Team-BHP - The TV Thread

largely because I allowed myself to get convinced by the dealer
1. plasma consumes more power and is a bit fatter
2. lcd is cooler on the eye (my impression)
3. I simply liked the lcd a lot ( this is purely personal because it looks damn good and very stylish!)
4. then everyone said plasma screens are going out of the market over the next year or two - and one buys an expensive tv about once in 5 -7 years unless one is a zillionaire which im not
5. now also after your enlightening post, I went last night and watched a golf DVD and enjoyed it - also watching IPL is great fun

I m not a major tv watcher per se, just that when one watches something one likes - like car chases in james bond movies then it is nice to have a big screen!

thats it:)
Having spent 70 grand (after exchanging my old 29 CRT and taking some good discounts, I guess I might as well stay peaceful and happy atleast till my next upgrade!:))

Quote:

Originally Posted by reignofchaos (Post 843375)

If you visited that link before purchase, why on earth did you buy an LCD when that link is clearly pro plasma?

Another set of Myths and false propoganda by dealers to get higher margins for themselves...
My replies in line

Quote:

largely because I allowed myself to get convinced by the dealer
1. plasma consumes more power and is a bit fatter

-ST- Depends on what you watch. LCD consumes more for full black picture, whereas Plasma consumes more for full white. Overall for general viewing there is not much difference between the two.

Quote:

2. lcd is cooler on the eye (my impression)

-ST- Exactly opposite. The high brightness of LCDs cause more eye strain.
Can;t blame you, as I myself thought that way after spending hours on LCD laptop. But when researching on this topic further (for my kids eyes sake) I realized how wrong I was!
There have been quantitative studies done which prove Plasmas are much less strain on eyes than LCD.

Quote:

3. I simply liked the lcd a lot ( this is purely personal because it looks damn good and very stylish!)

-ST- They look good in showroom (very bright environment), but compare it at home and the difference is evident. In low brightness, at night, while watching dark scenes the details completely get washed out. (the backlight behind the LCD is always ON). Style and picture quality are two different things. Then there are plasmas which would take pants of LCD's in terms of style.

Quote:

4. then everyone said plasma screens are going out of the market over the next year or two - and one buys an expensive tv about once in 5 -7 years unless one is a zillionaire which im not

-ST- That may be true as Plasma TVs are more expensive to produce than LCDs and that is why it makes more business sense for companies to produce and PUSH LCD by givving fatter margins to the dealer. But at the end it is the Plasma which offers the better picture quality

Quote:

5. now also after your enlightening post, I went last night and watched a golf DVD and enjoyed it - also watching IPL is great fun

-ST- Possibly true. But really speaking you don;t really realize what you are missing, till you experience the better stuff :)

Disclaimer - I do not own either LCD or Plasma... still with good old fat CRT

Quote:

Originally Posted by ST7677 (Post 848246)

CRT is Mature technology.
LCD is still in it's teens.
New technology doesn't necessarily mean better.
It is promising but would still take time to beat the already existent.
Till then CRTs rule.

There are few Plasmas out there which already beat CRTs, but still not all get into that category, and the ones which do are still pricey.

LCD/Plasma will go soon and OLED Organic TV has step in which uses only 40% of LCD energy. Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba have started making it.
Bright Future Ahead for Organic TVs: Scientific American

My 50 cents:

The issue that probably weighs most on our minds whenever we splurge on luxury is "investment protection", or in other words, "how long will the novelty value last?" The technological comparisons available on internet are sure to end in a tie because of sheer number of opinions. May be we have our own Guru's e.g. mine is CNET, but still these at best provide us that little push to take us over the "tipping point", the rest (and major) force being the snob value. In other words, we are already beyond reason.

My philosophy is to first peg the amount of money I am ready to spend on a (big/bigger) size TV for watching movies and sports. I am assuming that saas-bahu programs have about the same interest quotient in 21" and 40", which is actually zero in my case. Then, lie in wait for a technology that would allow me to buy the desired size (bigger than current 29") with similar or better quality within my budget.

Remember the "How much does a good PC cost?" paradigm? Well, even 5 years on, a "good" PC costs 40K to 50K, the definition of "good" shifting like Thar sands! Here, the "good" includes snob appeal too!!

Let me help you with another rule of thumb, when it comes to TV technology. Always wait for the tech maturity level to reach a point when you will need to spend the same amount you spent on your last TV (older tech) of the same size and same picture quality.

So, here is what you should do, if you are not in a hurry to set fire to your pay packet:

1. Stay agnostic to technology debate. Good technology never lends itself to debates! (Zippo lighters!!)
2. Wait for the moment when full-HD panel of 29" size or 32" and at least 3 HDMI and multi-PIP costs around Rs. 32000/- or LOWER. This is the price I paid for my LG 29" with 3 component inputs and multi-PIP feature. Of course, being digital, you should be getting far more software capability today.

Take care folks, they are already shrinking your Rupee and cost of living is moving up and even more steeply is the cost of health care!

"Great technology needs no rushing to. You can have it when she has it"

Makes sense?

Cheers and take good care!!

My best,
-MP Singh

Well said mps.
But the problem is that nowadays, people are with so much of disposable incomes (I mean a CTC of 15-20 lacs pa is considered avg nowadays) do not have patience to wait for a new technology to mature before making a purchase. And technology changes so fast nowadays that even before one tech matures, new breakthrough technologies already appear on the horizon...and then you again start waiting for "new horizon" technologies to mature...and this leads to an endless wait.
Just as you said, there's never a best to buy a paritcular PC model, because it is bound to become either old or cheap innext few months.
Hence, why not take the plunge whenever you are comfortable with a budget? Because I'm sure no technology of today could last as long as the good old CRT lasted (i.e. around 50-60 years).
I also recently bought a 32" LCD, partially because I could not afford a bigger sized one at this point in time, and if I did wait for a 32" full HD plasma, it would also have been too costly (I got LG 32" HD ready for 34K!). And I can buy a full HD 42" plasma after 3-4 years, when HD content becomes widely available.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sahil (Post 850950)

Suprising you say that... what LCD do you have?
My CRT is not a patch compared to the LCDs in my house, then again my LCD is FullHD so i don't even expect a CRT to come close.

As little as I know, LCD wins when it comes to the screen size and the brigh picture. However, good old CRT is always better when it comes to displaying true black and better PQ,, always...

Again, I dont think you are viewing FullHD content on your LCD all the times (Except you get a HD DVD), it may be performing a little bit of upscaling to whatever traditional PQ (470, or 640 in case of Dish or TataSky - dont remember the exact numbers though), but its definately not even 720P so you will never be watching 720P or 1080P transmission on your FullHD LCD.