Vizio SLAPPED with multiple lawsuits

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Pixie, you betta take your take your vizio and run fer the hills, Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi are coming fer ya.

Seems that Vizio can rake in the money, but they do not like to pay liscensing fee's. Apex, and Cyberhome are not around for these very reasons


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a_Sblzm99PEc&refer=japan

[GMichael]

Uht oh. I predict that this will not end well.

[bobsticks]

Jim Noyd best hope not to land in jail...in China.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Wow! That's a drag! :lol:

[techjunkie]

Pixie, you betta take your take your vizio and run fer the hills, Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi are coming fer ya.

Seems that Vizio can rake in the money, but they do not like to pay liscensing fee's. Apex, and Electrohome are not around for these very reason.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a_Sblzm99PEc&refer=japan

This is not as black & white as the Bloomberg article would have you believe.
Of course, Bloomberg is big business anyway.

The fine print : http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20080605PD210.html

The company said Vizio's suppliers have licenses for the MPEG-2 patents, and Vizio believes that these licenses extend to Vizio's products.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

This is not as black & white as the Bloomberg article would have you believe.
Of course, Bloomberg is big business anyway.

The fine print : http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20080605PD210.html

The company said Vizio's suppliers have licenses for the MPEG-2 patents, and Vizio believes that these licenses extend to Vizio's products.

The suppliers may have the liscenses, but those liscenses do not cover Vizio products in particular. This is an attempt to create a loophole that exempts Vizio from paying fees owed. If the liscenses cover manufacture of a particular piece(in this case a MPEG-2 decoder), it may not cover its implementation within the television itself. Since we do not know the particulars of the suit, its hard to say what covers what. But I know one thing, those big guys are not going to sue if they do not have a cause. And the fact that so many of them are joining in, means they have some cause, and a belief they will win.

Besides all of that, my corps is better than your corps! LOL

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Jim Noyd best hope not to land in jail...in China.

Yeah, he'll never get past the first dinner. They have these neat little chemical additives they like to season their food with. It a real killer!

[rroobbcc]

But I know one thing, those big guys are not going to sue if they do not have a cause.Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

[mbbuchanan]

well all is not lost,maybe they can borrow back some of the endorsement money from LT to foot the legal bill.....: )

[GMichael]

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

Welcome to AR,

So you think that all of these manufatureres decided to call each other and put this plan into action together?

[bobsticks]

Welcome to AR,

So you think that all of these manufatureres decided to call each other and put this plan into action together?

...or possibly just a conversation on the putting green.

[GMichael]

...or possibly just a conversation on the putting green.
What? They went without me again? Those SOB's!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think this lawsuit is based on the same one that was levied against Apex and Cyberhome for the same liscensing issues, and they won. That is why they are piling on this one. Apex's argument was their suppliers had paid THEIR liscensing fee's, so that covered Apex's butt. However the liscensing fee's were not designed to be transfereable, and Apex had to pay back liscensing fee's which drove them out of business. They apparently see this as the same infraction, and they are now coming down hard on Vizio.

I think this all stems from the fact that liscensing fee's were not policed well on DVD players, and the Chinese ran amok flooding the market with cheap DVD players they did not pay liscensing fee's on, which made the player alot cheaper, and eventually drove the major's out of the business.

[Rich-n-Texas]

VIZIO IS DEAD! :biggrin5:

[GMichael]

VIZIO IS DEAD! :biggrin5:
That's what they get for building nuclear powered TV's that will leak radioactive gasses and make the public grow 3 eyes.

[Rich-n-Texas]

And four tits! :eek:

[GMichael]

And four tits! :eek:

Four? One for each hand, one for the mouth, and one in the back for dancing?

[markw]

Roughly, what type of licensing fees could we be talking about on a per set basis?

Pennies, dollars, tens of dollars, more?

[pixelthis]

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

I agree with you, and not sir talky, who as usual doesnt have a clue.
SUING is a matter of doing business, and vizio has caused some ill will.
ITS KINDA HARD to sell a 42in lcd set for two grand plus when a vizio can be had for a grand, sometimes with a better picture.
Whenever a manufacturer offers a decent product at a decent price, those who would want to trade on their "name", who think their product should cost two prices because
of the name on it rush to the attack.
NOT that I care, I have a nice set with DVDO scaling and a zero bright pixel guarentee,
and I love it, it looks great.
This sort of thing has been going on forever, using govt force to quell a competetor
when you cant compete.
PRETTY MUCH LIKE WHAT HAPPENED with Tucker motor,
or the way RCA tried to get FM radio outlawed when it first came out:1:

[pixelthis]

VIZIO IS DEAD! :biggrin5:



nope.
THAT SMELL is your fly by nite amp going KABOOM, oh, about six months
from now.
NOT TO MENTION the projection bulb in that rube goldberg set of yours, which, like the set its in, has the lifespan of a fruitfly
Oh, and PLASMA TOO OF COURSE:1:

[pixelthis]

And four tits! :eek:
















WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH YOU?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I agree with you, and not sir talky, who as usual doesnt have a clue.
SUING is a matter of doing business, and vizio has caused some ill will.
ITS KINDA HARD to sell a 42in lcd set for two grand plus when a vizio can be had for a grand, sometimes with a better picture.
Whenever a manufacturer offers a decent product at a decent price, those who would want to trade on their "name", who think their product should cost two prices because
of the name on it rush to the attack.
NOT that I care, I have a nice set with DVDO scaling and a zero bright pixel guarentee,
and I love it, it looks great.
This sort of thing has been going on forever, using govt force to quell a competetor
when you cant compete.
PRETTY MUCH LIKE WHAT HAPPENED with Tucker motor,
or the way RCA tried to get FM radio outlawed when it first came out:1:

If this was nothing more than big brother picking on little brother, then Apex and Cyberhome would still be here. This is a case of a company selling cheap underperforming televisions without the necessary liscenses, which by the way allow them to undercut the majors who pay their liscensing fees.

When it comes to PQ, Vizio is always at the bottom of the pile. Why, because vizio televsions lose 75% of their resolution when objects move. That is more loss than any CRT based televsion, and more than other brand of flat panels as well. They are at the top of list with flat panels with high light leakage(hence the low contrast ratio), and they cannot fully resolve 720p even with a DVDO(because the panel is the issue, not the processing). That is neither here nor there though, because the bottom line here is that it is clear they have not paid their liscensing fees, and using the same argument that Apex and Cyberhome used is not going to help them at all.

[thekid]

Well if Apex and Cyberhome lost on the same premise that explains the law suit in the first place. A widespread practice among large law firms is to bring what are called "cookie-cutter" lawsuits.

A law firm wins a large settlement in a complicated case. Other law firms take note and then look around for practical applications to sue another business using the winning argument/precedent set in the earlier case. It is cheaper for the law firm because much of the research has been done and their chance of winning is pretty high. The practice has become so common that some law firms have attempted to patent their winning arguements/cases so that they could continue to generate income.

My guess is that an outside law firm approached the plaintiffs and told them they could put together an relatively inexpensive lawsuit that could eliminate one of their competitors.

[pixelthis]

If this was nothing more than big brother picking on little brother, then Apex and Cyberhome would still be here. This is a case of a company selling cheap underperforming televisions without the necessary liscenses, which by the way allow them to undercut the majors who pay their liscensing fees.

When it comes to PQ, Vizio is always at the bottom of the pile. Why, because vizio televsions lose 75% of their resolution when objects move. That is more loss than any CRT based televsion, and more than other brand of flat panels as well. They are at the top of list with flat panels with high light leakage(hence the low contrast ratio), and they cannot fully resolve 720p even with a DVDO(because the panel is the issue, not the processing). That is neither here nor there though, because the bottom line here is that it is clear they have not paid their liscensing fees, and using the same argument that Apex and Cyberhome used is not going to help them at all.


INTERLACE pixtures(1080i, 489i) lose res when theres movement, like your antique dinosaurs that you like to watch.
Progressive doesnt have that problem.
The PQ on my set is quite good, you think they would sell so many if the picture sucked?
Its no bargain to get a cheap set and a bad picture.
YOU'RE just taking point for your masters at Sony, who, while they make good sets,
have a hard time justifying their premium prices just because their name is on the front.
So the lawsuit.
Truth is that inexpensive Vizios are depressing market prices, grredheads like your sony masters cant charge what they would like, and the cant compete.
HENCE the lawsuit.
Its got about as much to do with "picture quality" as your hobbled together crappola:1:

[pixelthis]

AS for royalties they have been paid.
Former similar lawsuits were successfull for a reason, the plaintifs "laywered"
the defendants to death, paying out tons of money and finally outlasting them.
VIZIO, while a new name, is backed by older, more established companies.
They wont be such an easy victim to this nonsense.
Extrapolate the reasoning of the plaintiffs and you'd have to pay a royality
everytime you made a set, or WATCHED one.
But even if VIZIO sinks beneath the waves I dont care, I have a great set,
and it will certainly last till upgrade time (the two year mark).
I will bet its around long after your last CRT has fried and you cant find another , no matter how many dumpsters you "dive":1:

[Duds]

Vizio sells a lot of TVs to the inbreds who shop at Wally World and have no friggin idea how bad they really are.


INTERLACE pixtures(1080i, 489i) lose res when theres movement, like your antique dinosaurs that you like to watch.
Progressive doesnt have that problem.
The PQ on my set is quite good, you think they would sell so many if the picture sucked?
Its no bargain to get a cheap set and a bad picture.
YOU'RE just taking point for your masters at Sony, who, while they make good sets,
have a hard time justifying their premium prices just because their name is on the front.
So the lawsuit.
Truth is that inexpensive Vizios are depressing market prices, grredheads like your sony masters cant charge what they would like, and the cant compete.
HENCE the lawsuit.
Its got about as much to do with "picture quality" as your hobbled together crappola:1:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Vizio sells a lot of TVs to the inbreds who shop at Wally World and have no friggin idea how bad they really are.
You pack so much good stuff into one sentence! Gawd I wish I could do that! :mad2:

[Duds]

If you had combined your two earlier posts into one post, you'd almost be there.


You pack so much good stuff into one sentence! Gawd I wish I could do that! :mad2:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Yeah but it would seem fragmented compared to yours. Your remark had a nice, even flow to it.

[Duds]

Yeah I've been told i should write for an AV magazine or website...


Yeah but it would seem fragmented compared to yours. Your remark had a nice, even flow to it.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

INTERLACE pixtures(1080i, 489i) lose res when theres movement, like your antique dinosaurs that you like to watch.
Progressive doesnt have that problem.

You are lying pixie. All television whether they are progressive or interlaced lose resolution when objects move. ALL televsions. The question becomes how much. According to Panasonic digital testing lab, the Pioneer Kuros finished at the top of the heap, and the vizio at the bottom in every catagory and at all screen sizes. My dinosaur is a 1080p projector, not a 1080i. My television is a 1080p set, not 1080i. This is what I mean when I tell you that your information is lacking. Not all CRT's are 1080i, once you go high end, their resolution goes progressive OR interlaced. Remember, its not the television, its the processing. Any television can be made progressive CRT or digital. Its all in the processing. My projector loses 10% of its resolution during movement in its 1080p setting, and slightly(and I mean slightly) when handling interlaced images. My processor can knock that down to 5% with forward adapting motion compensation which my processor does very well(it uses four Cell processors) The visio 37" loses 75% percent of its resolution with moving objects. These are non debateable facts, tests bare this out.


The PQ on my set is quite good, you think they would sell so many if the picture sucked?

Yes. They sold alot of Apex and Cyberhome DVD players because they were cheap. It didn't make any difference that not one of these DVD players could pass basic tests such as 3:2 pull down without a bunch of jaggies.


Its no bargain to get a cheap set and a bad picture.

It is when you do not really care about PQ


YOU'RE just taking point for your masters at Sony, who, while they make good sets,
have a hard time justifying their premium prices just because their name is on the front.

I don't work for Sony. I am not sure why you don't seem to be able to grasp this, but this is not about you. Sony can justify its prices because they score well on PQ and video tests, and they pay their liscenses. So its pretty clear where the R&D money is spent, and fully justifies their price tags. The fact that Sony is the most reliable name in consumer electronics doesn't hurt.


So the lawsuit.
Truth is that inexpensive Vizios are depressing market prices, grredheads like your sony masters cant charge what they would like, and the cant compete.
HENCE the lawsuit.
Its got about as much to do with "picture quality" as your hobbled together crappola:1:

The Vizio are depressing the market because they are not paying their liscensing fee's, and passing those costs. They are depressing the market because they use cheap parts, and have basically no support infrastructure. They have no steady vendors, so you do not know when parts will change during manufacture Vizio doesn't even have a customer service department, it all falls on the retailer. What Vizio does is exactly the same thing that Apex and Cyberhome did, and that got them busted, and put out of business. Its cool if you come to the defense of the maker of your television, but doesn't mean a damn thing in the courts. Vizio is using the EXACT same defense as Cyberhome and Apex(our vendors paid the liscenses for us), and that is going to kill them in the courts.

[bobsticks]

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.
I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

This post actually makes alot of sense, though I see your point and suspect that it may be the catalyst or the proverbial foot in the door. In any case, the big boys don't have much to lose other than the time for some lawdogs who are probably house clowns anyway.

What interests me is that this story is being reported out of Japan. "Based in California" is not really too informative...is Vizio a Japanese entity?

[Woochifer]

This post actually makes alot of sense, though I see your point and suspect that it may be the catalyst or the proverbial foot in the door. In any case, the big boys don't have much to lose other than the time for some lawdogs who are probably house clowns anyway.

What interests me is that this story is being reported out of Japan. "Based in California" is not really too informative...is Vizio a Japanese entity?

