You wish... any person who does their research knows Plasma offers the best PQ. especially black levels. Plasma also doesn't have to artificially add enhancements like LCD does just to get it to perform like a plasma (ex. response times, 120Hz refresh rates, and other BS).
120Hz is not a gimmick. When you want to watch a movie, which is 24fps, 60fps just won't reproduce it as well as a display at a multiple of 24Hz, like 120Hz.
Additionally, if you want to talk about gimmicks or fakery, plasma has the ultimate. Plasma is incapable of outputting ANY gradations of luminance. So in order to simulate different luminance levels, it has to flicker the display pixels.
They both have their advantages, and one of LCD's is power usage. I think it would be fantastic if plasma's power usage could be lowered to be in line with LCD. But I don't mean just fakery like plasma's stated contrast levels (which are actually not even possible on anything resembling a real image). With enough fakery, anyone can come up with a misleading stat (witness LCD's BS "4ms" numbers). So I'd love to see plasma really meet the power challenge, not just come up with rigged tests.
"I have a MacBook Pro and an Xbox 360 and I would like to get a 20- to 24-inch display that will support both devices. The speakers should be inbuilt, or there should be an aux out on the display to hook up external speakers. Help! Please!"
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Plasma is almost as dead as HD-DVD at this point.
two words: black levels
You wish... any person who does their research knows Plasma offers the best PQ. especially black levels. Plasma also doesn't have to artificially add enhancements like LCD does just to get it to perform like a plasma (ex. response times, 120Hz refresh rates, and other BS).
120Hz is not a gimmick. When you want to watch a movie, which is 24fps, 60fps just won't reproduce it as well as a display at a multiple of 24Hz, like 120Hz.
Additionally, if you want to talk about gimmicks or fakery, plasma has the ultimate. Plasma is incapable of outputting ANY gradations of luminance. So in order to simulate different luminance levels, it has to flicker the display pixels.
They both have their advantages, and one of LCD's is power usage. I think it would be fantastic if plasma's power usage could be lowered to be in line with LCD. But I don't mean just fakery like plasma's stated contrast levels (which are actually not even possible on anything resembling a real image). With enough fakery, anyone can come up with a misleading stat (witness LCD's BS "4ms" numbers). So I'd love to see plasma really meet the power challenge, not just come up with rigged tests.
you obviously dont know your ass from a hole in the ground...