Plasma is DEAD !?

Bob in St. Louis · « **on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:14 pm »

Pioneer is done with Plasma technology!

Is it truly dead, or just the first nail in the coffin.

Bob

mfsoa · « **Reply #1 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:18 pm »

Bob,
Do you have a link w/ more info handy?

My brother just got some 50" Pios in his store and they look really amazing.

Thanks

-Mike

low.pfile · « **Reply #2 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:29 pm »

Wow, a surprise to hear
...my dream display has been the Kuros.

news thread on Pioneer and Plasma
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/eyeonasia/archives/2008/03/pioneer_gets_sm.html

http://www.forbes.com/markets/economy/2008/03/04/pioneer-plasma-tv-markets-equity-cx_vk_0304markets1.html

all....
google search from 03/03/08:
http://news.google.com/news?ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&tab=wn&ncl=1138970410&hl=en

maxwalrath · « **Reply #3 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:33 pm »

Maybe some Kuros models can be had on the cheap soon?

woodsyi · « **Reply #4 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:36 pm »

They may be out-sourcing the base panel manufacturing but will continue to assemble future units. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=asdLQteMqpFo&refer=asia

zybar · « **Reply #5 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:55 pm »

Quote from: Bob in St. Louis on 5 Mar 2008, 08:14 pm

Pioneer is done with Plasma technology!

Is it truly dead, or just the first nail in the coffin.

Bob

I thought that Pioneer is just outsourcing their glass and will stop producing their own?

I didn't think they were getting out of the plasma business.

George

musicman06 · « **Reply #6 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 08:56 pm »

I wouldn't jump to the "plasma is dead" conclusion quite yet. But it is true, Pioneer is out of the business, at least as far as producing goes. Quite a shame as they were about the best at it. Economies of scale win out once again. Lets help Panasonic and other brands can live up to the Pioneer legacy at least somewhat better than they have been in this realm. Really doesn't matter if Pioneer continues to assemble using someone else's panel. Still wouldn't be a real Pioneer.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #7 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:07 pm »

Hey Mike, I received an email from an emag pointing me here:
http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/plasma-tv-is-dead

Apparently, they are outsourcing their LCD screens, but dropping plasma all together.

Yea, the title "plasma is dead" is quite the eye catcher. It certainly caught my eye. Just thought I'd pass on the news and see if anybody else has heard anything about plasma as a viable (future) technology.

Bob

Zero · « **Reply #8 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:12 pm »

Pioneer made THE best plasma televisions - period. I sure as hell hope this ain't true.

If it is, the torch will be passed onto Panasonic. I hope they can keep it lit. Plasmas beat the pants off of LCD's and DLP's in nearly every way imaginable.

woodsyi · « **Reply #9 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:19 pm »

LED LCD has been getting better and better. I think it uses much less power -- this is a very good WAF for me since mine is a card carrying Green Party member.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #10 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:29 pm »

Having a front projection unit for the HT, and an old school 4:3 53" rear projection unit for the living room, I've never had any interest for the large flat panels. So it is with a slight bit of ignorance I say the following: I've been under the impression the dollar for dollar LCD is the way to go. Granted, plasma has a MUCH better picture^*, but for the cost of the unit versus it's ever deteriorating picture quality and shorter life span (due to the non-replaceable bulb) I'm surprised that plasma took off as well as it did. Due to competition in the industry for bigger, better, faster, more, cheaper, I'm not surprised to see a major company drop it.
That being said, the wife is talking about a remodel of a few rooms upstairs which would include a built-in flat panel of some sort. Sooo, I'll be in the market for a 'flaty' sooner than I thought. Maybe like maxwalrath said, they'll be able to be found cheap here real soon.

* A buddy has a 60" Fujitsu plasma with hi-def from Dish network. Seeing underwater reef footage in Discovery Channels hi-def on a plasma is the most stunning thing I've ever seen on a TV.

Bob

ctviggen · « **Reply #11 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:40 pm »

I'm actually quite astounded at how good a picture my cheap ($800) LCD flatscreen gets. It has very good black levels (not yet CRT levels, but close enough) and you can watch it in bright sunlight.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #12 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:53 pm »

I guess when OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) technology matures it will render the whole plasma/LCD question moot.