Technically, Vizio's an American company, but none of their product is actually made in the U.S. Like Terrence said, they operate as a virtual company with no independent R&D, manufacturing, or customer service capacity -- it's all outsourced. They're a billion dollar company and for a while last year they were the #1 LCD TV brand, yet they have less than 100 employees. What does that tell you?

A lot of these fly-by-night companies came and went when the DVD format was in its growth phase, and the Chinese outsource manufacturers supplying them with DVD players were known for bypassing or shortchanging the license and patent holders. With flat panel TVs, it should be no surprise that this same kind of cheating could be going on with the off-brand models.

The "big boys" actually have a lot to lose by doing nothing, given that they developed and hold most of the rights to the MPEG-2 technologies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpeg_2#Patent_holders) that underpin HDTV broadcasting. If they're getting shortchanged, and someone's gaining market share by undercutting their costs through illegal practices, then it's almost their obligation to enforce these patents in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpeg_2#Patent_holders

[bobsticks]

stuff

Gracias

[pixelthis]

Yeah I've been told i should write for an AV magazine or website...
If you can find one that hires JR high school students.
I can see why rich admires you, you're even more clueless than HE is :1:

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]You are lying pixie. All television whether they are progressive or interlaced lose resolution when objects move. ALL televsions. The question becomes how much. According to Panasonic digital testing lab, the Pioneer Kuros finished at the top of the heap, and the vizio at the bottom in every catagory and at all screen sizes. My dinosaur is a 1080p projector, not a 1080i. My television is a 1080p set, not 1080i. This is what I mean when I tell you that your information is lacking. Not all CRT's are 1080i, once you go high end, their resolution goes progressive OR interlaced. Remember, its not the television, its the processing. Any television can be made progressive CRT or digital. Its all in the processing. My projector loses 10% of its resolution during movement in its 1080p setting, and slightly(and I mean slightly) when handling interlaced images. My processor can knock that down to 5% with forward adapting motion compensation which my processor does very well(it uses four Cell processors) The visio 37" loses 75% percent of its resolution with moving objects. These are non debateable facts, tests bare this out.

I know that not all CRT tubes are interlaced.
I also know that CRT progressive requires such a fine pitch on the phosper that teh light output is quite dim, pretty much like yourself.
I have been arguing with you for six months that a interlaced pic loses up to half its resolution when movement occures, and you have been denying it.
Now you say ALL sets lose res during movement, which isnt the case for progressive scan.
THATS progress of a sort.
The real hoot is that you are comparing your (probably imaginary) multibuck pile of obsolete CRT CRAP to my 1,000 LCD SET




Yes. They sold alot of Apex and Cyberhome DVD players because they were cheap. It didn't make any difference that not one of these DVD players could pass basic tests such as 3:2 pull down without a bunch of jaggies.

If you have an argument against MY set then make it, you keep bringing up these two defunct makers , even tho they have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Vizio because that is all you can think of.
Why dont I bring up Muntz front projector tv when talking about your crap?
EVERYTIME I get into a shouting match with a ninnie such as yourself you mention Apex and cyberhome, even tho I have NEVER bought either.
Vizio is backed by several Tawainese companies , most of which make parts and components for much more expensive sets.
They have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Apex or Cyberhome, and if you cant
connect the two you need to SHUT UP about them, as they have NOTHING to do with
ANY of this


It is when you do not really care about PQ

I care a great deal about PQ, and I dont nurse a massive, fragil ego like you do.
And I have a life



I don't work for Sony. I am not sure why you don't seem to be able to grasp this, but this is not about you. Sony can justify its prices because they score well on PQ and video tests, and they pay their liscenses. So its pretty clear where the R&D money is spent, and fully justifies their price tags. The fact that Sony is the most reliable name in consumer electronics doesn't hurt.

I have had FIVE sonys, my next set will probably be Sony.
But Sony was twice the price of my Vizio when I bought it, and the pq wasnt twice as good.
The REAL reason for this lawsuit? Sony selling next to Vizio at walmart at a similar price,
which I saw during a recent trip there, and they HATE IT.
The free market sux for them I guess.
So hire a bunch of lawyers and do in the courts what we cant do in the market.
Lawyer em to death, wont be the first time.
As for you working for Sony, you have always denied this, and you have your nose
so far up sonys butt you can see tonsils.
YOU ARENT FOOLING ANYBODY



The Vizio are depressing the market because they are not paying their liscensing fee's, and passing those costs. They are depressing the market because they use cheap parts, and have basically no support infrastructure. They have no steady vendors, so you do not know when parts will change during manufacture Vizio doesn't even have a customer service department, it all falls on the retailer. What Vizio does is exactly the same thing that Apex and Cyberhome did, and that got them busted, and put out of business. Its cool if you come to the defense of the maker of your television, but doesn't mean a damn thing in the courts. Vizio is using the EXACT same defense as Cyberhome and Apex(our vendors paid the liscenses for us), and that is going to kill them in the courts.
No "steady vendors"? They have been selling at SAMS, Walmart, for three years, and now sell at Circuit city and others, they are a new company, and are very stable for one.
Three years, how "stable" do you want?
Rich just bought an AMP that has NO vendors, that is their sales strategy, as a matter of fact.
As for "cheap" parts you call ME a liar?
hOW DO YOU KNOW? Ever break one open?
the "parts" are first rate, the scaler is DVDO, the panel came from one of the two panel makers that were around when it was made. ITS TWO YEARS OLD ALMOST
with nary a hiccup, and the pic is the most stable I have EVER had on a set.
That is why it constantly gets good reviews.
And that is why slandering liars such as yourself bring up a few fly by night makers of tv
sets, because its all you have, and you know good and well that neither one has ANYTHING ot do with this company.
We have other Vizio owners on this site, ask THEM how they like theirs..
You wanna spend a small fortune on a science project that is obsolete, fine, do that
and sit in your darkened cave and enjoy you half a picture, you will never know that
you paid thousands for what modern tech can deliver for a LOT less:1:

[pixelthis]

Vizio sells a lot of TVs to the inbreds who shop at Wally World and have no friggin idea how bad they really are.

Sony SELLS AT "WALLYWORLD" nimrod, how about them?
Or phillips, or magnavox, etc.
You're probably envious, you probably cant afford to shop at wally world.
Or maybe the bus that runs by your trailer park doesnt go by there:1:

[pixelthis]

SO , just what IS this Company that the likes of sirtalky and other snobs like to slander?
Just what IS behind this huge sucess story?
Every since I GOT INTO THIS HOBBY I have heard the same thing about a company like VIZIO, their product is cheap so it cant be any good.
Also names like apex, and cyberhome are brought up, two chinese comapnies that
WERE cheap, this is called slander by association, even tho VIZIO has NEVER had ANYTHING to do with either company.
Vizio is a TWO BILLION DOLLAR COMPANY, comparing it to trash like apex is
like comparing Gwynth Paltrol to carmen electra.
Its a lean business model they adhere to, sure, but they do design their own products,
Back them up, and arent going anywhere
I am probably going to buy Sony the next time I buy, Samsung if I LIKE THEIR dlp,
but Vizio was a great product at a great price when I couldnt afford fancy.
And I have enjoyed my set immensely, it would be a shame if they were driven out of the market by a bunch of greedheads.
HERES the story of the one who runs things.
He used to run mag innovision, he is NOT a shyster.
read FOR YOURSELF

http://www.sbnonline.com/Local/Article/14706/77/0/The_big_picture.aspx

[Smokey]

The fact that Sony is the most reliable name in consumer electronics doesn't hurt.

Hey Sir TT

If you look at history of Sony’s reliability track record, that statement might not hold true. They were one of biggest selling CRT TV company on market, but refused to give their (non XBR) television sets more than 3 month warranty. While Panasonic and Sharp always provided one year warranty on their TV.

Panasonic is probably better qualified as most reliable brand :)

[kexodusc]

I think Sir T meant to say they are "known" as the most reliable name in consumer electronics, actual reliability notwithstanding - to the average joe. I'd believe that statement - I know a ton of people who aren't a/v enthusiasts like the people here, and for them it's Sony and Bose. Brand name power.

As for Vizio - if they're breaking the rules they will pay dearly. If they're not they probably won't. I don't care either way. Every Vizio I've seen has looked horrible, even for the money, but a zillion people buy them and don't care about PQ. Personally, I'd like to a see a few low-ball companies keep the other companies' prices in check a bit.

In the computer/software industry a lot of frivolous lawsuits are tossed around to paralyze competitors, you don't see it as much in the consumer electronics industry, and when you do it's usually patents or copyright/trademark disputes. This is a licensing issue so it's probably pretty black and white, and likely to be a quick case unless there's more to it than we're reading.

Dunno why Pixie is taking it so personally and responding with negative attacks on the people here instead of sticking to the topic?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Looks like pix has learned how to attach pictures.

All, don't worry, he's not far away from menopause so he shouldn't be having too many more *episodes* like these. We just have to be patient. :yesnod:

[bobsticks]

SO , just what IS this Company that the likes of sirtalky and other snobs like to slander?
Just what IS behind this huge sucess story?
Every since I GOT INTO THIS HOBBY I have heard the same thing about a company like VIZIO, their product is cheap so it cant be any good.
Also names like apex, and cyberhome are brought up, two chinese comapnies that
WERE cheap, this is called slander by association, even tho VIZIO has NEVER had ANYTHING to do with either company.
Vizio is a TWO BILLION DOLLAR COMPANY, comparing it to trash like apex is
like comparing Gwynth Paltrol to carmen electra.
Its a lean business model they adhere to, sure, but they do design their own products,
Back them up, and arent going anywhere
I am probably going to buy Sony the next time I buy, Samsung if I LIKE THEIR dlp,
but Vizio was a great product at a great price when I couldnt afford fancy.
And I have enjoyed my set immensely, it would be a shame if they were driven out of the market by a bunch of greedheads.
HERES the story of the one who runs things.
He used to run mag innovision, he is NOT a shyster.
read FOR YOURSELF

http://www.sbnonline.com/Local/Article/14706/77/0/The_big_picture.aspx

I'd rather be with Carmen Elektra.

[bobsticks]

As for Vizio - if they're breaking the rules they will pay dearly. If they're not they probably won't. I don't care either way. Every Vizio I've seen has looked horrible, even for the money, but a zillion people buy them and don't care about PQ. Personally, I'd like to a see a few low-ball companies keep the other companies' prices in check a bit.


I too like to see a few companies lowballin' it out there, provided they observe the applicable laws. The idea of trickledown technology clearly works and, I would gather, is what funds the level of innovation that keeps the tide rollin'...and it doesn't negatively impact me if Joe6P is happy, so why not?

[Auricauricle]

Shoot Straight, You Bastards!!

[Woochifer]

I too like to see a few companies lowballin' it out there, provided they observe the applicable laws. The idea of trickledown technology clearly works and, I would gather, is what funds the level of innovation that keeps the tide rollin'...and it doesn't negatively impact me if Joe6P is happy, so why not?

There will always be off-brand bottomfeeders like Vizio out on the market. Their business model is always the short-term cash grab for a high margin product. That's why they don't develop R&D, manufacturing, and customer support infrastructure -- because they're not investing in the long haul. Off-brand virtual companies that achieve any measure of market rank strictly by undercutting the established mass market CE companies on price inevitably crash and burn.

As price points decline and their only market advantage erodes, they don't have an established reputation for product quality or customer support to fall back on. This is exactly what happened to Apex Digital, which became a billion dollar company and (briefly) the #1 seller of DVD players by selling boatloads of cheap (and cheaply made) products. Once the price points for name brand DVD players fell below $200, Apex no longer had any market advantage. Operating with a ridiculously small staff and minimal facility investments simply makes it easier for the company to close up shop and walk away when sales begin to decline.

In the LCD TV market, a similar scenario is playing out. Vizio was the #1 LCD TV brand for one quarter last year. But, Sony and Samsung passed Vizio late last year as they lowered their price points. As the price difference between Vizio and the rest of the market continues to narrow, then consumers will inevitably drift back to those companies that offer something more than just a cheap TV. They might survive simply because big screen TVs will probably never plunge down to the commodity price levels of DVD players. But, their days as a market player are numbered, unless they actually invest for the long haul by building a company rather than simply serving as a middleman for outsourcers.

How fraud impacts Joe6p is that companies that actually invest in new technologies wind up cutting back because their margins get eroded by the company that cheats. Vizio has nothing in the patent pools, while companies like JVC, Toshiba, Sony, Philips, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, et al invested in development of HDTV technologies. If Vizio uses that technology without paying for it, then that reduces the resources available for innovation and product improvements.

[bobsticks]

Wooch,I'd agree if Sony et al were only invested in the production of LCD televisions. As most are involved with the software industry that fuels the overall machine it may be a little more complex. Just guessing but if the big boys are smart they have stock in the accessories market as well...again, adding to the complexity as this is where the margin is.

Fortunately for us there are many that will save for the quality product. There are those too that will buy for name recognition. In any case none of the bigguns seem to be hurtin' too bad.

I think it's better to have a smaller share of a bigger pie if you own a prospering bakery.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[QUOTE]

I know that not all CRT tubes are interlaced.
I also know that CRT progressive requires such a fine pitch on the phosper that teh light output is quite dim, pretty much like yourself.
I have been arguing with you for six months that a interlaced pic loses up to half its resolution when movement occures, and you have been denying it.
Now you say ALL sets lose res during movement, which isnt the case for progressive scan.
THATS progress of a sort.
The real hoot is that you are comparing your (probably imaginary) multibuck pile of obsolete CRT CRAP to my 1,000 LCD SET

Pix, your television can't even sit in the same room as either of mine, so there really is nothing to compare. There is one thing you do not seem to be able to get through your head(and damn its thick). With 9" CRT light is not an issue, they put out far more light than what is needed for proper calibration even at 1080p. Since you by your own confession do not own(and have confessed to never owning) a display device with 9" CRT's, how can you possibly make the light output claims you do? If what you say it true, then not a single 9" CRT based would be capable of producing neither a 1080i or 1080p image. It would be too dim to watch, which is not the case at all. That would be counter to Joe Kanes claims that 9" CRT are the only way to get 1080p properly done.

