I need to buy a 37 or 42 inch TV. It has to be a thin TV, no DLP or any other bulky old style and eventually I may hang it on the wall.
There will be no still images from slide show machines or computer, no use as computer monitor ever; just watching DVS's and movies from digital cable.
I am not interested on the fancy ones that cost a fortune and I am budgeting this from $800 to $1600 as I have seen on the market. I can't see why anyone would pay 3K or a lot more for a TV this size. What do they have extra to offer to cost so much more? I've seen many side by side on stores and the image is basically the same either on fast or slower image moves. Is it just paying for famous brand?
2006-12-10 03:46:48 · 4 answers · asked by ed_buchmann 2 in Consumer Electronics ➔ TVs
I've got a samsung 50" plasma and in my opinion its just as good as LCD. It hasn't done anything to my electric bill, my eyes arfe just fine(most likely because its got an anti-glare screen) and I paid less for it than the camparable LCD version. For the price and quality its one of the best tv's. I paid $2000 for it, the 40 inch version of it in my area runs a little over $1600 but still worth it,.
2006-12-10 06:08:09 · answer #1 · answered by jcindy22 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCDs are more directional. You need to watch it as directly in front as possible. Plasma is clearer, much more expensive , and has not been tested enough for longevity of service at this point (in my opinion).
2006-12-10 04:00:06 · answer #2 · answered by lyyman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD IS A BETTER CHOICE BECAUSE PLASMA SUCKS ALOT OF ELECTRICITY AND MESSES WITH YOUR EYES.
2006-12-10 05:01:03 · answer #3 · answered by Š†ËÅLŢH™ 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD is better
2006-12-10 13:05:23 · answer #4 · answered by Albion L 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