Maybe development is further along than is generally realized and that is hastening the demise of plasma.

http://tinyurl.com/22fqxa

http://tinyurl.com/yunyez

nicksgem10s · « **Reply #13 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 09:59 pm »

I have always like Plasma televisions and thought they buried the LCD sets I had seen.

My opinion of this recently changed after visiting just about all the local retailers over the last month.

I thought the only thing that the Plasma sets (various brands) had over the top of the line Sony LCD sets was viewing angle.

I actually preferred the picture quality of the Sony LCD sets below.

I really think the new Sony LCD sets KDL 52W3000 & KDL 52XBR4 offer incredible performance and value even though I would not call them cheap.

If I was in the market I would definitely have pulled the trigger on the KDL 52W3000 for under $3k. It is a really sweet set from what I have seen.

And to answer your question I am not a Sony fanboy.

This was in different store environments which were far from perfect but still can give you a clue as to the sets potential.

Zero · « **Reply #14 on:** 5 Mar 2008, 11:45 pm »

Not to sidetrack this thread into a classic LCD versus Plasma debate, but can't keep my trap completely shut on the issue. Theres are a number of benefits to LCD screens. They come in a much greater variety of sizes. They reflect less sunlight. They consume less energy and their life-span is more consistent across the board. LCD's have come a long, long ways in terms of viewing angle and color accuracy.

For sheer versatility and picture quality however, plasma still runs the show. The main problem with LCD's is that their picture is slave to the sets native resolution. An LCD may look fine with a BluRay disc and a High Definition broadcast, but they still lag behind a good plasma or CRT when it comes to regular DVD's, Cable, or what have you. Plasma screens do not rely on high resolution to deliver a solid picture. Plasma is also inherently faster than an LCD (120hz my butt, nothing more than a band aid) and can handle fast motion with aplomb. A keen eye will always spot lag and jaggies in even the best of today's LCD's.

Picture quality wise - its tough to gauge an idea of how sets compare in a stores like Circuit City, Frys, Best Buy, etc.. Most people are drawn to LCD's for "t3h purdy colors N its leik so brite!" appeal. However, if you take two professionally calibrated televisions, say the well respected Sony XBR LCD and Pioneer Kuro Plasma - there is absolutely zero arguing who has the most accurate picture. It'll be the Pioneer every time, and by no small margin.

Now that I've created a post that seems little more than a glorified LCD bashing fest

Samsung and Sony have released some fantastic screens that I certainly would not mind owning. Anyone buying those units certainly did not buy an inferior product. But at the end of the day - an LCD's strengths and weaknesses are what they are.

Now lets look at longevity. Typically, a good LCD has a half-life span of about 60,000 hours. A good plasma from the likes of Samsung will have about 40,000 - 45,000 hours . A plasma from Pioneer will last you a bit longer, around 50,000. Panasonic plasmas, particularly their latest 1080p sets from the Z500 series, are spec'd to last a whopping 100,000 hours until half life. Most people will replace their sets far before that point. Hell, many of you will hit your grave well before the set will hit its final swan song..

From a value perspective: It doesn't cost a lot of money to build a small LCD (32" on down). Plasma manufacturers would be taking a loss to offer something in that size, hence why up to now, you haven't seen a plasma screens under 42". Yet, when things get to that size, the rolls reverse. It takes more money to build say, a 50" LCD, than it does a 50" plasma. When you hit the 42" range and beyond, this is where plasma begins taking the lead in over bang for the buck value. This is why both technologies are priced so close at this range (on up).

Anyways - off my soapbox and side rant.

Dan Driscoll · « **Reply #15 on:** 6 Mar 2008, 03:22 pm »

Quote from: Bob in St. Louis on 5 Mar 2008, 09:29 pm

Having a front projection unit for the HT, and an old school 4:3 53" rear projection unit for the living room, I've never had any interest for the large flat panels. So it is with a slight bit of ignorance I say the following: I've been under the impression the dollar for dollar LCD is the way to go. Granted, plasma has a MUCH better picture^*, but for the cost of the unit versus it's ever deteriorating picture quality and shorter life span (due to the non-replaceable bulb) I'm surprised that plasma took off as well as it did.