Here is where you so called "knowledge" is failing you. Progressive scanning does not elimate motion blur or loss of resolution(both of which are major problems with digital television). Digital television utilize sample and hold as the basis for their projection of images. They hold the image for exactly 1/60 of a second with absolutely no break for the next image. They are continous light, unlike plasma and CRT which has breaks between images. Sample and hold is why motion blur and loss of resolution occurs in LCD panels. To combat that problem, some manufacturers have upped the refresh rate to 120hz, but then you lose the precious light that you use as a basis of your arguement. Every 16.67ms you get a single sample which leaves the panel no time to adjust to images with alot of movement. Thats a fact, the science, and the bottom line. Doesn't matter if the LCD panel is progressive or not, it loses resolution during moving images, far more so than either CRT or plasma.

As far as loss of resolution during movement, your "HALF" the resolution is what we are arguing over, not the fact that it loses resolution. In the interlace mode, my displays lose a measured 25% of its resolution during movement, not 50% as you state. That is considerably less than the 75% loss during movement of your vizio 37" panel caused by both sample and hold, and panel response combined together.



If you have an argument against MY set then make it, you keep bringing up these two defunct makers , even tho they have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Vizio because that is all you can think of.

I do not give a rats azz about your set. Those two defunct companies are setup just like Vizio is. You need to read what Wooch has posted, his information is spot on.


Why dont I bring up Muntz front projector tv when talking about your crap?

I do care if you do. But you would be talking apples and oranges because muntz front projector looks nor functions the same as mine.


EVERYTIME I get into a shouting match with a ninnie such as yourself you mention Apex and cyberhome, even tho I have NEVER bought either.
Vizio is backed by several Tawainese companies , most of which make parts and components for much more expensive sets.
They have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Apex or Cyberhome, and if you cant
connect the two you need to SHUT UP about them, as they have NOTHING to do with
ANY of this

You have this habit of making things about you. This is about a manufacturer of cheap low performing televisions cheating on liscensing just like Apex and Cyberhome. Apex and Cyberhome were set up just like Vizio currently is. Vizio outsources EVERYTHING just like Apex and Cyberhome did. You should read Wooch's post, how you missed it I will never know. Vizio is follow the same lead that Apex and Cyberhome blazed with DVD. That's the connection.




I care a great deal about PQ, and I dont nurse a massive, fragil ego like you do.
And I have a life

Pixie, you do not know what good quality is. Your television is not calibrated, and your choice of television was based on price, not performance. You said that yourself. If you cared a great deal about PQ, you wouldn't be advancing peak light levels as a arguement for flat panel over CRT. You would already know a properly calibrated television doesn't need to burn your eyes out with high light output levels. If you do not worry about my ego, I won't worry about your ignorance being passed off as knowledge.



I have had FIVE sonys, my next set will probably be Sony.
But Sony was twice the price of my Vizio when I bought it, and the pq wasnt twice as good.
The REAL reason for this lawsuit? Sony selling next to Vizio at walmart at a similar price,
which I saw during a recent trip there, and they HATE IT.
The free market sux for them I guess.
So hire a bunch of lawyers and do in the courts what we cant do in the market.
Lawyer em to death, wont be the first time.
As for you working for Sony, you have always denied this, and you have your nose
so far up sonys butt you can see tonsils.
YOU ARENT FOOLING ANYBODY

You go on believing I work for Sony, you have trouble dealing with reality anyway. If this was nothing more than giants going after the little guy, the case would not have gone this far. There would be no merit to it. However Vizio has admitted they have not paid liscensing fee's for the use of the MPEG-2 decoders in their television. And yes, those suing own the patents, and they have a right to be paid. Now you can make this about something else in your head, but really, its that clear, they didn't pay for the liscenses, and thought they could get away with it.


No "steady vendors"? They have been selling at SAMS, Walmart, for three years, and now sell at Circuit city and others, they are a new company, and are very stable for one.

Don't you understand the difference between a part vendor, and sales outlets?


Three years, how "stable" do you want?
Rich just bought an AMP that has NO vendors, that is their sales strategy, as a matter of fact.

Outlaw does have part vendors. Richie Rich's company is now one of them. They have no brick and mortar sales outlets. Its a little different.


As for "cheap" parts you call ME a liar?
hOW DO YOU KNOW? Ever break one open?

You are a liar. I did not have to break it open, The Panasonic Digital Testing did, and spread the parts out for everyone to see, and priced each individual part, much like they have done with the PS3 and XBOX. They also took the time to explain why the use of these particular parts in combination caused the panel(and all of their panels) to perform so poorly. They also pulled apart a Samsung, and a Sony SXRD LCD panel, and did the same thing. It was pretty damn clear why both cost more, and performed far better. The Samsung and Sony were designed from the ground up to perform with its internal parts designed specifically for its panels. The Vizio was not. What Vizio essentially did was "Muntz" the television together with a bunch of parts that was NOT designed specifically for that panel. I was also told that an earlier model of the same television had some different parts than the sample I saw, which means they had changed part vendors at some point.



the "parts" are first rate, the scaler is DVDO, the panel came from one of the two panel makers that were around when it was made. ITS TWO YEARS OLD ALMOST
with nary a hiccup, and the pic is the most stable I have EVER had on a set.
That is why it constantly gets good reviews.

I took the time to look up each one of the 37" LCD television they offer, and there is no mention of DVDO scaling chips, which is something that any marketing department in the world would trump up(lie, or did you misspeak?). Also considering that DVDO makes scaling chips of different quality to meet different price points, the mention of DVDO as the scaling chip is irrelevant. HQV makes three kinds of scaling and processing chips. The Reon, Realta, and a lower cost integrated design for lower cost televisions. They do not use first rate parts, that is another lie. Have you ever seen one pulled apart? I have, and seen it compared to a panel with good parts, and that performed better. Huge difference, and if Vizio used quality parts, they would not have performed so poorly on tests.


And that is why slandering liars such as yourself bring up a few fly by night makers of tv
sets, because its all you have, and you know good and well that neither one has ANYTHING ot do with this company.

You are becoming more mouth, and far less brains. Read what we said carefully(like that is going to help). We(wooch and I) didn't say that Vizio was apart of Apex or Cyberhome. We DID say they are set up like them both, which is a fact that you cannot mouth your way out of. Vizio isn't pay their liscenses, and neither did Apex or Cyberhome.

Your understanding of the english language is as poor as your ability to critically think. Nothing I have said is a lie, its all fact. Vizio has admitted they have not paid liscensing fees for the MPEG-2 decoders in their television. That's a fact. Vizio is set up just like Apex and Cyberhome. That is a fact. So where is the slander brightness?


We have other Vizio owners on this site, ask THEM how they like theirs..
You wanna spend a small fortune on a science project that is obsolete, fine, do that
and sit in your darkened cave and enjoy you half a picture, you will never know that
you paid thousands for what modern tech can deliver for a LOT less:1:

Subjective opinions are not helpful, and are too personal to be meanful to everyone. For instance, when you say PQ is good, that does not mean anything to me because you do not calibrate your sets, you watch in poor light conditions, and you choose underperforming products when one looks at the specs. If Joe Kane gives an opinion, I am going to listen VERY carefully, because he chooses top notch products(based on his readings he would never recommend ANY vizio), watches in optimum light conditions(darkness) and he knows far more about televisions that both you and I.

In California and New York we call hometheaters rooms, hometheater rooms. You hicks may call them caves, but that is not what we east and west coasters call it. I have been to about 10 caves in my lifetime, and they do not look like any room I have ever seen. But then I have never been to your house, so you may surprise me.

Your panel cannot do 1080p or 1440p and does not have the ability to do different resolutions. It can barely do 720p. Your panel does not have a measured 50:000:1 contrast ratio, it's 1000:1(which is not even good by LCD standards). The bottom line is you get what you pay for. So if you think your little beer budget is going to get you Dom Perrion performance, you really are living in an alternate reality. (I give Panasonic Testing Lab $100 for the price versus performance lesson).

[Woochifer]

Wooch,I'd agree if Sony et al were only invested in the production of LCD televisions. As most are involved with the software industry that fuels the overall machine it may be a little more complex. Just guessing but if the big boys are smart they have stock in the accessories market as well...again, adding to the complexity as this is where the margin is.

Fortunately for us there are many that will save for the quality product. There are those too that will buy for name recognition. In any case none of the bigguns seem to be hurtin' too bad.

I think it's better to have a smaller share of a bigger pie if you own a prospering bakery.

Aside from maybe Sony (which can occasionally generate more revenue from their movie studio operations than their consumer electronics division), most of the other companies in the MPEG patent pool rely primarily on revenues from the electronics side. What they have in common is that they reinvest their profits into developing new technologies and improving existing ones -- that's why they hold patents on digital video technologies, and virtual companies like Vizio don't.

Also, with the accessories market -- the margins are higher for the retailers, but the revenues for accessories still pale in comparison to what the TVs themselves will pull in. Accessories are more important to retailers because TVs have a lower margin for the retailers. But, for a name brand manufacturer, they probably maintain higher margins on TVs because they make many of the big ticket components themselves. This is somewhat offset by the huge capital investments required to make high margin components like LCD panels. But, that's just their way of doing business -- invest in technology, maintain control over the manufacturing process. That's all high value added activity that also requires higher levels of capital investment and risk.

The virtual company model is all about minimizing costs by minimizing investment. It can generate profits, but all of the high value added, high margin activity gets created elsewhere, which doesn't bode well for a virtual company's long-term prospects, since all they really do is slap a badge on a product developed and built by someone else.

[bobsticks]

It can generate profits, but all of the high value added, high margin activity gets created elsewhere, which doesn't bode well for a virtual company's long-term prospects, since all they really do is slap a badge on a product developed and built by someone else.

Kinda like Korea? I think I get it :)

[pixelthis]

I think Sir T meant to say they are "known" as the most reliable name in consumer electronics, actual reliability notwithstanding - to the average joe. I'd believe that statement - I know a ton of people who aren't a/v enthusiasts like the people here, and for them it's Sony and Bose. Brand name power.

As for Vizio - if they're breaking the rules they will pay dearly. If they're not they probably won't. I don't care either way. Every Vizio I've seen has looked horrible, even for the money, but a zillion people buy them and don't care about PQ. Personally, I'd like to a see a few low-ball companies keep the other companies' prices in check a bit.

In the computer/software industry a lot of frivolous lawsuits are tossed around to paralyze competitors, you don't see it as much in the consumer electronics industry, and when you do it's usually patents or copyright/trademark disputes. This is a licensing issue so it's probably pretty black and white, and likely to be a quick case unless there's more to it than we're reading.

Dunno why Pixie is taking it so personally and responding with negative attacks on the people here instead of sticking to the topic?

I am the one receiving "negative" attacks and am only defending myself.
there are a lot on this site who work in the industry, and they all want companies like Vizio GONE.
If you think the picture on a Vizio is "horrible" you are entitled to your opinion.
Everyone who looks at mine loves it, and they arent just saying so, several have bought one.
ONE reason I am pissed mightily is senile old farts like sir talky comparing a
TWO BILLION dollar company that is in most stores to fly by nights like Apex
and cyperhome crap, stuff that was mostly sold in grocery , drug, and dollar stores
.
This is slander of the worst sort and he insists on doing so, so I WILL IGNORE HIM
until he gets his act together and stops slandering people.
But the main problem I am having is that people seem to think that buying Vizio is some sort of "compromise".
I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH THIS CRAP EVER SINCE I GOT INTO THIS
"hobby".
Snobs and elitists who judge your gear not by how well it performs but by how much it costs.
My first set was a sony trinitron XBR ( 20") back in the early eighties, I
have had five sonys, two XBRS.
I have always had quality gear
VIZIO AND A FEW OTHER "LOSS LEADERS" are an exelent way for those with
meager funds to get a decent display.
The reason Apex and Cyberhome "lost" their lawsuit was they didnt bother
fighting it, but with Vizio the bullies in this industry who hate the fact that
they have to compete and work for a living are going to have a fight on their hands.
Vizio has a few million to throw into a lawsuit, unlike those two other brands.
But I guess my main gripe is that a lot of companies today are run like Vizio ,
and how does that compute when delivering a quality product?
I had a Samsung 19" widescreen computer monitor, it developed a "bright" pixel
shortly after the warrenty ran out.
What a quality brand!
I have had my Vizio for going on two years, with nary a peep.
Where I work they had a Samsung plasma in the lobby (42in), lasted A YEAR
before the gas escaped.
Truth is VIZIO has the same parts and panels as other brands, they all come from the same places, Vizio has just come up with an efficent business model for delivering it to the customer.
The real reason for this lawsuit?
Go to Walfart, there are Sony TV sets sitting next to vizio and others, a few hundred bucks more instead of the grand premium they used to charge.
THATS the free market in action.
IF UPSTARTS like Vizio are going to be "lawyered" out of exsistence by giant conglomerates with deep pockets we will all suffer, and pay higher prices.
HEY, hiring a bunch of "suits" is better than providing a quality product at a decent price aint it?:1:

[kexodusc]

I am the one receiving "negative" attacks and am only defending myself.
there are a lot on this site who work in the industry, and they all want companies like Vizio GONE.
Here's what you wrote to Duds....
"Sony SELLS AT "WALLYWORLD" nimrod, how about them?
Or phillips, or magnavox, etc.
You're probably envious, you probably cant afford to shop at wally world.
Or maybe the bus that runs by your trailer park doesnt go by there"
If I missed it and he attacked you personally, identified you specifically in the attack, then I apologize, but to claim you are a victim here is a half-truth. You give as much as you receive and aren't always the victim.


