2006-06-13 23:10:51 · 15 answers · asked by anand p 1 in Consumer Electronics ➔ TVs
LCD
2006-06-14 02:50:50 · answer #1 · answered by cpflow 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a lot depends on what you're doing with it... simple tv watching or gaming? just watching tv, these two choices would compare about the same... LCD is probably a bit better for gaming, and seems to last a little longer than PLSMA before burning out... the problem with both of these is burn-in and burn-out, and over time, pixles die... with only a single pixel out, to the naked eye on a small screen will of course not be such a problem - but the more that go out will obviously be more noticed - and the bigger the screen, the worse it is...
my recommendation would be DLP - newer technology, without the burn-in/burn-out problem, and yet cheaper! why? because this technology is cheaper to produce, therefore, cheaper to buy the end product... newer, better and cheaper! now how can you go wrong with that combination? :-)
2006-06-14 03:56:48 · answer #2 · answered by yedida 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When the pixels on a plasma burn out they are too costly to repair, you have to buy a new TV. LCD's are repairable at low cost. Some of the major manufactures like Sony have stopped making plasma TVs.
2006-06-13 23:16:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
uncooked has continuously been the flagship teach of the WWE and likely continuously be, i'm able to't see Smackdown replacing it with the rosters they have. Smackdown has no longer some thing on Monday evening uncooked. As for creativity, possibly you're top this can cause them to get more desirable imaginitive, yet you may keep in suggestions that is confusing. they could be able to now no longer call on the great stars of years lengthy undergone to pull in the crowds. as a lot as i love them John Cena and Batista will under no circumstances income an similar pop because the The Rock or Stone chilly
2016-10-30 21:05:08 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know, LCD is a little older and we've worked out a lot more kinks in it. Plasma on the other hand. i would wait about 3 years. have a few new models put out before investing such a large sum of cash.
2006-06-14 00:24:26 · answer #5 · answered by diamondheart16 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I honestly don't know but I can tell you my Father-in-law's LCD went out with the TV being less than 6 months old.Thankfully it was under warranty and the repair man said that this is very common.
2006-06-13 23:59:52 · answer #6 · answered by rachellynn200 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD has low maitainence coz plasma even though it gives u better images will have maintainence problem in the long run
2006-06-13 23:16:37 · answer #7 · answered by Raj 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
plasma because LCD have to have a tube replaced every two years at a cost of about two hundred dollars. they will offer a two years warranty on the TV when you buy it. after the warranty runs out get ready!!!!!
2006-06-14 05:12:03 · answer #8 · answered by brian 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the lcd for right now is your best bet for maintenance when you count the cost of repairing a plasma tv which is really expensive at this time hope i helped
2006-06-14 00:27:23 · answer #9 · answered by bikerreveal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd go with LCD, plasma burns out faster than you can pay for it and it's too expensive to fix at this time.
2006-06-13 23:18:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really don't know technically but I have a plasma that has lasted already 9 years without maintenance and would get another one when ever mine does give out
2006-06-13 23:43:57 · answer #11 · answered by golddragon55 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