brandonbull
Diamond Member
Not much in the parent's basement to keep them busy.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Plasma TV's are dying
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Not much in the parent's basement to keep them busy.
brandonbull
Diamond Member
What are you talking about? The big knock on LCDs were the refresh problems making people dizzy.
Coo, so hopefully plasma prices will be even cheaper.
As for power consumption: http://www.crutchfield.com/lea...e/TV-power.html?page=2 says LCD and plasma are about the same unless you compare it to the edge lit LED LCD tvs.
As for power consumption: http://www.crutchfield.com/lea...e/TV-power.html?page=2 says LCD and plasma are about the same unless you compare it to the edge lit LED LCD tvs.
Drako
Lifer
LOL, at the topic summary.
People have been saying plasma is dead for 5 or more years. If a better display technology for the price ever comes out, then both LCD and Plasma will be dead.
At this point in time, Plasma still offers the best picture quality for the price for any display over 40".
I currently own a 42" Plasma and a 42" LCD - my next TV purchase will be a 50" Panasonic plasma.
People have been saying plasma is dead for 5 or more years. If a better display technology for the price ever comes out, then both LCD and Plasma will be dead.
At this point in time, Plasma still offers the best picture quality for the price for any display over 40".
I currently own a 42" Plasma and a 42" LCD - my next TV purchase will be a 50" Panasonic plasma.
Samsung PN50B650 (Plasma) 50"
weight: 84.2 lbs. with stand; 73.2 lbs. without stand
Sony KDL-52V5100 (LCD) 52"
weight: 76.3 lbs. with stand; 66.1 lbs. without stand
Wow I know, it's soo much heavier... some people need to go to the gym more. 🙂
One thing I don't like about plasmas is the glare from sunlight. Fortunately I have a curtain.
I do hope plasmas last for quite a bit longer. I recently helped my parents replace their TV that they had for 11-12 years because it is dying. It needs a good kick every few once in a while to keep going.
While I don't watch much, if any, TV...I would still love a good plasma to watch movies on occasion and play some games.
Of course if better/cheaper technology comes along I'm fine with that. But if its just LCDs....bleh
While I don't watch much, if any, TV...I would still love a good plasma to watch movies on occasion and play some games.
Of course if better/cheaper technology comes along I'm fine with that. But if its just LCDs....bleh
CRXican
Diamond Member
Yes, my plasma is heavy. Who cares? I'm not carrying it around with me am I? I've had my 42" Pioneer Plasma just over two years now. I'm a lives at home kid and this is the first TV I purchased for myself ~$1,300.
I could certainly understand the 4 year upgrade mark as it already feels like I've had this TV a long time. I had to search Gmail to see when I ordered it from amazon and surprised it was 2007.
I could certainly understand the 4 year upgrade mark as it already feels like I've had this TV a long time. I had to search Gmail to see when I ordered it from amazon and surprised it was 2007.
My last two big TVs have been DLP. The current TV downstairs is an LED DLP 67" Sammy.
But LCD is coming down in price where even the big TVs DLP cant compete anymore. I see 50" LCDs for ~1000 now. I think DLP will end up in projection screens and that is it. Plasma is also on its way out.
Edit: BTW got the 67" from Amazon for 1800 bucks last November. Cant beat that size\cost ratio in Plasma or LCD yet.
JeffreyLebowski
Lifer
My Phillips Plasma is 2+ years old and has pixel wobble tech to prevent burn in.
To me, Plasma is better than LCD. Colors and blacks just are more vibrant and deeper on a plasma.
DisgruntledVirus
Lifer
Umm, at sizes that are smaller than 50 inches (some say 42 inches) LCD is cheaper. Traditionally plasmas were cheaper at sizes over 50 inches though. That is starting to change though, and you can get an LCD for about the same as the same size plasma.
There are many reasons plasma is dying out, even though PQ is better than LCD generally. First off, LCD's "look better" on the wall in "torch" mode. So, the people who go to BB and just buy what looks best in store will get LCD usually. Secondly, it's rare to find a plasma display under 42 inches which means that a big part of the market it's just not in. Third, LCD's have gotten to the point where they are "good enough" as that Wired article discusses. The average person doesn't want to spend the extra $ on the BEST PQ, they want the largest size with "good enough" PQ. Fourth, the glass of plasma makes it very reflective, which can be distracting. LCD's don't all have the glass, and you can get the matte LCD's which are good enough for watching in daylight conditions. Oh, and finally, plasma has lost a lot because of issues that are no longer relevant like IR/burn in. Early sets had it, but most sets don't suffer from it. Basically LCD has won because it's "good enough" and cheaper for most sizes.