If you think the picture on a Vizio is "horrible" you are entitled to your opinion.
Everyone who looks at mine loves it, and they arent just saying so, several have bought one. I know a few people that think Bose sounds great too - they don't necessarily know what to listen for. As long as they're happy, that's all that really matters. For the record, I don't look down on anyone who owns a Vizio - some people have way better things to spend their money on than a TV.
I don't think Vizio is unbearable to look at, if price was my primary factor I would consider it. It's just not cutting the minimum standard for me. But that's me. Doesn't mean I hate the sets or look down on Vizio owners.



But the main problem I am having is that people seem to think that buying Vizio is some sort of "compromise".
I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH THIS CRAP EVER SINCE I GOT INTO THIS
"hobby".
Snobs and elitists who judge your gear not by how well it performs but by how much it costs.
Not all that unlike the negativity and disbelief you posted about the amps Rich and I bought. You're not so different from us after all.



The real reason for this lawsuit?
Go to Walfart, there are Sony TV sets sitting next to vizio and others, a few hundred bucks more instead of the grand premium they used to charge.
THATS the free market in action.
IF UPSTARTS like Vizio are going to be "lawyered" out of exsistence by giant conglomerates with deep pockets we will all suffer, and pay higher prices.
HEY, hiring a bunch of "suits" is better than providing a quality product at a decent price aint it?:1:
I have little doubt Sony and co are lawyering Vizio at least partly because they don't like the price pressure Vizio is putting on them by sellng zillions of these things - if Vizio wasn't selling they'd be a non-issue and Sony wouldn't care. But too bad. If Sony's claim is truthful, they're entitled to be compensated for the license fees. That would just be stupidity on the part of Vizio. Likewise, if the case is BS and thrown out, I expect Vizio to slap a countersuit on Sony and laugh all the way to the bank.

As far as lawyering goes - if you want to play with the big boys you can't be afraid to get hurt from time to time. Welcome to the ugly side of business. Better get a good lawyer.

[GMichael]

comparing a
TWO BILLION dollar company that is in most stores to fly by nights like Apex......... This is slander of the worst sort....


Dude..
Apex got to be pretty big. But that's got nothing to do with why T and others have compared them to Vizio. They are comparing their business practices, which do parallel in a few ways. IMO your set may have a fine picture. Why else would you go on about how good it is? But Vizio's business methods lead to an inconsistent product. While your model may be great, other models may not be up to snuff.
I have an Apex 32" CRT in the guest room. While it's not the best, it still keeps on working. A lot of other Apex sets crapped out long ago for other consumers.

As far as T attacking you, and you attacking him? I think you've both had your share of off colored remarks. I've assumed that it's why you, he, and many others keep coming back. You gotta luv a good fight. And sometimes, a dirty fight is the best kind.

[Woochifer]

I am the one receiving "negative" attacks and am only defending myself.
there are a lot on this site who work in the industry, and they all want companies like Vizio GONE.
If you think the picture on a Vizio is "horrible" you are entitled to your opinion.
Everyone who looks at mine loves it, and they arent just saying so, several have bought one.
ONE reason I am pissed mightily is senile old farts like sir talky comparing a
TWO BILLION dollar company that is in most stores to fly by nights like Apex
and cyperhome crap, stuff that was mostly sold in grocery , drug, and dollar stores
.
This is slander of the worst sort and he insists on doing so, so I WILL IGNORE HIM
until he gets his act together and stops slandering people.
But the main problem I am having is that people seem to think that buying Vizio is some sort of "compromise".
I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH THIS CRAP EVER SINCE I GOT INTO THIS
"hobby".
Snobs and elitists who judge your gear not by how well it performs but by how much it costs.
My first set was a sony trinitron XBR ( 20") back in the early eighties, I
have had five sonys, two XBRS.
I have always had quality gear
VIZIO AND A FEW OTHER "LOSS LEADERS" are an exelent way for those with
meager funds to get a decent display.
The reason Apex and Cyberhome "lost" their lawsuit was they didnt bother
fighting it, but with Vizio the bullies in this industry who hate the fact that
they have to compete and work for a living are going to have a fight on their hands.
Vizio has a few million to throw into a lawsuit, unlike those two other brands.
But I guess my main gripe is that a lot of companies today are run like Vizio ,
and how does that compute when delivering a quality product?
I had a Samsung 19" widescreen computer monitor, it developed a "bright" pixel
shortly after the warrenty ran out.
What a quality brand!
I have had my Vizio for going on two years, with nary a peep.
Where I work they had a Samsung plasma in the lobby (42in), lasted A YEAR
before the gas escaped.
Truth is VIZIO has the same parts and panels as other brands, they all come from the same places, Vizio has just come up with an efficent business model for delivering it to the customer.
The real reason for this lawsuit?
Go to Walfart, there are Sony TV sets sitting next to vizio and others, a few hundred bucks more instead of the grand premium they used to charge.
THATS the free market in action.
IF UPSTARTS like Vizio are going to be "lawyered" out of exsistence by giant conglomerates with deep pockets we will all suffer, and pay higher prices.
HEY, hiring a bunch of "suits" is better than providing a quality product at a decent price aint it?:1:

:out:

[Duds]

So lets see here, in this post you blast Samsung, yet in your post before this one you say you might buy their DLP??? man you are a crack head


I am the one receiving "negative" attacks and am only defending myself.
there are a lot on this site who work in the industry, and they all want companies like Vizio GONE.
If you think the picture on a Vizio is "horrible" you are entitled to your opinion.
Everyone who looks at mine loves it, and they arent just saying so, several have bought one.
ONE reason I am pissed mightily is senile old farts like sir talky comparing a
TWO BILLION dollar company that is in most stores to fly by nights like Apex
and cyperhome crap, stuff that was mostly sold in grocery , drug, and dollar stores
.
This is slander of the worst sort and he insists on doing so, so I WILL IGNORE HIM
until he gets his act together and stops slandering people.
But the main problem I am having is that people seem to think that buying Vizio is some sort of "compromise".
I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH THIS CRAP EVER SINCE I GOT INTO THIS
"hobby".
Snobs and elitists who judge your gear not by how well it performs but by how much it costs.
My first set was a sony trinitron XBR ( 20") back in the early eighties, I
have had five sonys, two XBRS.
I have always had quality gear
VIZIO AND A FEW OTHER "LOSS LEADERS" are an exelent way for those with
meager funds to get a decent display.
The reason Apex and Cyberhome "lost" their lawsuit was they didnt bother
fighting it, but with Vizio the bullies in this industry who hate the fact that
they have to compete and work for a living are going to have a fight on their hands.
Vizio has a few million to throw into a lawsuit, unlike those two other brands.
But I guess my main gripe is that a lot of companies today are run like Vizio ,
and how does that compute when delivering a quality product?
I had a Samsung 19" widescreen computer monitor, it developed a "bright" pixel
shortly after the warrenty ran out.
What a quality brand!
I have had my Vizio for going on two years, with nary a peep.
Where I work they had a Samsung plasma in the lobby (42in), lasted A YEAR
before the gas escaped.
Truth is VIZIO has the same parts and panels as other brands, they all come from the same places, Vizio has just come up with an efficent business model for delivering it to the customer.
The real reason for this lawsuit?
Go to Walfart, there are Sony TV sets sitting next to vizio and others, a few hundred bucks more instead of the grand premium they used to charge.
THATS the free market in action.
IF UPSTARTS like Vizio are going to be "lawyered" out of exsistence by giant conglomerates with deep pockets we will all suffer, and pay higher prices.
HEY, hiring a bunch of "suits" is better than providing a quality product at a decent price aint it?:1:

[pixelthis]

So lets see here, in this post you blast Samsung, yet in your post before this one you say you might buy their DLP??? man you are a crack head
I didnt "slam" Samsung, I have had two of their sets, and currently have a DVD
player.
I was just pointing out that you are going to have problems with any brand.
And my so called "crappy" vizio has worked flawlessly ever since I GOT IT,
VS the samsung monitor I purchased.
I will try to keep it simple for you in the future so you can stay up with things.
BTW when ARE YOU GONG TO GET TIRED of attacking every post I make and start bugging someone else?:1:

[pixelthis]

Here's what you wrote to Duds....
"Sony SELLS AT "WALLYWORLD" nimrod, how about them?
Or phillips, or magnavox, etc.
You're probably envious, you probably cant afford to shop at wally world.
Or maybe the bus that runs by your trailer park doesnt go by there"
If I missed it and he attacked you personally, identified you specifically in the attack, then I apologize, but to claim you are a victim here is a half-truth. You give as much as you receive and aren't always the victim.

I know a few people that think Bose sounds great too - they don't necessarily know what to listen for. As long as they're happy, that's all that really matters. For the record, I don't look down on anyone who owns a Vizio - some people have way better things to spend their money on than a TV.
I don't think Vizio is unbearable to look at, if price was my primary factor I would consider it. It's just not cutting the minimum standard for me. But that's me. Doesn't mean I hate the sets or look down on Vizio owners.



Not all that unlike the negativity and disbelief you posted about the amps Rich and I bought. You're not so different from us after all.


I have little doubt Sony and co are lawyering Vizio at least partly because they don't like the price pressure Vizio is putting on them by sellng zillions of these things - if Vizio wasn't selling they'd be a non-issue and Sony wouldn't care. But too bad. If Sony's claim is truthful, they're entitled to be compensated for the license fees. That would just be stupidity on the part of Vizio. Likewise, if the case is BS and thrown out, I expect Vizio to slap a countersuit on Sony and laugh all the way to the bank.

As far as lawyering goes - if you want to play with the big boys you can't be afraid to get hurt from time to time. Welcome to the ugly side of business. Better get a good lawyer.

I think you're being a little sensitive, mayby because I was reserved in my opinion of your new amp, instead of heaping it with praise like the rest did.
Let me explain, the last serious piece of "audio" gear was a Denon receiver, this was before they got into HT, and it was their top of the line.

AND it had a sterling seventy five watts per channel , into TWO channels.
About fourteen hundred bucks in todays dollars.
Its not just your amp, its the whole "box full of amps" world we live in.
That is a bunch of power for 499, is all I am saying, seems like there has to be a catch somewhere.
I really hope you get some good use outta it.
BUT WITH AN ADCOM SELLING FOR 799 FOR TWO CHANNELS...
Well, that was all I am saying.
I like my amps discrete, and its understanding that the emotiva amps arent entirely so.
Which is fine, if that is your thing :1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am the one receiving "negative" attacks and am only defending myself.
there are a lot on this site who work in the industry, and they all want companies like Vizio GONE.

I thought you were Pixel, now your are Vizio???? Very interesting.......


If you think the picture on a Vizio is "horrible" you are entitled to your opinion.
Everyone who looks at mine loves it, and they arent just saying so, several have bought one.

The only thing you are saying here is that there is more than one of you that does not know what good PQ is.


ONE reason I am pissed mightily is senile old farts like sir talky comparing a
TWO BILLION dollar company that is in most stores to fly by nights like Apex
and cyperhome crap, stuff that was mostly sold in grocery , drug, and dollar stores

I am at least 8-10 years younger than you are pixie. So if I am an old senile fart, you must be an ancient fossilized shale just readied for oil production.

The amount of revenue a shell company generates does not give it legitimacy. Sorry, but it does not work that way. Its easy to make two billion dollars when you do not pay your liscensing fees, and Muntz your sets together with various off the shelf parts that were never intended to work together in the first place. The bummer of outsourcing everything, is that you have less control on the quality.
.

This is slander of the worst sort and he insists on doing so, so I WILL IGNORE HIM
until he gets his act together and stops slandering people.

Is this the same as I am taking my ball and jacks and going home? Look up slander. You will find that you use of this word in this context is quite frankly....lacking. If you think I am wrong, prove that they DO NOT outsource R&D, and customer service. Prove that they have a reliable and consistant source of parts that does not change during a models entire run. Since you have failed to do this up to this point, I do not think you can, and slander is not even in the equation.


But the main problem I am having is that people seem to think that buying Vizio is some sort of "compromise".

It is a "compromise" in one key area. Performance. It has price locked down, but performance is sorely lacking with their sets. When reviewed in a vaccum, its more subject to the subjective opinion of the reviewer, and less on the objective testing performance. When reviewed with other sets, it wins in price, and basically sits at the bottom of the pack in performance


I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH THIS CRAP EVER SINCE I GOT INTO THIS
"hobby".
Snobs and elitists who judge your gear not by how well it performs but by how much it costs.

I think the basis of my critizism comes from how well it performs, or doesn't. It has always been that way, have you been paying any attention at all?


My first set was a sony trinitron XBR ( 20") back in the early eighties, I
have had five sonys, two XBRS.
I have always had quality gear
VIZIO AND A FEW OTHER "LOSS LEADERS" are an exelent way for those with
meager funds to get a decent display.

Decent is an exellent word for the Vizio panels. Adequent is also an excellent word, as is mediocre. But good, very good or excellent can not be used in the same sentence as Vizio.


The reason Apex and Cyberhome "lost" their lawsuit was they didnt bother
fighting it, but with Vizio the bullies in this industry who hate the fact that
they have to compete and work for a living are going to have a fight on their hands.

