They both have their strengths and weaknesses. LCDs achieve sharp, bright, colorful pictures with high resolution at relatively small sizes, thrive with ambient light, and are easy to lug around and mount. However, they also suffer from a relatively restricted viewing angle, poor black levels on average, the dreaded screen-door effect (at close distances), and possible motion blur. Plasmas have routinely better blacks, wider viewing angles, and accurate color. But they aren't as good in ambient light and if misused, are susceptible to uneven burn. Inch for inch, they can't squeeze as many pixels into a panel as LCDs can; at 42", many plasmas tap out at 1024x768, whereas 40" LCDs can reach the full HD format of 1920x1080. But at this point, plasmas win the sheer size sweepstakes (though not for long). Plasmas also have a pixel-refresh problem at times, but it isn't serious. Execution counts for quite a lot with both technologies, so too much generalization won't hold up. The bargain panels on both sides leave a lot to be desired, though LCD has an advantage as a long-standing computer technology. But still, at this point, under the right conditions, the right plasma can satisfy more of the traditional requirements of the video enthusiast than LCD can. That said, no set of abstractions can replace an informed visit to a venue that has several examples of each on display, especially if you can tinker. Pioneer, Panasonic, Hitachi, and Fujitsu are at the top of the class for plasmas so far as basic picture is concerned (especially the first two). Sharp's Aquos line, Sony's Bravias, and a host of others have LCD flat planels worth a close look.

Ed