Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
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
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.