1. Plasma doesn't use a bulb. Most LCDs do use a bulb, which can cost $300 or more. LED back-lit LCD panels are like plasma, they don't have a bulb.

2. The half-life of a decent plasma panel is over 40,000 hours, which is the equivalent of watching 10 hours a day, every day, for 11 years. In practical terms it means the panel will last 15-20 years. LCD will last 20-25. I don't know about you, but I've never owned a TV for more than 10 years.

3. For a given panel size, plasma typically cost less than LCD, meaning the per unit cost is actually lower for plasma.

4. Please don't mention burn-in, it is a myth the continues to be perpetrated by ignorant sales people at big box retailers.

5. Lower cost and better picture quality. What's surprising is that so many people are buying LCDs, which just goes to show how poorly TVs are set-up in big box stores and how uninformed the average consumer (aka, J6P) is. The only advantage LCD has over plasma right now is brightness.

drcruz · « **Reply #16 on:** 6 Mar 2008, 04:55 pm »

All the posters who defend plasma w/ the facts are waisting their time. Unfortunately the the floor guys at BB, CC and Fry's didn't have the facts and spread all the STUPID mis-information about "gas recharge" and "needing panel replacement every 5 years" garbage. What I want to know is WHERE DID ALL THAT CRAP COME FROM!

Because of the mis-info on PDP's, plasmas are probably a dying breed, even if it does have the better PQ. Granted I have heard good things about current LCD black levels and viewing angles. Plus the way LCD's display the bright colors is definitely an immediate eye grabber vs. the geeky need for color accuracy (I'm definitely in the geek catagory). I haven't had a need to shop around since buying my Panny 50 in. 6uy in 2004 though.

drcruz · « **Reply #17 on:** 6 Mar 2008, 05:00 pm »

"...deteriorating picture quality and shorter life span..."

Bob, I have had my panel since 2004 and I do not notice any deteriorating PQ and my panel has 30,000 hours to 1/2 brightness rating. If you do the math at 6 hours a day (very conservative if you ask me) that's 13 years of viewing, and that's to just 1/2 brightness. I currently have my contrast set WAY down so my panel could be around a loonnngg time (assuming the internals hold up). Current panels are in the 60,000 to 100,000 hour range AND have features to fight burning.

Mike Dzurko · « **Reply #18 on:** 6 Mar 2008, 06:46 pm »

Zero:

I agree with pretty much all of your post except the part about my 60" Pio outliving me . . . .

Drcruz:

You're right. Misinformation is a big factor. I've talked to a number of people who are fairly tech savy and yet they've believed (based on what they've read in the mass media and heard in the box stores) that Plasmas are inferior because of burn-in issues, not bright enough, not as good a picture etc. They also think that any 1080 set will obviously outdo any 700+ set. These guys no nothing about internal scalers, viewing angles, color etc.

undertow · « **Reply #19 on:** 6 Mar 2008, 07:01 pm »

Bottom line in my opinion.. its the Same as the HD-DVD vs. Blu ray battle.. In the end somebody will push to the end.. Plasma is Too Heavy, Too much glass, To much power consumption, and If it does go into a downward spiral Too many repair costs.. LCD on the other hand, Runs cool, Very lightweight, Easily within 90 to 95% as good to the naked eye in most rooms, and also still coming in a little cheaper on some store discounts.. Not to mention replacing a 250 dollar bulb unit or something vs. and entire screen in a plasma makes much more sense to me..

I know I just bought a Killer 52" LCD and its every bit as good, but weighs a total of 50 lbs vs. the comprable 115 lbs of a plasma, Does not Vent all that heat like a plasma onto the wall, and consumes next to nothing in power, and goes Brighter with just as sharp a picture and very accurate colors, 2 years ago this might not have been the case. Whats with DLP anyway, did that not more or less disappear too in the last 24 months?

I guess in the end Average Joe consumer if educated enough will buy more LCD's anyway and not live on the hype of "Plasma" and the fancy name it rocked the industry with 10 years ago.