Oh, Apex ahd Cyberhome fought vigorously. But its difficult to fight against the reality that you didn't pay liscensing fee's that you owed, and tried to get out of so you could keep your prices lower than the pack. Vizio admits they did not pay their liscensing fees, THEY ADMITTED IT. To claim that their "vendors" paid them on their behalf is not an arguement at all, but is the same argument that both Apex and Cyberhome gave. Unfortunately the liscenses they claimed were paid were for manufacture, not distribution. The name on the badge of the product must pay for the liscense to actually put the technology in the product and distribute it.



Vizio has a few million to throw into a lawsuit, unlike those two other brands.
But I guess my main gripe is that a lot of companies today are run like Vizio ,
and how does that compute when delivering a quality product?

They are going to need more than a few million. They are going to battle with Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi, Phillips, JVC, Thompson and MPEG LA. Not to mention the others that also hold patents on MPEG-2 compression and decoding. Sony film division alone is does more than 2 billion dollars in revenue, and we have not even talked about the others.




I had a Samsung 19" widescreen computer monitor, it developed a "bright" pixel
shortly after the warrenty ran out.
What a quality brand!

There is a guy on Bluray.com who purchased two Vizio LCD monitors of which both had 4-6 burnt out pixels. So what is your point?


I have had my Vizio for going on two years, with nary a peep.

Count your blessing, others do not share your joy.


Where I work they had a Samsung plasma in the lobby (42in), lasted A YEAR
before the gas escaped.

Deflection is a sign of extreme weakness. We are not talking about Samsung plasma's in somebodies lobby. Samsung pays its liscensing fees.


Truth is VIZIO has the same parts and panels as other brands, they all come from the same places, Vizio has just come up with an efficent business model for delivering it to the customer.

Perhaps it uses the same parts and panels as other brands(though the evidence I saw was contrary to this opinion). However the other parts and panels were designed from the ground up to work with each other, hence the better performance. Their business model is pretty efficient, if you goal is to pack up and disappear quickly when the party is over. Pay no liscensing fees for the technology you use, so you can undercut the market with your panels. Very good business models for long term success(shuts off sarcasm)


The real reason for this lawsuit?
Go to Walfart, there are Sony TV sets sitting next to vizio and others, a few hundred bucks more instead of the grand premium they used to charge.
THATS the free market in action.

No, actually the reason for the lawsuit is that Vizio didn't pay their liscensing fees, something they have already admitted. Did you know you could actually drown in De-nile?


IF UPSTARTS like Vizio are going to be "lawyered" out of exsistence by giant conglomerates with deep pockets we will all suffer, and pay higher prices.
HEY, hiring a bunch of "suits" is better than providing a quality product at a decent price aint it?:1:

If upstarts like Vizio don't pay their liscensing fees in an attempt to undercut the market, then we still lose. Companies like Vizio do not introduce new technology. They are like leeches and vampires that suck the blood out of the the ones that do. Flat panel technology, DVD, bluray, VHS, laserdisc was not invented by companies like Vizio. So if it wasn't for the conglomerates with deep pockets, you would still be staring at a 20" XBR taking up as much space as 10 flat panels, and playing 160 minute VHS tapes.

How you so personalized this is beyond me, but many things you have said have been beyond me, so I credit you for being pretty consistant.

[pixelthis]

I thought you were Pixel, now your are Vizio???? Very interesting.......

Cant tell the difference between a person and a company, gee, you ARE getting senile


The only thing you are saying here is that there is more than one of you that does not know what good PQ is.

According to you, like I GIVE A RATS PATOOTIE about your "opinion"


I am at least 8-10 years younger than you are pixie. So if I am an old senile fart, you must be an ancient fossilized shale just readied for oil production.

I'll bet your hair produces oil already


The amount of revenue a shell company generates does not give it legitimacy. Sorry, but it does not work that way. Its easy to make two billion dollars when you do not pay your liscensing fees, and Muntz your sets together with various off the shelf parts that were never intended to work together in the first place. The bummer of outsourcing everything, is that you have less control on the quality. .

No you dont, you just have to have proper controls.
APEX and CYBERHOME sold cheap crap built in china and sold in in grocery stores and drug and
dollar stores, hard to find a place that doesnt sell vizio.
Is a Kia the same as a mercedes? They have the same "business" model, so using you're pretzel logic they are the same.
Of course anybody paying attention has known for some time you are quite ignorant on such business matters, and logic for that matter.
I guess apples and oranges are the same because they both grow on trees


Is this the same as I am taking my ball and jacks and going home? Look up slander. You will find that you use of this word in this context is quite frankly....lacking. If you think I am wrong, prove that they DO NOT outsource R&D, and customer service. Prove that they have a reliable and consistant source of parts that does not change during a models entire run. Since you have failed to do this up to this point, I do not think you can, and slander is not even in the equation.

WHY is outsourcing bad, you old fart? Quality control is whats key, and Vizio is quite good at that.
NO, YOU show ME as to why the "quality" of a Vizio is lacking , you're the one slandering the company, you provide the proof of how bad the parts, etc are.
But you cant, because you're a lying weasel whos making stuff up.
As I type this I AM USING A TWO YEAR OLD VIZIO THAT HAS NOT GIVEN ME ONE PROBLEM, not ONE.
Saying a company is bad just because they use modern business practices is looney.
Apropriate for you I guess



It is a "compromise" in one key area. Performance. It has price locked down, but performance is sorely lacking with their sets. When reviewed in a vaccum, its more subject to the subjective opinion of the reviewer, and less on the objective testing performance. When reviewed with other sets, it wins in price, and basically sits at the bottom of the pack in performance

Show me how "performance" is "lacking" in their sets.
AND heres the little secret of yours that you dont want to admit.
If you can say this comapany is "lacking" that allows you to look down your nose at the millions buying these sets, lets you massage that massive, fragil ego of yours by proclaiming that YOU, the great sir talky , is so much better than all of them.
Well, hate to tell ya ace, but they are enjoying their sets just fine without YOUR approval,
sir terrence the "terrible", more like sad and pathetic



I think the basis of my critizism comes from how well it performs, or doesn't. It has always been that way, have you been paying any attention at all?

Your "criticism " comes from being a troglodyte living in the past, cant even admit that the age of crt is OVER.
You have never done any lab work on ANY of these sets, all you know is ten year old tube tech, which is why you cling to them , probably.
YOU "CRITICISM" is totally factless, and you are trying to say that the product of a certain
"business model" is bad simply because of the way the company is structured,
when the way the company is RUN is whats important



Decent is an exellent word for the Vizio panels. Adequent is also an excellent word, as is mediocre. But good, very good or excellent can not be used in the same sentence as Vizio.
You are entitled to your opinion, just make sure that peeps know that its the opinion of
an old fart who cant stand a sharp picture, because its not "tubelike"



Oh, Apex ahd Cyberhome fought vigorously. But its difficult to fight against the reality that you didn't pay liscensing fee's that you owed, and tried to get out of so you could keep your prices lower than the pack. Vizio admits they did not pay their liscensing fees, THEY ADMITTED IT. To claim that their "vendors" paid them on their behalf is not an arguement at all, but is the same argument that both Apex and Cyberhome gave. Unfortunately the liscenses they claimed were paid were for manufacture, not distribution. The name on the badge of the product must pay for the liscense to actually put the technology in the product and distribute it.

They addmitted no such thing.
I the people suing are claiming that they deserve royalties along every leg of the supply chain, then they are just as looney as you are.
You want people to pay a "liscense" everytime they turn on their TV because it used MPEG tech? Thats the natural logical progression of what they are saying.
They outsourced certain tech, and the people they bought the tech from assured them that the liscenses were covered, if they are wrong, then its from being misinformed.
The people who provided the tech paid liscense fees, why should these be paid TWICE?



They are going to need more than a few million. They are going to battle with Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi, Phillips, JVC, Thompson and MPEG LA. Not to mention the others that also hold patents on MPEG-2 compression and decoding. Sony film division alone is does more than 2 billion dollars in revenue, and we have not even talked about the others.

they are a six year old company, old compared to the likes of Olevia, and others.
And they make several billion a year(pretty good for a "fly by night" company) and this battle will most likely be fought in Tawain, I am not too worried about them




There is a guy on Bluray.com who purchased two Vizio LCD monitors of which both had 4-6 burnt out pixels. So what is your point?

He could have turned them in for new ones, Vizio has a zero bright pixel guarentee,
something that helped sales and helped promote LCD.
AND BLURAY.COM is a company shill site, I TAKE everything I read on there with a grain of salt, especially since I learned that the likes of such as you is a member and
one of the main instigators



Count your blessing, others do not share your joy.
Which "others".
I CAN FIND A FEW DISGRUNTLED CUSTOMERS FOR ANYTHING



Deflection is a sign of extreme weakness. We are not talking about Samsung plasma's in somebodies lobby. Samsung pays its liscensing fees.

So does VIZIO



Perhaps it uses the same parts and panels as other brands(though the evidence I saw was contrary to this opinion). However the other parts and panels were designed from the ground up to work with each other, hence the better performance. Their business model is pretty efficient, if you goal is to pack up and disappear quickly when the party is over. Pay no liscensing fees for the technology you use, so you can undercut the market with your panels. Very good business models for long term success(shuts off sarcasm)

sorry BUT YOU ARE TALKING TO SOMEONE WHO KNOWS a little about the subject.
The panels are made in only a few places, and the "parts" and "panels" are ALL made top work together
AS FOR CLAIMING THAT the leadership of the company are going to disapear into the night, MORE SLANDER.
Truth is any company could do such.
You have no knowledge of what the management of Vizio will do, just more insults
and slander.
THE MAN WHO RUNS VIZIO IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESSMAN, a member of the business community, who has run other companies, and is very good at what he does.
If he were planning to disapear as you so conspriatorialy suggest, then why is he giving
interviews in magazines?



No, actually the reason for the lawsuit is that Vizio didn't pay their liscensing fees, something they have already admitted. Did you know you could actually drown in De-nile?

Keepp repeating lies, doesnt make them more true



If upstarts like Vizio don't pay their liscensing fees in an attempt to undercut the market, then we still lose. Companies like Vizio do not introduce new technology. They are like leeches and vampires that suck the blood out of the the ones that do. Flat panel technology, DVD, bluray, VHS, laserdisc was not invented by companies like Vizio. So if it wasn't for the conglomerates with deep pockets, you would still be staring at a 20" XBR taking up as much space as 10 flat panels, and playing 160 minute VHS tapes.

Showing your ignorance again.
When IBM liscensed their PC platform the companies that rushed to start making them had done none of the R&D, most of the companies that made VCRS had done little or no R&D, this is true is a lot of cases.
If the company that developed a product would be the only one that sold it there would be shortages and soon no business because of lack of market penetration.
Vizio did a great deal to promote LCD, by making affordable sets and calming the
fears of potential buyers with such as their zero bright pixel guarentee.
the market for LCD would not be nearly as large without them.
Companies like emotiva and outlaw do A GREAT DEAL OF OUTSOURCING, ARE THEY "BAD"?


How you so personalized this is beyond me, but many things you have said have been beyond me, so I credit you for being pretty consistant.

YOU HAVE BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT ALSO, a paid company shill who produces nothing of value, just a bunch of hot air, doing whatever your masters at sony tell you to do.
Why have I personalized this so much?
Because Vizio makes a decent product at a decent price, a lot who couldnt afford a
decent set now can.
And I have NEVER seen something attacked so strongly.
GEEZE, what is the matter with you?
You dont like vizo, THEN DONT BUY ONE.
Sit around in you cave and play with your overpriced , obsolete CRT tube front projector
that is hobbled together like frankensteins monster:prrr:

[kexodusc]

I think you're being a little sensitive, mayby because I was reserved in my opinion of your new amp, instead of heaping it with praise like the rest did.
Let me explain, the last serious piece of "audio" gear was a Denon receiver, this was before they got into HT, and it was their top of the line.

AND it had a sterling seventy five watts per channel , into TWO channels.
About fourteen hundred bucks in todays dollars.
Its not just your amp, its the whole "box full of amps" world we live in.
That is a bunch of power for 499, is all I am saying, seems like there has to be a catch somewhere.
I really hope you get some good use outta it.
BUT WITH AN ADCOM SELLING FOR 799 FOR TWO CHANNELS...
Well, that was all I am saying.
I like my amps discrete, and its understanding that the emotiva amps arent entirely so.
Which is fine, if that is your thing :1:
Not sensitive at all. I suspect I could take any piece of equipment I own and find a bunch of people that hate them, that bothered me when I was younger, now I derive a certain satisfaction from finding high value products that break the brand-name conventions audio snobs love. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your actions on 2 separate occasions. Surely if Vizio can offer quality equipment at a low price, others could too? Or all low cost providers are hiding something (illegal use of licensed materials perhaps?)...or maybe even a healthy mix of both? Make up your mind.

FYI, in the interest of keeping information accurate, the Emotiva amps are discrete channels, not digital switching amps or anything like that. The catch is simple - if you remove a 10-15% cost for dealer network distribution and advertising material, and another 40% cost in dealer markup, and throw in another 10-15% cost advantage from actually owning the factories that build your equipment (in exploited-labor Asia at that), you'd have 50-70% price advantage on the competition at equal quality. This would allow you to offer more for much less, though not to as many people as a large distribution network provides. A different business model, smaller scale, fewer layers of markup. Vertical integration, and all that.

Does Vizio own their factories or do they enter into production agreements for all their equipment? I don't know much about them other than what I've seen in store, I confess.

[pixelthis]

Not sensitive at all. I suspect I could take any piece of equipment I own and find a bunch of people that hate them, that bothered me when I was younger, now I derive a certain satisfaction from finding high value products that break the brand-name conventions audio snobs love. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your actions on 2 separate occasions. Surely if Vizio can offer quality equipment at a low price, others could too? Or all low cost providers are hiding something (illegal use of licensed materials perhaps?)...or maybe even a healthy mix of both? Make up your mind.

