Plasma Is Dead

[pixelthis]

What part of competition do you not understand, Mr. Friedman?

a LOT BETTER THAN YOU.
Why is there only one type of dvd? automobile? (internal combustion)
Eventually a form factor gets chosen, and the others fall by the wayside or become niche products

And big screen plasma sets have been on the market for how long now? More than a decade? So, in your view of competition, plasma manufacturers should have just sat still and done nothing when a market opportunity was available to them? You are just such a capitalist!

Capitalists think in terms of decades, the emergence of LCD happened practically overnight, plasma is an inferiour product that the consumer is rejecting as we speak.
If "capitalists " had known that it was only gonna last as long as 2010 at most they wouldnt have spent billions on it.
Spending billions on an expensive tech , even if the govt did subsidize it, on a product that will be gone in a decade is not a "market niche", its financial suicide

So, I guess in your clairvoyant view of the world, LCD manufacturers should just quit now because OLED's going to take over the market within the next ten years? Nice logic.

LCD has already made its way, and will make billions more, but it is doomed.
OLED has a perfect black level, wont explain why to you because a chimp only understands a banana, its also .17 in thick.
The latest "superthin" sets dont even approach that.
BEING ABLE TO ROLL ONE UP AND PUT IT IN A TUBE IS NICE ALSO.
OLED is to lcd AND plasma what the joint strike fighter is to a p51 mustang.
The mustang is nice but DANG is it even close to the newest toy?
AND IT WILL BE HERE SOONEST, a lot sooner than most think

Maybe because there's no single technology out there that does not have a significant drawback of some kind?

Some tech has drawbacks but not all are significant.
This is known as a generalization and like most such is wrong

Nope, performance parameters are very easy to measure, and brightness is the only measure where LCD consistently outperforms plasma. If you're talking about black levels, contrast, color accuracy, image consistency, and motion resolution, plasma sets generally outperform LCD. If LCD were "THAT TECHNOLOGY," it would outperform plasma, LCoS, DLP et al in every category, or even most. It doesn't, so therefore it's not.

There is no set standard for black level or most of the other parameters you mention.
Its totally subjective. performance IS easy to measure but theres no standard, so it mainly boils down to what you like.
And most are deciding that the picture of an LCD is just as good as a plasma.
Which isn't a surprize to those who know more than you (just about everybody)
Things you dont consider "important" (long life, inexpensive to use, brightness, and no GLARE whatsoever ) when factored into the very close specs in the PQ area make the
LCD a hands down winner

Subjective is what it is, and in my viewings, plasma delivers the better picture. Difference is that my opinion squares with what the objective measures demonstrate.

And that is a subjective statement.
THERE IS NO "OBJECTIVE" measure of tv DISPLAYS , but most concede that the ONLY area in which plasma is "better" is a very slight black level advantage and a slightly "smoother" pic, which some preceive as a lack of sharpness.
our hobby rides on a sea of mass market, if the great unwashed reject your toy it doesnt matter why, a complicated thing like a plasma tv requires hugh economies of scale,
once the numbers drop below a certain number they will cease.
The ONLY thing they have going for them is snobs such as yourself, you dont like LCD for one reason , EVERYBODY else likes them.
Once OLED takes off, the "niche" of PQ OVER any kind of common sense will be gone,
which is plasmas main market

And LCD wasn't much better, or are you forgetting that at your old age?

LCD was WORSE, but has improved much more than plasma

If that's the case, then how come most LCD sets still don't perform well with motion resolution?

You're joking , right? Thuis old bugaboo never was much of a problem and with 120 hz sets has been done away with entirely.
But you dont even need that, an eight millisecond refresh rate does away with it quite
nicely, and there are FOUR millisecond sets out there if that still aint enough.
Why dont you bring up the old "screen door" crap while you're at it?
I am about five feet away from my set and cant discern ANY pixel structure whatsoever

Once again, recycling decade-old talking points as if they are relevant to today's models.

Look at the pot calling the kettle black, bring up "lag" and other nonsense that never was much of a problem to begin with in the first place

Ah, so now the personal attacks have stretched to include the kids. How classy of you!

THANKS

I guess you really don't have much material left, and to think your career as a comedian was off to such a brilliant start, however unintentional your humor might have been!

yOUR CAREER as one is assured, just keep doing what you've been doing, getting your tech advice from cheech and chong

Right, given that you're back to regurgitating debunked points about gas leakage, energy usage, and costs, that speaks more about YOUR comprehension than anything.

THEY ARE not "DEBUNKED", they are still serious problems.
especially price, 1080p in plasma is so much more expensive than LCD that most are passing on them

Why not just say what you're really thinking ... WE'RE ALL DOOMED BECAUSE WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE SOMEDAY! Your oh-so-sunshiney disposition must really be a joy to be around!

Again, THANKS

And plasma also has a larger average screen size, think that has something to do with this?

Who cares? THE market for such sizes is a lot smaller

And if plasma's that much more expensive to make, then how does Panasonic get away with pricing their 1080p sets so that they undercut what the 120 Hz LCD sets cost?

THE 120HZ is in itself a small part of the market.
And Panasonic is owned by MATSHUHITA, one of the largest comglomerates
on the planet.
They could sell gold for ten bucks an ounce for a year and not lose enough of their rather large pie to wory about

Why would the industry kill the segment that currently delivers the largest direct view screen sizes (70" already on the market, and 150" demo models already built), and has the highest performance in some key measures? And all the while, the segment remains a profitable niche for the biggest players? This isn't like Blu-ray v. HD-DVD, which relied on the hardware matching the software specs. So long as plasma and LCD sets use the same connection standards and can play the same source material, it's irrelevant to "the industry" whether one or both segments remain in the market.

You really are clueless arent you?
THE 70 AND 150 MARKETS ARE SMALL, not even worth worrying about.
And your subjective assesment of plasma quality, even if true, isnt a deciding factor in the marketplace.
Only a small percentage of the market buys a set based on subjective things like "black level", etc. you think people are out there measuring such when they buy a set?
Everybody who buys a lcd in my circle, know what they talk about?
The bright glarefree picture!
Tv companies put the default setting for contrast on "TORCH" mode (with enthusaists
complaining all the time) for a reason, people like a bright picture.
And the list of tech that was strangled in the grave for financial reasons is rather large.
LASER was only supported by pioneer, most thought that laser would hurt VCRS.
fm radio was very superiour to AM, but RCA tried to kill IT because they thought it
would take sales away from their new toy, TELEVISION.
EVERY PLASMA B "sale" has a major problem, its not an lcd sale.
If it sells too many it will be finished because its canabalizing lcd sales at a high cost.
In other words why go to the expense of making plasma when people will buy LCD if it doesnt exist?
This is one of the reasons that video rental companies were reluctant to go to DVD,
why bother if VIDEOCASSETTE is "good enough"?
And its the reason that a lot of broadcasters fought HD, AND STEREO TV.
Why invest in the good stuff if people will buy crud?
On the other hand if not enough sets of teh plasdma variety arent sold it will be killed off for being nonprofiftable.
Either way its going to be killed off. For marketing reasons if nothing else.
THEY DODGED a few bullets, settling the leaking gas and burn in lawsuits out of court and keeping them quiet, but plasma isnt a cat, it doesnt have nine lives.
Eventually it wont be worth the trouble.
WHICH IS WHY PLASMA IS DEAD