Engadget http://www.engadget.com Engadget http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif Engadget http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[Bigger & biggest HDTVs: Sharp's 108 vs. Samsung's 102]]>http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/bigger-and-biggest-hdtvs-sharps-108-vs-samsungs-102/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/bigger-and-biggest-hdtvs-sharps-108-vs-samsungs-102/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/bigger-and-biggest-hdtvs-sharps-108-vs-samsungs-102/#commentsIt's hard to decide. We're seeing so many great HDTVs every day like these two giants -- and some not so giant -- but still, which one of these screens would we rather take home? On the left we've got Samsung's old school 102-inch plasma, on the right Sharp's new 108-inch 1080p Aquos LCD. Some people could be content with a mere 102-inch or even 103-inch screen and prefer plasma to LCD, but with 120Hz motion and other advancements coming off of Sharp's 8th-generation manufacturing line its impossible to say no to the new size king in town. Check out the gallery for a couple more pictures of both.
Bigger and biggest HDTVs: Sharp's 108 vs. Samsung's 102

Filed under: , , ,

Bigger & biggest HDTVs: Sharp's 108 vs. Samsung's 102 originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>1021031088gaquosbiggerbiggestfeaturehdhdtvhigh definitionHighDefinitionlargestlcdliveplasmasamsungsharpTue, 09 Jan 2007 10:40:00 EST<![CDATA[Pogue's perspective: megapixel numbers don't matter]]>http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/23/pogues-perspective-megapixel-numbers-dont-matter/http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/23/pogues-perspective-megapixel-numbers-dont-matter/http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/23/pogues-perspective-megapixel-numbers-dont-matter/#comments David Pogue has faced his fair share of myth-busting duties, but his latest assignment sure didn't have to be done in order to convince us that his unanimous discovery was indeed correct all along. While theorists (and those adamant that bigger always equals better) can theorize forever on why additional megapixels should yield clearer, more accurate prints, the reality of the matter is that extra megapixels are typically not much more than a marketing ploy to lure consumers into making an additional purchase. In his latest test, he took identical photos with anonymous 5-, 8-, and 13-megapixel shooters, and then printed them out on 16- x 24-inch poster paper at a professional photography lab. Then, he surveyed the general public in Times Square to see if the naked eye could actually discern between the varying sensors and the level of clarity -- to no surprise (and to theorists' chagrin), only a single person (a photography professor, mind you) correctly sorted the prints in order of megapixels, and Pogue even asserted that the lucky winner was probably guessing anyway. So, if you still don't believe us, be sure to hit the read link for the full skinny, and save yourself a few bills the next time you're camera shopping by not making megapixels your ultimate priority, capishe?

[Via TheRawFeed]

Filed under:

Pogue's perspective: megapixel numbers don't matter originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:34:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>betterbiggermegapixelmegapixelspogueresearchstudytestThu, 23 Nov 2006 04:34:00 EST