin tones as in movies, I am not so sure super-sharp is a good thing.

This situation is similar to these other interest of mine:
1. Vinyl vs CD sound. CD sound can be super clean but ultimately, sounded clinical to me and devoid of much emotion. As for vinyl, despite it's crackle and pop 'dirty' sound due to scratches etc, sound more musical or analog to me. LED is like the digital CD. Plasma is like the analogy vinyl. And we can agree vinyl is really an obsolete tech.

2. Pocket digital camera without touch up. Nikon's tends to be super sharp due to more software sharpening but skin tones are less natural. Canon tends to be softer but color is more natural. In this case, LED are like Nikon whereas Plasma are like the Canon.

So at the end of the day, it's up to individual's preference. And all those ridiculous talk about Plasma being 'obsolete' tech shouldn't have anything to do with decision nor perpetrated as urban myth.

This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 22 2011, 09:52 AM

I want. I want. CRT is not obsolete when you want to watch Standard Definition program. They still have superior picture quality when viewing those compared to Plasma/LCD/LED

I don't buy that. If what you said is correct then we will all be watching vivid colored cartoon instead of movies with real human actor with dull colored skin tones. Likewise, we should all be listening to synthesized music instead of piano etc. For us buying Plasma, while we know we can never get 100% natural color, we try to get a TV that comes closes to it.

Now I can truly understand why you don't like the more natural color of Plasma. You prefers vivid (I called it less natural) color of LCD/LED. Nothing wrong with that. Just personal preference.

Sure you can fine tune all you want till the cows come home but at the end of the day, Plasma's picture is generally still more natural than LCD/LED. This is a pretty much accepted fact.

So there you have it. You are 70% into vivid color and I am 70% into natural color so we choose different TV.

p.s I bet you also play video game (requires vivid color) whereas I don't. Another reason why you picked LCD/LED and I didn't.

Was it because of size or color?

Just a thought. If you love vivid color, why don't you buy Sony? IMHO, Sony's HDTV has one of the the sharpest and most vivid color amongst them all. Personally I can't stand Sony because their colors are so unnatural, most suited for cartoon and video games.

Different people have different taste. Normal. You just confirming color naturalness is not your top priority because as I said, I find Sony's color the most unnatural (or vivid) of all HDTV. IMO, the best judge of naturalness is to look at human skin tone.



This post has been edited by Optiplex330: Jan 23 2011, 08:19 AM

Yes, they all have their pro's and con's but unfortunately, there are many urban myth floating around Plasma which has to be dispatched away with "old technology" and "obsolete technology" are at the top of the list.

As for picture quality, expert generally agree that for room with dim or normal lighting, Plasma picture quality tends to be the best. But of course it too have cons.