FYI, in the interest of keeping information accurate, the Emotiva amps are discrete channels, not digital switching amps or anything like that. The catch is simple - if you remove a 10-15% cost for dealer network distribution and advertising material, and another 40% cost in dealer markup, and throw in another 10-15% cost advantage from actually owning the factories that build your equipment (in exploited-labor Asia at that), you'd have 50-70% price advantage on the competition at equal quality. This would allow you to offer more for much less, though not to as many people as a large distribution network provides. A different business model, smaller scale, fewer layers of markup. Vertical integration, and all that.

Does Vizio own their factories or do they enter into production agreements for all their equipment? I don't know much about them other than what I've seen in store, I confess.

they outsource a lot, but its my understanding they design their own product.
Thing I like about mine, its made in tawain, a lot I get from Tawain is pretty good.
AND I dont care about the opinions of others, what I DO care about is deliberate falsehood and propaganda from a corporate shill who should know better, you know who I am talking about.
HE knows that comparing a company like Vizio to true fly by nights like apex and cyberhome is dishonest at best, trying to get some of their bad rep to stick to Vizio by association, a blantant propaganda ploy, once taught at the best of propaganda pushers,
pravda
I am defending honest debate tactics more than a certain brand.
To be truthfull there are better out there, I know that.
FOR INSTANCE I saw a 37" sony, a 37" vizio, and a 37" olevia, all showing the golden compass at, of all places kmart (dont ask)
The best by a mile was the olevia, the Sony was actually worse than the other two.
That silicon optix chip that Olivia uses is amazing, to say the least.
How does a picture acheive being filmlike , sharp, and smooth at the same time?
as for a CERTAIN propagandist he should admit he doesnt like anything that is not an obslete crt design at least ten years old:1:

[pixelthis]

Not sensitive at all. I suspect I could take any piece of equipment I own and find a bunch of people that hate them, that bothered me when I was younger, now I derive a certain satisfaction from finding high value products that break the brand-name conventions audio snobs love. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your actions on 2 separate occasions. Surely if Vizio can offer quality equipment at a low price, others could too? Or all low cost providers are hiding something (illegal use of licensed materials perhaps?)...or maybe even a healthy mix of both? Make up your mind.

FYI, in the interest of keeping information accurate, the Emotiva amps are discrete channels, not digital switching amps or anything like that. The catch is simple - if you remove a 10-15% cost for dealer network distribution and advertising material, and another 40% cost in dealer markup, and throw in another 10-15% cost advantage from actually owning the factories that build your equipment (in exploited-labor Asia at that), you'd have 50-70% price advantage on the competition at equal quality. This would allow you to offer more for much less, though not to as many people as a large distribution network provides. A different business model, smaller scale, fewer layers of markup. Vertical integration, and all that.

Does Vizio own their factories or do they enter into production agreements for all their equipment? I don't know much about them other than what I've seen in store, I confess.

As long as you understand I am not "slamming" your amp, just that I am from an age where this much amp power cost a small fortune, and I tend to be leery of all such,
hope yours is as good as it looks:1:

[kexodusc]

As long as you understand I am not "slamming" your amp, just that I am from an age where this much amp power cost a small fortune, and I tend to be leery of all such,
hope yours is as good as it looks:1:
Didn't ever really think you were slamming my amp, just thought I'd point out your contrary opinions of two similar situations. Though I can appreciate skepticism. Yeah, I bought a lot of more expensive power amps too. Someone made a lot of money off me. Sooner or later one would expect production advantages to be passed on to a consumer.

TV's are probably the best example of that. An LCD a few years ago would have required a second mortgage for some people. How are they making them better and cheaper? Aside from the margins going down to even negative at times (and accusations of license fraud), they've streamlined the process. On goods that aren't strongly correlated to commodities, one should expect price cuts over time to a certain extent.
Anyway, you can slam my amp all you want. I'll retaliate by slamming your vacuum cleaner. It won't change either of our reasons for buying...

I don't really know enough about Apex or Vizio to enter the debate or pass judgement on it. You and Sir T tend to have healthy disagreements that make for animated reading though. Carry on...

[pixelthis]

Didn't ever really think you were slamming my amp, just thought I'd point out your contrary opinions of two similar situations. Though I can appreciate skepticism. Yeah, I bought a lot of more expensive power amps too. Someone made a lot of money off me. Sooner or later one would expect production advantages to be passed on to a consumer.

TV's are probably the best example of that. An LCD a few years ago would have required a second mortgage for some people. How are they making them better and cheaper? Aside from the margins going down to even negative at times (and accusations of license fraud), they've streamlined the process. On goods that aren't strongly correlated to commodities, one should expect price cuts over time to a certain extent.
Anyway, you can slam my amp all you want. I'll retaliate by slamming your vacuum cleaner. It won't change either of our reasons for buying...

I don't really know enough about Apex or Vizio to enter the debate or pass judgement on it. You and Sir T tend to have healthy disagreements that make for animated reading though. Carry on...


Well, they got rid of all of the tubes in the eighties, except for the high voltage oscilator,
and the picture tube, and then nothing but the tube.
Plasma still has both, just a flat tube and a solid state oscilator.
But lcd and other form factors make for great economies in the factory, they can be built very simply, and the major componet is made outta sand.
As for amps, I WISH HEATHKIT WAS STILL IN BUSINESS .
Would be fun to "roll your own".
Of course you can still do it on your own, but what a job...:1:

[Mash]

...than those endless “Vahalla wire sounds far better than Generic wire” arguments!

I bought a Vizio “HDTV-ready” monitor on closeout at Sam’s in …-ummm… 2005, was it? This Vizio sat in a display line with Westinghouse and some other well known and, I presume, ‘better’ brands of LCD displays. I remember that Sam’s played ads for their various business offerings, such as travel services, on their display televisions while other TV dealers played static pictures of ducks standing on spillways or pseudo-action shots like race cars zooming toward you, seemingly passing right next to you.

The travel services ad at Sam’s was a hoot when the ‘tourist’ jumped out of a light plane in a black & white checkerboard jumpsuit and then spun around in freefall. I guess he couldn’t wait for the plane to land. Anyway, only the Vizio could keep the black & white checkerboard pattern on the spinning jumpsuit continuously coherent.

But then I looked at some Vizio LCD sets two months or so back and I could see that they did have motion-blur problems. Back in 2005 the Olivia sets seemed pretty poor, so I am surprised to read that they may now have very good pictures. I do recall a Panasonic 120 Hz 1080p LCD a month back that had a really good picture.

It is predicted that energy prices will continue to escalate, and especially briskly for people who get their AC power from resellers who buy bulk on the spot market. This will encourage many more people to migrate toward power-frugal LCD televisions and away from power-hungry CRT and Plasma sets. This will be similar to the move toward high mpg autos and away from SUVs. I have noticed that the roads around here have about 80% less traffic than they carried a year ago.

I do not use our Futterman amps nearly as much as I used to. They are biased to run Class A up to 30 watts before they transition into Class AB. They cause a real hit to the power bill. The Jolida 302B with Russian Winged-C tubes gets more use with less of a hit to the power bill, and the Mackie HR824 studio monitors get the most use because they use even less power while providing only slightly less satisfaction. Since we have something playing most of the time, power consumption traits become a consideration.

Unless the days of cheap energy return, I think the LCD’s relatively low power consumption means LCD displays will ultimately displace the CRT and the Plasma displays in the marketplace. The falling volume and concomitant reduced technological progress of the CRT and the Plasma displays will then cause even elite specialty-manufacturers to abandon these power-hungry display technologies. Today you can still get good amplifier vacuum tubes from Russia but this will also peter out.

I think Americans will soon be forced to become frugal, whether they like it or not. I know that last November the entire cold structures group (gas turbine compressors & inlets) at the company division I retired from was outsourced to India & Poland and 120 engineers and designers were reassigned to the combustion and turbine departments. Now I am waiting to hear about a RIF. Developments like this have to be causative for the reduced business at CC and BB discussed in another thread.

Many Americans will experience a deteriorating standard of living and this will create even more interest in, and desire for, brands like Vizio and Olivia. So we shall have to see how Vizio fares in the future.

C1967 I read about a Greek dishwasher in Chicago who never made more than $6000 per year and yet he left an estate of $160,000. This became my financial model c1967 and it has borne us the kind of succulent fruit that allowed me to retire early with nice toys.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Cant tell the difference between a person and a company, gee, you ARE getting senile

Maybe because the person has so blurred the difference between the two by being so defensive.




According to you, like I GIVE A RATS PATOOTIE about your "opinion"

Feelings mutual so let's move on




I'll bet your hair produces oil already

Irrelevant to the topic at hand old guy

.


No you dont, you just have to have proper controls.
APEX and CYBERHOME sold cheap crap built in china and sold in in grocery stores and drug and
dollar stores, hard to find a place that doesnt sell vizio.
Is a Kia the same as a mercedes? They have the same "business" model, so using you're pretzel logic they are the same.
Of course anybody paying attention has known for some time you are quite ignorant on such business matters, and logic for that matter.
I guess apples and oranges are the same because they both grow on trees

Kia and Mercedes may have the same business model, but they do not appeal to the same kind of customer. Much like the crowd of cheap panel lovers like vizio, versus folks who own dinosaurs, but get FAR better performance than a cheap panel can provide.

Haven't you ever heard of a target market? A person looking for a high performance display is not going to go to Sam's Club, Walmart, or Costco. Only those looking for a cheap inexpensive poor performing panel, who have no idea what performance is will.




WHY is outsourcing bad, you old fart? Quality control is whats key, and Vizio is quite good at that.
NO, YOU show ME as to why the "quality" of a Vizio is lacking , you're the one slandering the company, you provide the proof of how bad the parts, etc are.
But you cant, because you're a lying weasel whos making stuff up.
As I type this I AM USING A TWO YEAR OLD VIZIO THAT HAS NOT GIVEN ME ONE PROBLEM, not ONE.
Saying a company is bad just because they use modern business practices is looney.
Apropriate for you I guess

Outsourcing is bad because you lose control of QC. Ask Sony when they began outsourcing their upper end receiver. Bad channels, overheating, DSP modes that didn't work became the norm, not the exception. You claim that vizio is quite good at QC? Then why does their panels perform so badly when compared to other panels? Why do they always test so poorly. Why did I see two 37" vizio panels laid out, same model, but manufactured at different times, with some parts that where different? Can you explain that? Why were the engineers at the Panasonic testing lab able to explain why Vizio's part do not work so well with its panels. Their explaination was that the parts vizio procured for their sets were not optimized for the panel itself. What is your explaination? Keep in mind, they are engineers, and you are not.





Show me how "performance" is "lacking" in their sets.
AND heres the little secret of yours that you dont want to admit.
If you can say this comapany is "lacking" that allows you to look down your nose at the millions buying these sets, lets you massage that massive, fragil ego of yours by proclaiming that YOU, the great sir talky , is so much better than all of them.
Well, hate to tell ya ace, but they are enjoying their sets just fine without YOUR approval,
sir terrence the "terrible", more like sad and pathetic

There response times on their panels are worst than their competition. They have a ton of light leakage between panels, hence a contrast ratio of 1000:1, while their competitors are acheiving 4000:1 and 5000:1 contrast ratios. They lose more than 70 percent of their resolution when objects move quickly, while other lose only 45-50 percent. These are facts, tested facts. Now this crap about me looking down on people is bullocks. Everyone has a right to make a choice about what they want based on whatever perimeters they set. My opinion plays no role in that. Vizio is what it is. Its is a cheap, inexpensive panel that price will appeal to the masses. That is Vizio aim, and it was also the aim of Cyberhome, and Apex.

There is nothing more sad and pathetic than watching a pitiful old man defend something as trivial as the brand name of a cheap product. I suppose you will want to defend Cyberhome and Apex next.





Your "criticism " comes from being a troglodyte living in the past, cant even admit that the age of crt is OVER.
You have never done any lab work on ANY of these sets, all you know is ten year old tube tech, which is why you cling to them , probably.
YOU "CRITICISM" is totally factless, and you are trying to say that the product of a certain
"business model" is bad simply because of the way the company is structured,
when the way the company is RUN is whats important

This is nothing more than"pixel can't read". I think everyone knows that CRT based anything is no longer being manufactured. Even I agreed to that. Where you and I have a difference of opinion(yours based on non experience, mine based on experience) is performance levels. Any knowledgeable person knows that there are many areas(and mostly the most important ones)that CRT based HIGH END PROJECTORS outperform panels and digital projectors. There are some CRT based rear projection television based on 9" CRT's that do as well. Widescreen Review not too long ago compared the performance of their CRT based high end projectors (high end Sony G-90 and Runco projectors) to their flat panels and digital projectors. In 7 out of 10 areas of performance, the CRT based high end projectors did better, and in some cases much better. So I do not care about bulk, the age of the technology, or the price. I care about performance, and obviously you don't. There is no need to cry, moan, get frantic, and tax your pacemaker over this. Different strokes for different folks, and there is no need to get mad about that.




You are entitled to your opinion, just make sure that peeps know that its the opinion of
an old fart who cant stand a sharp picture, because its not "tubelike"

No, it is not tube like. Its artificial looking, not natural. It blurs, has poor black levels, cannot track greyscale accurately, and does not meet SMPTE standards for accurate colors in HD. 9" CRT based televisions and projectors do. So you are right, I do not like artificial sharpness of LCD panels. So if I am at least ten years younger than you pixie, does that make you a neaderthal?





They addmitted no such thing.