I bought a Kuro and love it. Beautiful tv, and beautiful PQ.
BoberFett
Lifer
Very interesting article, thanks. It's really pretty obvious though if a person just sat down and thought about it. The same thing applies to every human endeavor. For everything a person does the ultimate objective would be perfection. However at some point in the march toward perfection the cost of taking the next step becomes greater than the benefit derived. That point is where something is "good enough."
IndyColtsFan
Lifer
Ditto. I have 2 Panasonic plasmas and love them both.
With that being said, I think it has been obvious for quite some time that plasmas were on their way out for a variety of reasons. The OP isn't telling us anything new that hasn't been talked about for 2 or 3 years now, though I still believe plasma PQ is superior.
Fingolfin269
Lifer
Since when has narrowing focus in tech been a way to push boundaries?
SphinxnihpS
Diamond Member
No TV in the world produces a better picture than my Kuro. They might be unpopular because of the price tag, but nothing matches the quality, NOTHING!
SphinxnihpS
Diamond Member
It's Fritzo, enough said.
13Gigatons
Diamond Member
24" OLED for $399 in 2015.
destrekor
Lifer
this.
I just don't get it. Plasma is the superior technology. Why does it matter if a less superior technology is cheaper and more common?
My parents were looking for a new TV, I picked out the Panasonic TC-P50S1. Absolutely phenomenal display.
Yes, Plasma panels require more power, and are fragile and heavy.. but, so what?
Fragile? Moving the tv from the store to the home and setting it up is the only worry.
Weight? Same - only when setting it up. Just as easily mountable on a strong wall or tv stand with mounting arm, and the weight makes it even more sturdy if setting it up only on the base on a regular entertainment center/stand.
Power is the only issue, and that's a personal choice. Tree hugging hippie and/or really cutting back on electricity bill - then plasma isn't the right choice.
But the color, far deeper blacks and overall contrast, and no issues viewing angle options make it a superior panel type.
LCDs have come a long way, colors, viewing angles, and contrast have improved immensely. But not enough to stand a chance against a plasma for those who like a good picture.
There are just certain limitations with Plasma technology improvement. Weight and fragility aren't going to change. Power has come down a lot with the new "eco" panels.
LED LCDs are great sets, far and away better than regular LCDs. Still, a no-brainer for the discerning type; plasma is the clear winner.
OLED sets will be the only contender that can challenge the features that make Plasma the better display panel. But OLED production is very costly, and getting large panels with that panel type is going to be some time still - they have hit a lot of hurdles with large panel sizes.
I'd love for a better panel type to come out that can dethrone Plasma, but nothing is out there right now.
I was really hoping the SED panels were going to be a real thing, but that has fallen by the wayside. New panel types are the only thing that will bring a better picture, not improving the current LCD technology.
Sadly, consumers rarely go for quality, and thus the reason Plasma struggles to find a large market share. That, and there is still a lot of stigma over the early generations of the Plasma panel tech. Short lifespan is no longer anything to worry about, though most people still stick to the "OMG plasmas die in 5 years!!". That Panasonic TC-P50S1 I picked out for my parents has a claimed panel life of 100k hours. In a rather bleak view, one might say that Plasma might outlive my parents based on typical usage.
Oh, I did forget to mention burn-in is another issue with Plasma. A real concern, but new panels have improved upon that factor quite a bit, and have included features to help make it less likely to occur, at least any longer than temporarily. But it takes someone who knows displays to help make sure that isn't an issue. I've advised my parents against constantly watching channels with vertical bars on the sides, and hell, they hate that too so that makes it easy - they'll switch to SD channels if the HD channel is only broadcasting a 4:3 picture, since I kept the TV's setting to a version of stretch for SD picture since they prefer a picture taking full screen, even if a little stretched. For DVDs and Blu-ray the viewing period won't be long enough to be a worry.
destrekor
Lifer
well that worked because with CRTs, the only differences would really be color accuracy and saturation - the technology was mature to that point that most sets had just about the same contrast. Pay more and you would get better accuracy, gamut, and correct saturation, but contrast didn't change much. Yes there were differences, but not to the extremes of the sets available today.
Today, no technology has yet to come close to CRT in terms of contrast capability. The nature of the technology behind the panels.
That is why I was ecstatic over the whole SED hype, because it was like a super CRT that was also a flat panel. Having that kind of insane contrast (millions:1) would just be spectacular. Black crush, huh? 😛 Sadly I have no idea what the hell happened to that. R&D must have been way too costly to continue at this moment. They better revive that R&D when it becomes more viable. I want CRT-level contrast in a large HD panel that rivals Plasma's color fidelity. That would be the godly panel type.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
