why Plasma Sales are falling compared to LCD?

A

Plasma is said to be great technology, unrivaled picture clarity, colors, blacks, viewing angles. Besides all this, its price also seems to be lower but then why its suffering with low sales? why big companies have abandoned it?

the only major problem is burn in.

Expensive to make, higher power consumption and high failure rates have forced manufacturers to concentrate on LCDs which although inferior give good profits.

G

you forgot led

plasmas (perhaps) require more R&D, and tend to last longer than LEDs/LED-LCDs. manufacturers in these times are not surely looking forward to sell something that would last long to a customer. as sarath said, other TVs can be produced with lesser input to gain high output.

gopi_vbboy said:
you forgot led

The panel is still a basic TN one with a CCFL or LED backlit option.

If you are referering to OLEDs then yes, they are superior to both LCDs and Plasmas.

I vaguely remember seeing a prototype of a LED tv too but that was so expensive that it made the 1L 11" Sony OLED look cheap in comparison.

GhorMaanas said:
plasmas (perhaps) require more R&D, and tend to last longer than LEDs/LED-LCDs. manufacturers in these times are not surely looking forward to sell something that would last long to a customer. as sarath said, other TVs can be produced with lesser input to gain high output.

Plasmas have a lower life than LCDs do. This was marketed heavily but the problem is no one calculated the real life scenario.

For example, a crude one, take a LCD which lasts 5 times as long as a Plasma. Now let the Plasma have a life of 5 years. Which makes the LCD last 25. Now in real life for a TV to make it through 5 years or more is a tough call. So practically speaking, even if the LCD lasts endlessly on paper, in real life it may not last that long especially with leaps in resolution and such.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ghosmanas has a plasma and I don't think he would ever buy a TN LCD panel for TV viewing after it.

Sarath said:
Plasmas have a lower life than LCDs do. This was marketed heavily but the problem is no one calculated the real life scenario.

For example, a crude one, take a LCD which lasts 5 times as long as a Plasma. Now let the Plasma have a life of 5 years. Which makes the LCD last 25. Now in real life for a TV to make it through 5 years or more is a tough call. So practically speaking, even if the LCD lasts endlessly on paper, in real life it may not last that long especially with leaps in resolution and such.

you may be correct. but quite paradoxically, i have seen quite many people on forums complaining about their dead LCDs/LED-LCDs (the latter more than LCDs), and very few (if i remember) reporting a plasma that went dead too soon. may be thats because not many people buy plasmas in the first place

BTW, now-a-days panasonic is rather aggressively publicising about the increased panel-life of its plasma line-up with the help of its new R&D in the field

Sarath said:
Ghosmanas has a plasma and I don't think he would ever buy a TN LCD panel for TV viewing after it.

certainly not for viewing HD content! the 'artificial' picture-processing of the latter is somewhat repulsive :mrgreen:

I recently compared few Plasmas and LEDs, and have found that the picture quality on LEDs are much better.

aroraanant said:
I recently compared few Plasmas and LEDs, and have found that the picture quality on LEDs are much better.

What reference clip did you use for comparison?

I went to croma and reliance digital recently and they has played the same clip on all of their TVs(you know all showrooms do that), and then I realized that the difference in picture quality is quite a lot