They most certainly did admit to not paying royalties directly to MPEG LA. Their claim specifically states their vendors paid on their behalf, so they are covered. A vendor pays royalites to manufacture technology, they do not pay royalities for implementation and distribution in the products themselves. This is the SAME arguement that Cyberhome and Apex used, the same one. It failed in court.


I the people suing are claiming that they deserve royalties along every leg of the supply chain, then they are just as looney as you are.
You want people to pay a "liscense" everytime they turn on their TV because it used MPEG tech? Thats the natural logical progression of what they are saying.
They outsourced certain tech, and the people they bought the tech from assured them that the liscenses were covered, if they are wrong, then its from being misinformed.
The people who provided the tech paid liscense fees, why should these be paid TWICE?

This defense is a stretch pixie. This is the same defense that Apex and Cyberhome used. It is pretty clear what royalties cover what. They outsourced EVERYTHING, and the bottom line is that they wanted to keep things so convoluted that they could get away from paying their share of the royalties.

This has nothing to do with me, and I do not want anyone to pay anything. This has to do with a company that has avoided paying royalties, and as a result, has undercut the entire market in terms of price. It has been long established that the manufacture pays royalties for one set of perimeters, and the Company who's name is on the badge pays for the implementation of the technology within their products. Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, Philips, Pioneer, and every other CE company has followed these rules. Its the cheap no name brands looking for quick market penetration that don't. And those who hold the patents are no longer turning their heads on royalty violations, of which the Chinese OEM's have skirted for years with the DVD.

Vizio is not uniformed, they knew the rules. They just decided not to follow them and take their chances. They got busted, and now will have to settle, or have the courts settle it for them.



they are a six year old company, old compared to the likes of Olevia, and others.
And they make several billion a year(pretty good for a "fly by night" company) and this battle will most likely be fought in Tawain, I am not too worried about them

Actually the battle is going to be fought in Los Angeles Superior court, not Tawian as you state. MPEG LA is a Los Angeles based company, and Vizio is based out of Irvine.

Apex also made billions selling cheap televisions and DVD players. Cyberhome made hundreds of millions on DVD players as well. How much a company makes does not determine their level of honesty. Microsoft is a prime example of that.



He could have turned them in for new ones, Vizio has a zero bright pixel guarentee,
something that helped sales and helped promote LCD.
AND BLURAY.COM is a company shill site, I TAKE everything I read on there with a grain of salt, especially since I learned that the likes of such as you is a member and
one of the main instigators

Bluray.com is not affiliated with any Bluray producing company, they are a entity on their own. Its states that on their website, so they cannot shill anymore than you are with Vizio now.

It really doesn't matter that Vizio would replace the panels for free, it matters that he got two panels that weren't properly QC before they left the manufacturer. That's the problem with outsourcing everything out, you lose the QC. It happen with Toshiba and its HD DVD players, with Apex with their televisions and DVD players, and Cyberhome with their DVD players.


Which "others".
I CAN FIND A FEW DISGRUNTLED CUSTOMERS FOR ANYTHING

If it was just a few, it wouldn't even be worth mentioning.



So does VIZIO

If they did, there would be no court case. Since they have openly admitted they have not written a single check to MPEG LA, then your claims are just inaccurate.





sorry BUT YOU ARE TALKING TO SOMEONE WHO KNOWS a little about the subject.

Yeah, too little, which is why you are being debated to the ground on this.

The panels are made in only a few places, and the "parts" and "panels" are ALL made top work together

There is a difference between working together, and working together OPTIMALLY. Sony SXRD panels are an excellent example of a panel where all of its parts and electronics are designed to work optimally together. Their Bravia line as well. Sharp, Hitachi, Samsung and Panasonic panels all test extremely well, much better than Vizio.


AS FOR CLAIMING THAT the leadership of the company are going to disapear into the night, MORE SLANDER.
Truth is any company could do such.
You have no knowledge of what the management of Vizio will do, just more insults
and slander.

Nobody here as EVER said that Vizio leadership was GOING to disappear overnight. The structure of the company(outsourcing everything, small staff, no manufacturing plants, no research and development) makes it easier. No, not just any company can do it. Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Sharp, Hitachi, Pioneer could not as they have manufacturing plants, large staff in multiple countries, R&D facilities, and shareholders. Vizio is a privately held company with a small staff (100 for a billion dollar company?) no R&D facilities, no manufacturing plants, no service department, and most importantly, no share holders. Just like Apex and Cyberhome, Vizio is a shell company with absolutely no infrastructure of their own. This makes it easy to just pack up and disappear when it gets tough.


THE MAN WHO RUNS VIZIO IS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESSMAN, a member of the business community, who has run other companies, and is very good at what he does.

Yeah right Pixie, I supposed you have shared BBQ and beer with him on numerous occasions. I bet your his daughters godfather, and your families take vacations together. You do not know this man any better than anyone else here, so to make this kind of statement is just plain disingenuous, but typical.


If he were planning to disapear as you so conspriatorialy suggest, then why is he giving
interviews in magazines?

To promote sales just like Apex's owners did. Can you point me to a magazine he has done interviews in?


Keepp repeating lies, doesnt make them more true

You are an expert at this, so don't rag on your own MO



Showing your ignorance again.
When IBM liscensed their PC platform the companies that rushed to start making them had done none of the R&D, most of the companies that made VCRS had done little or no R&D, this is true is a lot of cases.

So what you are saying is that every VCR and every computer is an exact clone of the next with no extra value features to give distinguish one brand from the next? Thats a big lie. R&D does not have to happen before a product is manufactured. It can be a continual process throughout the life of the product. Toshiba did R&D on their VCR and discovered that placing the video amp closer to the drum head eliminated video noise and various other artifacts, and improved color. They also made VCR with fewer moving parts than their competitors. Matsu****a discovered the HQ curcuit long after the VCR hit the consumer market. Stereo and hifi stereo was added to the VCR long after the first models hit the market. Toshiba included a PCM encoder to their VCR as they made a great recorder for music applications. R&D is a continual process, not a one time process.


If the company that developed a product would be the only one that sold it there would be shortages and soon no business because of lack of market penetration.
Vizio did a great deal to promote LCD, by making affordable sets and calming the
fears of potential buyers with such as their zero bright pixel guarentee.
the market for LCD would not be nearly as large without them.
Companies like emotiva and outlaw do A GREAT DEAL OF OUTSOURCING, ARE THEY "BAD"?

I know of no performance issues with Outlaw or Emotiva products. I have seen performance issues with Vizio televisions. Outsourcing in and of itself is not a bad thing, especially when it only involves manufacturing. Outsourcing design and development, customer service, manufacturing, and every other aspect of your product has proven problematic in the QC department over and over again.



YOU HAVE BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT ALSO, a paid company shill who produces nothing of value, just a bunch of hot air, doing whatever your masters at sony tell you to do.

The company I work for is a competitor to Sony. Why would I let a competitor tell me what to do? I have told you over and over that I do not work for Sony. And just like many things, you just do not get it.


Why have I personalized this so much?
Because Vizio makes a decent product at a decent price, a lot who couldnt afford a
decent set now can.
And I have NEVER seen something attacked so strongly.
GEEZE, what is the matter with you?
You dont like vizo, THEN DONT BUY ONE.
Sit around in you cave and play with your overpriced , obsolete CRT tube front projector
that is hobbled together like frankensteins monster:prrr:

You are being a drama queen here, and giving a Tony award winning performance at that. So you are playing Robin Hood here saving the masses from overpriced LCD televisions, and championing the cheap underperformers instead. How noble Pixie. Where were you when Apex and Cyberhome were around? Vizio churns out products with the same quality and price, why didn't you come out to defend them as well?

Let's face it. You do not want anyone talking badly about the manufacturer of your television. That is the bottom line. You are not defending the brand name, you are defending your decision to purchase it. You have so tied your reputation here to this product that you are compelled to lash out illogically in defense of it. Now that is sad indeed, and pitiful to boot.

[pixelthis]

Maybe because the person has so blurred the difference between the two by being so defensive.





Feelings mutual so let's move on





Irrelevant to the topic at hand old guy

.



Kia and Mercedes may have the same business model, but they do not appeal to the same kind of customer. Much like the crowd of cheap panel lovers like vizio, versus folks who own dinosaurs, but get FAR better performance than a cheap panel can provide.

Haven't you ever heard of a target market? A person looking for a high performance display is not going to go to Sam's Club, Walmart, or Costco. Only those looking for a cheap inexpensive poor performing panel, who have no idea what performance is will.





Outsourcing is bad because you lose control of QC. Ask Sony when they began outsourcing their upper end receiver. Bad channels, overheating, DSP modes that didn't work became the norm, not the exception. You claim that vizio is quite good at QC? Then why does their panels perform so badly when compared to other panels? Why do they always test so poorly. Why did I see two 37" vizio panels laid out, same model, but manufactured at different times, with some parts that where different? Can you explain that? Why were the engineers at the Panasonic testing lab able to explain why Vizio's part do not work so well with its panels. Their explaination was that the parts vizio procured for their sets were not optimized for the panel itself. What is your explaination? Keep in mind, they are engineers, and you are not.






There response times on their panels are worst than their competition. They have a ton of light leakage between panels, hence a contrast ratio of 1000:1, while their competitors are acheiving 4000:1 and 5000:1 contrast ratios. They lose more than 70 percent of their resolution when objects move quickly, while other lose only 45-50 percent. These are facts, tested facts. Now this crap about me looking down on people is bullocks. Everyone has a right to make a choice about what they want based on whatever perimeters they set. My opinion plays no role in that. Vizio is what it is. Its is a cheap, inexpensive panel that price will appeal to the masses. That is Vizio aim, and it was also the aim of Cyberhome, and Apex.

There is nothing more sad and pathetic than watching a pitiful old man defend something as trivial as the brand name of a cheap product. I suppose you will want to defend Cyberhome and Apex next.






This is nothing more than"pixel can't read". I think everyone knows that CRT based anything is no longer being manufactured. Even I agreed to that. Where you and I have a difference of opinion(yours based on non experience, mine based on experience) is performance levels. Any knowledgeable person knows that there are many areas(and mostly the most important ones)that CRT based HIGH END PROJECTORS outperform panels and digital projectors. There are some CRT based rear projection television based on 9" CRT's that do as well. Widescreen Review not too long ago compared the performance of their CRT based high end projectors (high end Sony G-90 and Runco projectors) to their flat panels and digital projectors. In 7 out of 10 areas of performance, the CRT based high end projectors did better, and in some cases much better. So I do not care about bulk, the age of the technology, or the price. I care about performance, and obviously you don't. There is no need to cry, moan, get frantic, and tax your pacemaker over this. Different strokes for different folks, and there is no need to get mad about that.





No, it is not tube like. Its artificial looking, not natural. It blurs, has poor black levels, cannot track greyscale accurately, and does not meet SMPTE standards for accurate colors in HD. 9" CRT based televisions and projectors do. So you are right, I do not like artificial sharpness of LCD panels. So if I am at least ten years younger than you pixie, does that make you a neaderthal?






They most certainly did admit to not paying royalties directly to MPEG LA. Their claim specifically states their vendors paid on their behalf, so they are covered. A vendor pays royalites to manufacture technology, they do not pay royalities for implementation and distribution in the products themselves. This is the SAME arguement that Cyberhome and Apex used, the same one. It failed in court.



This defense is a stretch pixie. This is the same defense that Apex and Cyberhome used. It is pretty clear what royalties cover what. They outsourced EVERYTHING, and the bottom line is that they wanted to keep things so convoluted that they could get away from paying their share of the royalties.

This has nothing to do with me, and I do not want anyone to pay anything. This has to do with a company that has avoided paying royalties, and as a result, has undercut the entire market in terms of price. It has been long established that the manufacture pays royalties for one set of perimeters, and the Company who's name is on the badge pays for the implementation of the technology within their products. Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, Philips, Pioneer, and every other CE company has followed these rules. Its the cheap no name brands looking for quick market penetration that don't. And those who hold the patents are no longer turning their heads on royalty violations, of which the Chinese OEM's have skirted for years with the DVD.

Vizio is not uniformed, they knew the rules. They just decided not to follow them and take their chances. They got busted, and now will have to settle, or have the courts settle it for them.




Actually the battle is going to be fought in Los Angeles Superior court, not Tawian as you state. MPEG LA is a Los Angeles based company, and Vizio is based out of Irvine.

Apex also made billions selling cheap televisions and DVD players. Cyberhome made hundreds of millions on DVD players as well. How much a company makes does not determine their level of honesty. Microsoft is a prime example of that.




Bluray.com is not affiliated with any Bluray producing company, they are a entity on their own. Its states that on their website, so they cannot shill anymore than you are with Vizio now.

It really doesn't matter that Vizio would replace the panels for free, it matters that he got two panels that weren't properly QC before they left the manufacturer. That's the problem with outsourcing everything out, you lose the QC. It happen with Toshiba and its HD DVD players, with Apex with their televisions and DVD players, and Cyberhome with their DVD players.



If it was just a few, it wouldn't even be worth mentioning.




If they did, there would be no court case. Since they have openly admitted they have not written a single check to MPEG LA, then your claims are just inaccurate.






Yeah, too little, which is why you are being debated to the ground on this.


There is a difference between working together, and working together OPTIMALLY. Sony SXRD panels are an excellent example of a panel where all of its parts and electronics are designed to work optimally together. Their Bravia line as well. Sharp, Hitachi, Samsung and Panasonic panels all test extremely well, much better than Vizio.



