RIP Pioneer TVs

[dkzzzz]

Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser

The plasma fanboys make it seem like the difference between plasma and LCD is like the difference between Kiton and Men's Wearhouse when it's more like the difference between Kiton and Brioni. Ask yourself this question: If plasma is so superior, why does LCD dominate plasma in the marketplace even though LCD is more expensive than a comparably sized plasma?

For exactly the same reason Mens' Wearhouse outsells Hugo Boss and Hugo Boss outsells Kiton.

 

[Girardian]

On the "developing technology" front who, other than Mitsu, is going to sell LaserTV technology?

It is always disappointing to see a cutting edge technology developer bow out, but what is more disappointing is when they don't transition to something else in the same sphere.

 

[Piobaire]

Originally Posted by A Y

The most expensive Pioneer's MSRP is $7K, and getting 20 percent (or more) off that is not uncommon.

--Andre

Last Thanksgiving, when I decided to go buy a flatscreen, the 60" Pio elite was 10k. The 55" Bravia XBR (they don't have/didn't have a 60, and 70" was too big) was on sale for $3.5k I just did a quick Google, and the cheapest I found the Pio Elite on the 'Net for was 7.5k. That was just a quick Google, maybe you can find a refurb or dicey vendor for less.

Again, RIP Pioneer.

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Last Thanksgiving, when I decided to go buy a flatscreen, the 60" Pio elite was 10k.

The MSRP is listed on Pioneer's site. Dealers will price however they want. I just did a Google search as well, and I have not seen the Pro-141FD for more than $6.5K. Perhaps the prices you saw included other components?

--Andre

 

[Tarmac]

Honestly, the average consumer HATES 2 things: reflective glare and burn-in. LCD solved both of those problems.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

To be honest, I think DLP looks better than both plasma and LCD.

Agreed.

 

[rnoldh]

Originally Posted by A Y

+1, but that's not a high bar. Almost any plasma is better than any LCD.

--Andre

Andre, You are a techie knowledgeable guy.

Why do you say almost any plasma is better than any LCD.

BTW: I have a Samsung LCD and I'm satisfied. But I really doubt I could tell the difference bewtween a Samsung LCD and a much cheaper Vizio LCD in a blind test.

 

[dusty]

Originally Posted by rnoldh

Andre, You are a techie knowledgeable guy. Why do you say almost any plasma is better than any LCD. BTW: I have a Samsung LCD and I'm satisfied. But I really doubt I could tell the difference bewtween a Samsung LCD and a much cheaper Vizio LCD in a blind test.
Motion on a plasma is inherently worlds better than an LCD. You have to worry about burn-in though. Soon OLED will be here and all of our problems will be solved.

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by dusty

Motion on a plasma is inherently worlds better than an LCD. You have to worry about burn-in though.

Soon OLED will be here and all of our problems will be solved.

+1. LCDs motion issues aren't just ghosting (which really isn't an issue anymore), but black crush. I still noticed that on high-end sets the last time I looked.

Burn-in is such an overrated issue for plasmas though. Almost nobody that actually owns a plasma worries about it. If you're really that paranoid (it's really not a big deal in most modern plasmas), just leave the damned thing running during the day for the first week you own it.

The one valid thing that was brought-up is the glare. Plasmas are definitely best in controlled light environments. If you've got huge windows and watch a lot of TVs during the day, an LCD is almost certainly better for that room.

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Last Thanksgiving, when I decided to go buy a flatscreen, the 60" Pio elite was 10k. The 55" Bravia XBR (they don't have/didn't have a 60, and 70" was too big) was on sale for $3.5k I just did a quick Google, and the cheapest I found the Pio Elite on the 'Net for was 7.5k. That was just a quick Google, maybe you can find a refurb or dicey vendor for less.

Again, RIP Pioneer.

The point is, even the non-elite is fantastic, better than the bravia, and would have been much more competitive in price.

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by Tarmac

Honestly, the average consumer HATES 2 things: reflective glare and burn-in. LCD solved both of those problems.

This puzzles me since laptops are almost impossible to find without glossy LCDs these days.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by GQgeek

This puzzles me since laptops are almost impossible to find without glossy LCDs these days.

I think that's because most consumers think a glossy image looks better. Ultimately, I chose a Sharp Aquos LCD over a Samsung because I hate that. My Aquos screen is nice and matte.

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I think that's because most consumers think a glossy image looks better. Ultimately, I chose a Sharp Aquos LCD over a Samsung because I hate that. My Aquos screen is nice and matte.

Ya... For something like a TV that will be placed in an area where you can control the light, I could understand that. But for something like a laptop, I just can't. The reflections on glossy screens are terrible.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by GQgeek

The reflections on glossy screens are terrible.

I agree. I like matte better under all circumstances. I just think most consumers are dumb and like shiny things.

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by rnoldh

Why do you say almost any plasma is better than any LCD.

I was equivocating a bit. There's probably some terribly implemented plasma out there that really sucks.

--Andre