10M HDTVs sold, 15.5M by end of 2005

[TexT]

But there are a lot of lemmings plunking down big cash for plasma. Some are only 1024x768.

They do look sexy and the pic. is good. Just not going to give you any longetivity for all that money, even if they don't pump out higher-resolution content. The phosphors will lose their brightness, burn in, etc.

For somebody that spends as much time as you do on AVSforum, I'm surprised to hear such bias, unfounded comments.

1024x768 is an acceptable resolution given the screen size and common viewing distance. Remember, most of these XGA displays are in the 37-45" range, which is tiny.

Regarding the brightness "issues" with plasma, I highly advise hitting up some CCFL manufacturers to check the average half-brightness ratings for common LCD backlights. NEC, which happens to be at one end of the spectrum rates its high end CCFL products at 50,000 hours (link). For those of you keeping score this is less than or equal to many quality plasma displays.

This whole argument is asinine. CRT monitors use similar phosphors to display the image and have half-life ratings in the 25-50,000 range (at best), yet I don't see people bitching about brightness and longevity issues with their old tubes. Most people will have replaced their plasma or LCD displays long before brightness even becomes an issue. How many people keep their televisions for 20 years?

Nice to see another knowledgeable person.

 

[KnightBreed]

CRTs cost a fraction of plasma.

Do know of any CRTs in the 40+" range? If so, how much do they cost?

And some people do expect to keep their TVs 10, 15, and even 20 years.

That's super, but I don't see you denouncing LCD technology on account of it's longevity issues.

Either you can front more dollars per inch now and spend a few hundred later to replace the CCFL when it goes bad in 15 years or you can just replace your television with whatever technology is mainstream at that point. 15 years is a long time and the price for flat panels is still coming down.

 

[Pete]

You can get a 30" widescreen HDTV tuner equiped unit for less than $600 at Walmart.

If that Sanyo doesn't drive HDTVs into the mainstream, nothing will.

 

[PC-Engine]

Have they solved the burn-in issues with PDPs?

 

[KnightBreed]

Have they solved the burn-in issues with PDPs?

Nope. Any phosphor based display carries a risk of burn-in, but with a 60,000 hour half-brightness rating, it is diminished to where it shouldn't be an issue with average use.

As with any theater equipment, you should base your purchase on your specific needs. If you watch CNBC constantly, you probably don't want a PDP. If your viewing is a mix of games, movies, news, etc, the PDP should suit you perfectly.

 

[Alejux]

Plasma is a dead-end technology. They will eventually be surpassed in quality by much cheaper technologies, then they will have no reason for existing at all.

Your statement is true for EVERY type of technology.

True. But even more true for PLASMA since it's in it's last stage of evolution. On the other hand, LCD's are still getting better and cheaper year by year. Not to mention other technologies that are in the process of maturing, such as OLED. Plasma may have a market today, but it has no future.

 

[Ty]

True. But even more true for PLASMA since it's in it's last stage of evolution.

Uh, ok. Are you a display engineer by chance?

On the other hand, LCD's are still getting better and cheaper year by year.

You do realize the same is true for Plasma TVs. They've increased contrast, lifespan, lowered wattage use, lowered prices, etc.

Not to mention other technologies that are in the process of maturing, such as OLED.

I'm guessing OLED is at least 10 years out till it reaches the market sector that Plasma has penetrated to. SEDs are probably 5+ years. FEDs/NEDs - who knows how long for those? And remember LCOS? That even made it to the market but is now pretty much dead.

Plasma may have a market today, but it has no future.

Sure, again a phrase that can apply to every current technology (yes, even LCDs).

 

[KnightBreed]

Plasma is a dead-end technology. They will eventually be surpassed in quality by much cheaper technologies, then they will have no reason for existing at all.

Your statement is true for EVERY type of technology.

True. But even more true for PLASMA since it's in it's last stage of evolution. On the other hand, LCD's are still getting better and cheaper year by year. Not to mention other technologies that are in the process of maturing, such as OLED. Plasma may have a market today, but it has no future.

I would argue that transmissive technologies have less of a future than something emissive like OLED, plasma, or SED. Emissive displays have an inherent advantage in that they can better control color and brightness without having to fight a bright CCFL or LED behind the panel.

LCD's have been on the market for nearly 3 decades and they are only now getting close to the picture quality of plasma, which has been in the consumer market for <10 years. Every technology has it's flaws. It's up to the consumer to decide which is important for them.

 

[Alejux]

None of you can deny that LCD's are evolving much, much faster then PLASMA, and is progressivelly catching up in things like refresh rate, black levels and support for larger sizes. Once you have both technologies with practically the same quality, there will be no room left for PLASMA. You can already find LCD display prototypes with 4ms response time, and other ones with sizes up to 82". I wouldn't give 2 years before we have such displays on the market, and unless PLASMA producers can come up with cheaper production methods, PLASMA is doomed.

 

[TexT]

Plasmas aren't going anywhere. And LCDs still stink. they have the worse black level of all display types...there goes your picture quality right there!

some of you think plasmas arent evolving with other tech ,which simply not true, as long as Plasmas aren't comparable to CRT in picture quality there's always some to thrive for. Just recently the largest Plasma ever was unveiled.

Samsung’s 102-inch plasma TV!

Yes it cost a small fortune, but it shows how Plasma is steady evolving. I don't see LCDs ever having picture quality that will match a plasma.