Nobody here as EVER said that Vizio leadership was GOING to disappear overnight. The structure of the company(outsourcing everything, small staff, no manufacturing plants, no research and development) makes it easier. No, not just any company can do it. Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Sharp, Hitachi, Pioneer could not as they have manufacturing plants, large staff in multiple countries, R&D facilities, and shareholders. Vizio is a privately held company with a small staff (100 for a billion dollar company?) no R&D facilities, no manufacturing plants, no service department, and most importantly, no share holders. Just like Apex and Cyberhome, Vizio is a shell company with absolutely no infrastructure of their own. This makes it easy to just pack up and disappear when it gets tough.



Yeah right Pixie, I supposed you have shared BBQ and beer with him on numerous occasions. I bet your his daughters godfather, and your families take vacations together. You do not know this man any better than anyone else here, so to make this kind of statement is just plain disingenuous, but typical.



To promote sales just like Apex's owners did. Can you point me to a magazine he has done interviews in?



You are an expert at this, so don't rag on your own MO




So what you are saying is that every VCR and every computer is an exact clone of the next with no extra value features to give distinguish one brand from the next? Thats a big lie. R&D does not have to happen before a product is manufactured. It can be a continual process throughout the life of the product. Toshiba did R&D on their VCR and discovered that placing the video amp closer to the drum head eliminated video noise and various other artifacts, and improved color. They also made VCR with fewer moving parts than their competitors. Matsu****a discovered the HQ curcuit long after the VCR hit the consumer market. Stereo and hifi stereo was added to the VCR long after the first models hit the market. Toshiba included a PCM encoder to their VCR as they made a great recorder for music applications. R&D is a continual process, not a one time process.



I know of no performance issues with Outlaw or Emotiva products. I have seen performance issues with Vizio televisions. Outsourcing in and of itself is not a bad thing, especially when it only involves manufacturing. Outsourcing design and development, customer service, manufacturing, and every other aspect of your product has proven problematic in the QC department over and over again.




The company I work for is a competitor to Sony. Why would I let a competitor tell me what to do? I have told you over and over that I do not work for Sony. And just like many things, you just do not get it.



You are being a drama queen here, and giving a Tony award winning performance at that. So you are playing Robin Hood here saving the masses from overpriced LCD televisions, and championing the cheap underperformers instead. How noble Pixie. Where were you when Apex and Cyberhome were around? Vizio churns out products with the same quality and price, why didn't you come out to defend them as well?

Let's face it. You do not want anyone talking badly about the manufacturer of your television. That is the bottom line. You are not defending the brand name, you are defending your decision to purchase it. You have so tied your reputation here to this product that you are compelled to lash out illogically in defense of it. Now that is sad indeed, and pitiful to boot.


You know NOTHING about Vizio, I have had one for two years, the PQ is great .
As for buying at Sams, costco, etc, SONY AND OTHERS SELL AT THESE PLACES,
as does Samsung, etc.
Just because they dont sell old crt junk isnt their fault...NOBODY DOES.
This is just snobbery of the typical sort from you.
Havent heard from you for awhile, been to the beach with your parents?
Looking foward to the tenth grade at the end of vacation? :1:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Ahhh... The good times have returned! :cool:

[thekid]

Should'nt this discussion be merged with the "King of Long Posts" thread........
I can only read one post at a time and then I have to shut down do to eye strain,,,,, :D

[pixelthis]

Ahhh... The good times have returned! :cool:

SORRY RICH... but I refuse to be baited into wasting precious
time preaching to a moroon who is probably lying about his equipment anyway.
And if he is telling the truth then that makes him a snob of the highest order (odor in his case).
At the best, the very best, his stuff has no relevance to most who just want a good display and great sound.
I mean, a crt projector "cobbled up" by the boys at work?
GIVE me a break.
ON THE BRIGHT SIDE I did hook up a playstation 3 like you're considering for a friend, a very interesting experience.
HE ALSO LET ME TAKE HIS HARMONY 550 HOME TO PROGRAM FOR HIM, HAVENT HAD TIME YET THO.
:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You know NOTHING about Vizio, I have had one for two years, the PQ is great .

Your great is my not so great. I have seen Vizio televisions in costco. I have seen the smearing of images, the flat inaccurate color, lousy blacks, and really bad shadow detail. I have seen a 37" Vizio pulled apart, and seen its parts as compared to other panels. Have you seen this? No you haven't. I do not have to live with something for two years to realize it is cheaply made using second tier parts that we not designed especially for the panel.



As for buying at Sams, costco, etc, SONY AND OTHERS SELL AT THESE PLACES,
as does Samsung, etc.
Just because they dont sell old crt junk isnt their fault...NOBODY DOES.
This is just snobbery of the typical sort from you.
Havent heard from you for awhile, been to the beach with your parents?
Looking foward to the tenth grade at the end of vacation? :1:

Oh Pixie, suffering from an inferiority complex? Curt Palme sells high end CRT projectors, and is apparently doing good business.

If my CRT based projector is junk, then your cheap azz Vizio panel is dirt not worth planting in. It can outperform you cheap panel with ease.

I have a real job, I do not sit at home picking my nose and pretending I am smart. Unlike your idiotic self I go to workshops, symposiums and conferences to learn about what I talk about here. You PRETEND to know alot, and aren't really that good at doing that.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

SORRY RICH... but I refuse to be baited into wasting precious
time preaching to a moroon who is probably lying about his equipment anyway.
And if he is telling the truth then that makes him a snob of the highest order (odor in his case).
At the best, the very best, his stuff has no relevance to most who just want a good display and great sound.
I mean, a crt projector "cobbled up" by the boys at work?
GIVE me a break.
ON THE BRIGHT SIDE I did hook up a playstation 3 like you're considering for a friend, a very interesting experience.
HE ALSO LET ME TAKE HIS HARMONY 550 HOME TO PROGRAM FOR HIM, HAVENT HAD TIME YET THO.
:1:

This sound to me like profound jealousy..PROFOUND jealousy. Don't hate because some of us have higher standards, and can afford to buy equipment that meets that standard. I do not sit around knocking something I cannot afford like you do. You knock my projector and RPTV because you could never afford them. You cannot afford my amps or speakers either. You have a sick case of inferiority complex, and you have it bad.

My projector is not cobbled together stupid fool, it has been upgraded. My RPTV is a custom design, not a cobbled together product. Are you too stupid to know the difference? I can answer my own question, yes! The guys that put that television together have FAR more knowledge about televisions than you will ever know, and you are probably jealous of that too.

There is nothing worse to me than a poor old fart crying about what he cannot afford. Get a job petroleum product!

You are just mad because your cheap azz stuff couldn't inhabit the same room as mine

[pixelthis]

This sound to me like profound jealousy..PROFOUND jealousy. Don't hate because some of us have higher standards, and can afford to buy equipment that meets that standard. I do not sit around knocking something I cannot afford like you do. You knock my projector and RPTV because you could never afford them. You cannot afford my amps or speakers either. You have a sick case of inferiority complex, and you have it bad.

My projector is not cobbled together stupid fool, it has been upgraded. My RPTV is a custom design, not a cobbled together product. Are you too stupid to know the difference? I can answer my own question, yes! The guys that put that television together have FAR more knowledge about televisions than you will ever know, and you are probably jealous of that too.

There is nothing worse to me than a poor old fart crying about what he cannot afford. Get a job petroleum product!

You are just mad because your cheap azz stuff couldn't inhabit the same room as mine

and ITS GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE custom as it gets harder and harder to find parts.
AS for pulling apart a Vizio, BULL HOCKEY.
Not that it matters, I dont care if its made of tin cans and bailing wire,
its the end result that counts.
And sure the pic looked bad in the store, they always do.
You have to set it up properly.
OF COURSE ONCE YOU DO THATS IT, YOU DONT HAVE TO ADJUST IT EVERY SIX MONTHS LIKE A CRT,
which is even affected by earths magnetic field.
And no my "stuff " couldnt inhabit the same room as your "stuff",
not with all of that obsolete junk in there.
Buy a clue, and while you're at it, a trip outta the past:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

and ITS GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE custom as it gets harder and harder to find parts.

I will worry about that problem when it gets here. Curt Palme has been in business a long time, and has a long list of vendors to secure parts from.


AS for pulling apart a Vizio, BULL HOCKEY.
Not that it matters, I dont care if its made of tin cans and bailing wire,
its the end result that counts.

Yes, and the end results land it at the bottom of any performance comparison with other panels, and not even in the same planet as the dino CRT.


And sure the pic looked bad in the store, they always do.
You have to set it up properly.

Setting it up properly does not change the fact that the panel cannot track greyscale properly. It doesn't even after calibration. It doesn't change the fact that it does not reproduce the HD colorspace correctly. Its still doesn't after calibration. It doesn't change the fact that it smears during fast motion, even after calibration. The panel just does not react fast enough, and calibration isn't going to change that.


OF COURSE ONCE YOU DO THATS IT, YOU DONT HAVE TO ADJUST IT EVERY SIX MONTHS LIKE A CRT,
which is even affected by earths magnetic field.

You only have to adjust the convergence every six months. For me, its just a push of a bottom, as the correct convergence values are programmed into the video processor. Even with this inconvience(sarcasm off) it outperforms your vizio even when the convergence is a little off. Smearing on your Vizio is forever. Low contrast levels are forever. Improper reproduction of the HD colorspace is forever. Inability to properly track greyscale is forever. None of these things can be adjusted out every six months, or even in a lifetime.


And no my "stuff " couldnt inhabit the same room as your "stuff",
not with all of that obsolete junk in there.
Buy a clue, and while you're at it, a trip outta the past:1:

My obsolete junk outperforms your cheap mass market stuff any day of the week easy peasy. You have no HDMI inputs on your receiver. You have no advance audio decoders on your receiver. You do not even own a bluray player but I do, so who's stuff is obsolete?

I already have too many clues, so I give you one for free. You are bankrupt.

[pixelthis]

I will worry about that problem when it gets here. Curt Palme has been in business a long time, and has a long list of vendors to secure parts from.



Yes, and the end results land it at the bottom of any performance comparison with other panels, and not even in the same planet as the dino CRT.



Setting it up properly does not change the fact that the panel cannot track greyscale properly. It doesn't even after calibration. It doesn't change the fact that it does not reproduce the HD colorspace correctly. Its still doesn't after calibration. It doesn't change the fact that it smears during fast motion, even after calibration. The panel just does not react fast enough, and calibration isn't going to change that.



You only have to adjust the convergence every six months. For me, its just a push of a bottom, as the correct convergence values are programmed into the video processor. Even with this inconvience(sarcasm off) it outperforms your vizio even when the convergence is a little off. Smearing on your Vizio is forever. Low contrast levels are forever. Improper reproduction of the HD colorspace is forever. Inability to properly track greyscale is forever. None of these things can be adjusted out every six months, or even in a lifetime.



My obsolete junk outperforms your cheap mass market stuff any day of the week easy peasy. You have no HDMI inputs on your receiver. You have no advance audio decoders on your receiver. You do not even own a bluray player but I do, so who's stuff is obsolete?

I already have too many clues, so I give you one for free. You are bankrupt.

What does my financial situation have to do with anything?
I can always make more money, but plastic surgery hasnt advanced nearly far enough to fix that mug of yours.
Just keep screaming your nonsense about "color smear" and other made up stuff.
I am using my vizio right now, it resolves the 1366x766 perfectly.
As for ypour buddy curt palme, which third world country is he going to get his tubes from? Maybe if he goes around the planet he can still find a few, but I DOUBT IT.
OLED will render all of this mute anyway, if anything but a dirty sock
could render you mute.:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Pixie,
Your response it pitiful, but par for the course. You have a serious case of denial, and just do not like facing the truth. You ignore the facts and buy your own press. So you go on and live with your faulty information, and sit around and pretend your cheap panel, and your HDMI less receiver passes for state of the art performance. Those of us that know better will respect you for the joke that you are.

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]Pixie,
Your response it pitiful, but par for the course. You have a serious case of denial, and just do not like facing the truth. You ignore the facts and buy your own press. So you go on and live with your faulty information, and sit around and pretend your cheap panel, and your HDMI less receiver passes for state of the art performance. Those of us that know better will respect you for the joke that you are.
:1:

[pixelthis]

How funny! So my receiver doesnt have HDMI!
WOOOO! GONNA CRY NOW!
NO! WAIT! My Vizio does! My receiver takes a coax from that and
the TV gets the HDMI, and my 1200 dollar receiver works fine.
Actually I bet MOST dont have HDMI, especially you,
was the hdmi standard even around when your old crap was made?
My 20 year old technics turntable doesnt have HDMI either,
should I kill myself now?
How about the 4300$ integrated amp that Marantz is selling?
Obsolete outta the box!
dagnab it!:1:

[bobsticks]

Y'all have certainly been letting Pix get the last word around here lately. Perhaps the revolution has begun?

Pix: Harbinger of the Enlightenment...nice job on the cake.

[pixelthis]

Y'all have certainly been letting Pix get the last word around here lately. Perhaps the revolution has begun?

Pix: Harbinger of the Enlightenment...nice job on the cake.

I was letting him get the last word and just got tired of it.
I can post a link to a thread that goes back two years, the subject is 37" Vizios.
People talk about the service, the quality pic, how to set it best, etc.
Its not the fly by nite company that sir talky is trying to protray it.
Do they make the best monitors? Nahhh!
Who said they did?
But they make a good product for the price, with little compromise,
if any.
I JUST HATE them being compared to junk like cyberhome, etc,
by professonal slander artists like sir talky, who is trying to "talk down"
their market share with blatant propaganda.
I have had one for two years, and if you are of limited means they are a good option.
I really like mine, the pic is great, dont like em, dont buy one, simple as that.
But what really gets my butt is sir talky trying to compare one to a dedicated home theater costing several grand.
That is not a FAIR COMPARSION,
AND HE KNOWS THAT.
BLATANT propaganda of the worst sort,
and he knows that
The skunk :1: