BribieG Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Now, I know we shouldn't insult "fellow-traveller" organisations but I was absolutely amazed to read this comment today in CNET's article "LCD versus Plasma, six things you need to know": http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,339273215,00.htm "Technically, a 42-inch plasma gives you approximately 30 percent extra screen real estate as a 37-inch LCD panel, but they both go for about AU$3500 mark. By 2008, you may see 42-inch LCDs hitting that price" Are these people on the same planet? A current home consumer catalogue I am looking at is full of 42 inch LCD's starting at about 2k. I have always logged on to CNET for info about latest trends and products but I'm wondering if they have lost the plot. To drive the point home you would think that someone writing for CNET should know that 37inch LCDs are just about finished. I'm wondering if someone from a plasma company is ... erm ... assisting him in writing this article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geforce Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 And this part which isn't correct. LCDs can suffer from image retention. To their credit, LCDs don't suffer from burn-in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diesel Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Are you sure??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geforce Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Are you sure??? Yes, here's just one link about it. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....age=1&pp=30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strange_one Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 I was always of the assumption that they can but it is just rare or difficult to have it happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PersianImmortal Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Burn-in is not the same as image retention. Burn-in is the permanent imprint of an image, image retention is a temporary phenomenon which is possible on Plasmas, LCDs and CRTs. The article itself does appear quite dated in terms of the prices quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geforce Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Burn-in is not the same as image retention. Burn-in is the permanent imprint of an image, image retention is a temporary phenomenon which is possible on Plasmas, LCDs and CRTs.The article itself does appear quite dated in terms of the prices quoted. Yeah okay, so burn in is worse and LCDs do suffer from it too. Have a look at the above link and there are many more posts about it in that same forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam5 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Are you sure??? Yes I have seen it happen in a drastic manner At work we purchased a 42inch LCD TV for displaying fixed images about 3 years ago (about $12,000 then) within a year it was cactus. It was replaced under warranty eventually but it did fail and the new one is going the same way. But this is an extreme example of images changing little 24x7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyestrain Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 One issue of lcd V. plasma ownership that few Aussies will have a problem with is this: "nor do they (lcd's) have troubles at high altitudes where the air pressure differential causes plasmas to emit an irritating buzzing sound." Makes my decision making all that much easier! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhf 2 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Now, I know we shouldn't insult "fellow-traveller" organisations but I was absolutely amazed to read this comment today in CNET's article "LCD versus Plasma, six things you need to know":http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,339273215,00.htm "Technically, a 42-inch plasma gives you approximately 30 percent extra screen real estate as a 37-inch LCD panel, but they both go for about AU$3500 mark. By 2008, you may see 42-inch LCDs hitting that price" Are these people on the same planet? A current home consumer catalogue I am looking at is full of 42 inch LCD's starting at about 2k. I have always logged on to CNET for info about latest trends and products but I'm wondering if they have lost the plot. To drive the point home you would think that someone writing for CNET should know that 37inch LCDs are just about finished. I'm wondering if someone from a plasma company is ... erm ... assisting him in writing this article. I read this article 6 months ago when I started looking around for a plamsa/ LCD, same article word for word just the dates have been changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts