Recent survey suggests plasmas preferred over LCDs

As the continuing debate between LCD vs. plasma steams ahead, here we have yet another research study that purportedly suggests that nearly four out of five consumers would prefer PDPs over LCDs. The study -- which was conducted by global market research firm Synovate, posed the question to respondents in China, Japan, England, France, and Germany (no North America?) -- and found that an average of 80-percent of individuals preferred the images produced by plasmas when viewing a side-by-side comparison. What's interesting about the supposed results, however, is that recent sales have depicted quite the opposing story, and multiple plasma manufacturers have had to realign their strategies or shut down aspects of the business completely in order to remain afloat. Conversely, LCD sales have been impressive as of late, as consumers have responded positively to the tanking prices and widespread availability. Of course, this whole plasma vs. LCD war could rage on until SED TVs actually go mainstream and never find finality, but until PDPs can once again become price competitive with similar alternatives, we don't see its sales struggles ending anytime soon.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 2:28PM]

"What's interested about the supposed results..." should be "What's interestING..." and "Conversely, LCD sales have been impressive of late..." should be "...AS of late..."

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 2:47PM]

The results of the study are not too surprising. Although many people seem to prefer plasma over LCD in a controlled side by side environment, in a store bright TV's sell better. This has been true even back when all TV's were CRT-based. Add in the fact that at many sizes LCD's are just going to be cheaper than plasma, and fear, rightly or wrongly, about burn in, and you have LCD's winning out when it comes down to a purchasing decision.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 3:59PM]

This message brought to you in part by LG Electronics.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 4:34PM]

I hope you guys were sarcastic about SED. SED is dead.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 4:37PM]

Extremely.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 4:50PM]

the plasma has the best picture but the life of LCD is better, plasma has problems with glare with external light and most of burn problems.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 6:11PM]

Do people prefer higher power consumption and burn in as well?

[gsaj Posted Jul 5th 2007 7:15PM]

rather than flame on plasma about "higher power consumption", have you done a side-by-side test to confirm that it's actually true? From what I've heard, Plasma has more variable power consumption than LCDs. As for burn-in, that's pretty much a non-issue. Any "persistent" images I've experienced on plasma go away pretty fast. The image quality on plasma was the winner for me.

[NeoteriX Posted Jul 6th 2007 8:28AM]

Uh, we don't need to actually test power consumption ourselves when it's widely reported that Plasmas consume more power than LCDs. At this point, the burden *IS ON YOU* to refute this otherwise well known fact.

It's called a "Kill a Watt". Have fun, and report to us your results!

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 5th 2007 8:32PM]

In other news:

Porsches and Lambos preferred over Aveos and Cobalts.

[gsaj Posted Jul 6th 2007 12:29PM]

This isn't a court of law ("burden of proof"), and I was replying to a snarky comment. I was interested in discussion, rather than just spewing forth one's dislike for technology. I never even said anything negative about LCD! For what it's worth, the difference is narrowing, but Plasma over-all uses more power. E.g.: http://www.g4techtv.ca/callforhelp/shownotes/0283.shtml?regular

Is it worth the tradeoff for a better picture? I think it is, personally.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 6th 2007 4:44PM]

I dunno.. They must have been lookin at old tech..

The LCDs Ive been seeing now are much better than Plasma.. Also to note.. Ive been seeing alot of 1-2 year old plasmas now that have problems with the picture.. Dots of Color were it shouldnt be..

I used to hate LCDs but they are much better now.. Esp when you figure in price and how long your plannin B4 you wanna replace it..

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 6th 2007 4:51PM]

Oh yeah.. I want to add that alot of ppl Ive talked to that are lookin to get a new HD set say that they are gunna get a plasma.. And I ask them if they have looked into HD sets yet and why they want a plasma.. Most tell me that they just want something Flat and they KNOW plasmas are flat screens but they've never really looked into the HD set yet..

So as far as a survey on HD sets, alot of ppl just associate what they know due to all the Media Hype on Plasmas from a few years back.. Ya know when they were $20k+ just for a 30-some Inch, And now they see 40+ inch for around $2k.. So they go and buy one now that they can afford it, but dont realize they could have had better..

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 8th 2007 4:59AM]

There are lot of bad LCDs and Plasmas out there - low and medium end models. However I am not surprised by the research result when I compare high end models as Plasma's have by far the better picture in that range - have not seen any LCD display even coming close to a high-end plasma from Pioneer or Panasonic - on both SD and HD content.

regarding power consumption all this was true when display sizes were small 32" and below. Now research has shown that on displays 42" and bigger it evens out as plasmas turns off their pixel for blacks where as LCD pixels has to be on all the time.

People often forget that Plasma is the newer of the two technologies and is changing as rapidly as everything else is - there is not much similarity between the technology used in a 5 year old plasma and a new one.

Of course it all comes at a premium - you must have a high-end model, but why drive Toyota when you drive Ferrari?

[WickedEast Posted Jul 8th 2007 11:39AM]

Based on some of the comments here, looks like what's holding people back from getting a plasma instead of LCD is ignorance. Burn-in, higher power consumption. It's 2007 for God sakes.

The result of the survey is not that surprising. Color reproduction and black level is a lot better with plasma than with LCD. It has both being scientifically and subjectively proven.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 8th 2007 10:57PM]

You would think that with the supposedly shortened life of PDP's and the burn in problem there would be thousands of disgruntled customers who bought plasmas several years ago and are just now having their panel go out. Doesn't seem to be happening does it?

My 5 year old Pioneer 50" plasma still has a great picture and no burn in (how can it with the "screen saver" function working?). The only panels I have ever seen with burn in have been in public places continuously showing transit schedules or in business lobbies with a burned in CNN ticker at the bottom. My only problem is when I see a 50" plasma for sale at $1399 at Sam's. I feel a little better when I think of the $750 I saved by not getting the extended warranty.

To get back to the original topic, if plasmas had shortened life�s we would have a tsunami of dead panels on the beach. The LCD fanboys need a new story.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 23rd 2007 5:27AM]

As far as burn in goes-- I work at home and leave CNN or Foxnews on from around 6 am to 5 pm...then change to watch real shows in the evening.

Since both channels have a ticker on the screen all day, should I assume Plasma is out for me because of burn in?