 

[KnightBreed]

None of you can deny that LCD's are evolving much, much faster then PLASMA, and is progressivelly catching up in things like refresh rate, black levels and support for larger sizes. Once you have both technologies with practically the same quality, there will be no room left for PLASMA. You can already find LCD display prototypes with 4ms response time, and other ones with sizes up to 82". I wouldn't give 2 years before we have such displays on the market, and unless PLASMA producers can come up with cheaper production methods, PLASMA is doomed.

Your argument is ridiculous. Plasma is doomed because LCD will, in the next few years, reach the picture quality and size levels where plasma is currently. That's a monumental assumption considering that plasma contrast ratio, brightness, half-brightness specs, and sizes are all improving while price is still going down.

 

[Alejux]

None of you can deny that LCD's are evolving much, much faster then PLASMA, and is progressivelly catching up in things like refresh rate, black levels and support for larger sizes. Once you have both technologies with practically the same quality, there will be no room left for PLASMA. You can already find LCD display prototypes with 4ms response time, and other ones with sizes up to 82". I wouldn't give 2 years before we have such displays on the market, and unless PLASMA producers can come up with cheaper production methods, PLASMA is doomed.

Your argument is ridiculous. Plasma is doomed because LCD will, in the next few years, reach the picture quality and size levels where plasma is currently. That's a monumental assumption considering that plasma contrast ratio, brightness, half-brightness specs, and sizes are all improving while price is still going down.

It's a simple matter of analysing the evolution curves so far between LCDs and PLASMAs, and the price reduction curves as well. Both the technical evolution and price reduction curves of LCDs are steeper then the ones relating to PLASMA displays. The only chance I see for PLASMA to continue to exist in the next 5 years, is for their prices to suffer a significant reduction. Unfortunately, PLASMAs are still stubornly expensive. On the other hand, I agree that in a 10 year time frame, LCD may also be in big trouble from other numerous technologies that are surfacing. The display technology market today, is both exciting and horrifying for analysts and investors, mainly because there are SO MANY technologies emerging! Each one better then the other (OLED, SED, CNT, etc...)!

 

[KnightBreed]

It's a simple matter of analysing the evolution curves so far between LCDs and PLASMAs, and the price reduction curves as well. Both the technical evolution and price reduction curves of LCDs are steeper then the ones relating to PLASMA displays. The only chance I see for PLASMA to continue to exist in the next 5 years, is for their prices to suffer a significant reduction. Unfortunately, PLASMAs are still stubornly expensive. On the other hand, I agree that in a 10 year time frame, LCD may also be in big trouble from other numerous technologies that are surfacing. The display technology market today, is both exciting and horrifying for analysts and investors, mainly because there are SO MANY technologies emerging! Each one better then the other (OLED, SED, CNT, etc...)!

What evolution curve? LCD TV's have been on the market only for a few years. Plasma made the same advancements in price and quality its first few years on the market. It's silly to think the advancements can continue at this pace forever. Hell, look at the desktop LCD market. Aside from decreasing prices and a nominal spec increase what's changed in the past 2+ years? Response times are still in the teens and contrast has barely increased. With the prices of LCD fabs in the billions and rising, I expect a similar slowdown in the large panel market. Large LCDs are still maturing in the market. I have no reason to believe the advancements will continue indefinitely.

 

[MfA]

And remember LCOS? That even made it to the market but is now pretty much dead.

JVC still does HD-ILA RPTVs right? That is LCOS of sorts.

 

[KnightBreed]

And remember LCOS? That even made it to the market but is now pretty much dead.

JVC still does HD-ILA RPTVs right? That is LCOS of sorts.

Yep and Sony will be introducing a SXRD based rear projection TV later this year, which is a LCOS technology. Sony and JVC both have high end LCOS projectors in the $20,000+ market.

 

[wco81]

The Sony SXRD was suppose to be out early this year wasn't it? That 70-inch rear projection job which is $10k. Was a Qualia model.

Just read that Sony is pushing into digital projection at theaters. The market leaders are TI, with their DLP-based 2k systems.

Sony is coming out with 4k models using SXRD but with a price-premium. Sony systems are expected to go upwards of $140k while the TI systems are around $100k.

So SXRD development will continue for awhile, apparently.

 

[Ty]

The only chance I see for PLASMA to continue to exist in the next 5 years, is for their prices to suffer a significant reduction. Unfortunately, PLASMAs are still stubornly expensive.

What are you comparing to say that Plasma is more expensive than LCD?

42" HD PDPs are ~4K. 42" HD LCDs are about the same if not more. Or maybe the Aquos' I was looking at are high-end? Those are 4-5K for a 37".



Yes, there are LCOS sets still being sold. Technologically though, I think it's dead as no one is really working on it anymore.

 

[wco81]

Survey on consumer interest in consumer electronics, including HDTV and next-generation optical disc players.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050331/neth031.html?.v=2

Strange methodology though. They presented one group with prices and without and extrapolated conclusions that general interest in these products decrease, with some exceptions, when respondents are given pricing info.

Plus they broke down the age segments very well but they have a $1500-5000 range for HDTV? That encompasses a lot of HDTV segments.

Also next-gen disc players ranging from $250-1000 seems too wide range as well.

 

[Kill_Jade]

since we're on HDTV can someone tell me if this set is good for someone on a budget? its small but i just want hdtv http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001YI462/102-6595062-6774508?v=glance

 

[Cobra101]

Well, I just became a member of the DLP club.

Just got myself a Samsung HL-P5085W "Captain Kirk".

Damn its sweet.


My old man has the 52" JVC DLI-A which is very sweet also. A bit better than the DLP in some areas and maybe a bit behind in others.

Both are pretty good bang for the buck technologies.

Hell, some 50" DLP's can be found for just under 2 grand now.