heathen83

Probably the Sony Z series.. if I had the money (which I don't )

It was definitely a G10. I havent' seen a G10 in "torch mode" so I will definitely do the next time I check one out, but I still don't think it compare with the Samsung colour wise.

As I said, the Pana G10 was considerably duller than every other set in the shop, including LCD's and Plasma's. There was a stark constrast between the G10 and the Samung plasma I compared, and IMO the Samsung looked better, and though the colours were brighter they didn't look excessive or unnatrual. I have no idea how a G10 looks in home, but even most reviews on the G10 query it's colour performance. That being said, both sets have their pro's and cons and it's up to the customer to decide what they like best.

I compared the Samsung B650 with two G10 (one 46" and the other 50") side by side at Myer. The 46" looked terrible, it was obviously set up on some picture mode but I couldn't tell which one. Frankly it looked terrible when compared to the Samsung. Next to the 46" was a 50" G10 which looked much better, but by then my opinion of the G10 had greatly diminished, and I still reckon the Samsung looked better. You're right to say store lighting and conditions can affect our perception of the picture however I've seen the G10 in quite a few stores and the picture in general seems to be of a duller and darker quality than any of the other sets.

Why would you spend $900 on something that is going to give you mild satisfaction, but more importantly is going leave a lot to be desired? Are you intending to use this as your households main TV set? If so, then you should be looking at a minimum 40" screen, and preferably higher. You should be able to find a Pana or LG 42" plasma around the $1,200 mark. If you can't afford this right now, consider that places like Myer and Harvey Norman are doing attractive interest free terms at the moment.

Are you sure you want the Pana? I had my heart set on a G10 but when I saw the picture quality it turned me right off. Not to say it was bad or anything but IMO inferior to the Samsung plasma and Sony LCD's. The colours on these look so much more vibrant.

I've seen this promotion today they're claiming this tv is $699 RRP but I've seen it in Myers at $390 just last week.

Guys I hadn't really considered Sony as I am budget conscious but I had a look in David Jones today and was really impressed with the Bravia's. I was thinking more along the lines of going Plasma however the strong backlighting of the LCD's might get me over the line. The one I was specifically interested in was the 46" W5500 and I was quoted $3k for it. Can anyone tell me strenghts/limitations of this TV and is $3k a good price to pay? Another thing how does this TV respond to showing sports like NRL and soccer? I know Plasma's are generally better for this but I like watching movies as well in medium to dark light. I just didn't like how the Plasma's seemed too dim, but maybe that's cause I'm used to a strong backlight for my laptop. Cheers.

Anyone know when the OLEDS are due to hit the shelves, and are they likely to make plasma's and LCD's obsolete?

It's mostly winter sports and looks to have nothing of mainstream interest.

How's the TWG forum? Miss me?

I dunno what it is about JB sales staff but most I've encountered appear to have zero respect for professionalism and possess bad haircuts and terrible dress sense (i.e. skate shoes). They must be on really poor hourly rate (or none at all) and make their living solely on commissions. Sales can be a tough gig but I'm sure if they learned to groom themselves a little better and not look like homeless people they might get more respect.

Is this just for students or can anyone claim it? Would you be interested in selling your samsung?

Tried the 40" Bravia W (100hz) and they said no negotiation if you take the PS3.

Nope, you work at Optus?

Not too bad. Did they knock something off for the extended warranty? Usually the more you bundle the better deal you get.

You didn't negotiate on the price of the tv?

Your perception is poor value.

Really? You just happen to bump into people who don't like their Foxtel and under contract and want to cancel without paying the exit fee? What did Foxtel do to you anyway?

Utter drivel. It's your own perception if you think Foxtel is overpriced but most of us are happy to pay for the service. It costs me $14 per week to watch 24/7 cricket, league, soccer and some doco's and movies. I don't care about the other crap because what I get in sheer volume and quality of sport in my mind represents value for money. If you don't perceive you are getting value, then by all means switch back to free to air and be content money hungry Foxtel aren't getting your hard earned dollar, but don't be an tight@ss and complain about the price when you're on their premium package. It takes on average four years for Foxtel to break even on a basic customer, when you factor you're getting free installation, a free satellite (if applicable), a free remote, free cabling (if applicable), free set top box, an ongoing service, improving technology and new channels which all costs Foxtel BIG MONEY then you wouldn't be so obtuse in your judgements. Contracts are absolutely necessary because they protect the product, the company, it's employees and the consumer. And for the record, for 8 channels @ $100 per month you're each of those channels is costing you less than $1 per day, which ain't bad value.

Your loophole "rationale" can be easily applied to voice recordings. For example, is there any way to prove the customer was in a sober state of mind while agreeing to the terms and conditions? Can it be proven the ID details and information given by the customer are honest and accurate? Can you prove it's actually the customer making the agreement and not his neighbour? Point is no system is ever foolproof and almost anything can be exploited to save ourselves a penny, that doesn't we should so we can feel almighty and powerful because we "deceived" the big corporation as they will just punish the rest of us by making their services harder to get and more expensive.

Your loophole "rationale" can be easily applied to voice recordings. For example, is there any way to prove the customer was in a sober state of mind while agreeing to the terms and conditions? Can it be proven the ID details and information given by the customer are honest and accurate? Can you prove it's actually the customer making the agreement and not his neighbour? Point is no system is ever foolproof and almost anything can be exploited to save ourselves a penny, that doesn't we should so we can feel almighty and powerful because we "deceived" the big corporation as they will just punish the rest of us by making their services harder to get and more expensive.

My thoughts exactly. I think it's safe to assume he might be trying to "deceive" us.

Doubt it. Either you gave some sob story about how your step daddy kicked you outta home or your full of it. No chance Foxtel would back down that easy. deceiver: hi, i don't want to pay the cancel fee telephone operator: but you have to deceiver: can you produce a signed work order? telephone operator: oh darn, we give up then, you win deceiver: ner ner ner