Thin TVs - Some Get It, Some Don't

[admin]

People, at least the gotta-have-it tech-at-all-costs bleeding-edge gimme-my-iphone-now cowd are always looking for the next best thing. And despite the lagging economy, they are driving the market and the media to tell others what's cool and what's the next evolution in products. Steve Jobs and Apple may come out with the next big thing, but if it's not adopted by the elites, and praised by the media elites, it won't make it very far. Now let's apply that to flat TVs. Sure, you may think your new flat panel, measuring in at a scant 3-4 inches thick, is... well... flat. But it's not. Not really.

Discuss "Thin TVs - Some Get It, Some Don't" here. Read the article.

 

[GlocksRock]

Who really needs a tv that is only 2 inches thick? I'm happy with my LCD just the way it is... but if you want super thin don't go LCD, look towards OLED.

 

[Chopin_Guy]

I found it ammusing, when recently looking at displays, how one of Samsung's big marketing things with thier new edge-lit LED LCD displays was how thin they are. However, if you go look at the new Panasonic V10 Plasmas they are about as thin as the Samsung and that the wireless Z10 series is actually thinner than the Samsungs. Not to mention the fact that Panasonic displays picture's are superior to the Samsungs without the over-blown marketing on the 'thin-facotr'....

 

[Davemcc]

The thickness of the panel hasn't been an issue for me, as long it wasn't DLP deep. This extreme thinness raises some other issues. All the flat panel wall mounts that I've seen hang the panel out from the wall by a couple of inches at least. Do these new thin panels come with a new style of wall mount or can they be mounted directly on the wall? If not, then they will still hang out away from the wall like any other TV.

As far as audioholics are concerned, those who are really interested in the quality of sound have acoustic treatments on the wall. Generally, these are 4" thick panels on the front wall flanking the display. The front face of my display hangs out about 1" in front of my panels and I'm okay with that. It might look a little weird having a 1" thick panel hanging flush to the wall flanked by a set of 4" thick acoustic panels.

I guess this new style of TV isn't really geared for audioholics anyway since as soon as we can afford the price and dedicated space, we are going for a PJ anyway.

 

[BMXTRIX]

What's the craziest thing is that people buy a flat panel display, then SET IT ON A CREDENZA! Get the heck out of here! I will never understand why people spend any extra money on thin and then do not mount it up on their wall, out of the way of their gear.

But, I am a sucker for the thin displays. They are definitely nifty, and the OLEDs are really cool. Not for the amount of money they are asking, cool, but cool nonetheless.

 

[rnatalli]

I'm waiting for a tv stand that has a holo emitter as the top. 3D TV using histograms, yum...

 

[Seth=L]

Vizio is kicking some major tail. The economy taking a dump seems to have tipped the market in their favor.

 

[autoboy]

When most consumers put their TVs on a stand, who cares about thin?

I think thin was a trend when there were DLPs and big CRT rear projection sets. The layman was bombarded with messages that thin TVs gave a better quality. So, he would go in and buy a thin TV. To him, 4" is thin and 2" is thin. Both are just thin to him. He probably sees no difference. Remember that these TVs are still going to first time HDTV buyers and they are pretty impressed with anything thinner than their CRT sets.

I put my TVs on a TV stand. So, I went big with a DLP and LcOS. Who cares about the thickness when it sits on a stand?

When you can hang a TV flat against a wall like a picture, then you will see people start to take notice.

 

[lsiberian]

My tv is thinner. It fit's right on the wall directly and I can't even tell the width.

 

[DaleAV]

Not to mention the fact that Panasonic displays picture's are superior to the Samsungs without the over-blown marketing on the 'thin-facotr'....

Of course, a plasma (including the Samsung plasmas) will be ultimately superior to an LCD..although LCDs have come a long way.

http://www.valueelectronics.com/images/pdf/VE 09 HD shoot out results of the attendees.pdf

 

[westcott]

This article just reaffirms that Vizio is the McDonalds of the flat panel world.

Price over quality wins here in America. Surprise, Surprise!!!

 

[GO-NAD!]

If it comes as a byproduct of improved technology, i.e. better picture quality and lower energy consumption, I'm all for making thinner TVs. But as an end in itself!? It's a supreme waste of time, money and effort on the part of the manufacturers. After all, it's the law of dimishing returns rearing its ugly head. When you go from a 2 ft thick, 36" CRT to a 3.5" thick, 46" LCD or plasma, that's a 580% reduction! Impressive! Going from 3.5" to 2" is a 75% reduction. Looked at in isolation, that would be impressive. But when you compare it to the original reduction.....mehh....

As for certain manufacturers not pursuing the, "if thin is good, thinner is better" market, I don't believe they are trolling the bottom of the consumer market. I'll be in the market for a new flat screen within the next few months and I won't be buying it from Wal-Mart. The performance/price relationship will be a big factor. Being 2" thick versus 3" thick will not even make my check-off list.

 

[gmichael]

My projector screen seems plenty thin to me. It will do.

 

[DaleAV]

My projector screen seems plenty thin to me. It will do.

I like the thinner displays from an aesthetic point of view...and if the display has everything else you want, no problem.
I have a Panasonic BD55 player that is very thin (vertically) too...thanks to more advanced electronics integration. That in itself does not make it better, but it is a sign of things to come.
OTOH my Oppo BDP 83 player and that is like a thick slab of granite.
But the performance is certainly top notch!
So really, kind of a non-issue.

 

[Dezoris]

Taking a look at the pricing disparity between the edge and local dimming sets compared with CCFL LCDs is huge.

Yes the style of the thin cabinet is great and so is the power savings.
But local dimming or not most good comsumers would not plunk out $1500 more for a first generation backlit LCD namely when there are plenty of bugs with it still.

Not yet and not with OLED looming.

 

[Duff man]

Thin is very overrated. I'd rather spend my money on screen size than on something thinner.

I have a 67" Samsung LED DLP and couldn't be happier. The picture is excellent, and for under $2000 it is a tremendous value that LCD or plasma can't compete with.

 

[bandphan]

Thin is very overrated. I'd rather spend my money on screen size than on something thinner.

I have a 67" Samsung LED DLP and couldn't be happier. The picture is excellent, and for under $2000 it is a tremendous value that LCD or plasma can't compete with.

Yes size for dollar ratio your dlp is nice, but IMO I'd take a 50 or 58" panny plasma for around 2k first.

 

[jinjuku]

I guess this new style of TV isn't really geared for audioholics anyway since as soon as we can afford the price and dedicated space, we are going for a PJ anyway.

That is exactly what I thought. I would love to see any LCD/Plasma compete with a 120" screen out there. Especially the Screen Goo variety. Wake me up when I can get a 1mm thick 120" LCD/Plasma for $1200-$1500.

 

[jinjuku]

I like the thinner displays from an aesthetic point of view...and if the display has everything else you want, no problem.
I have a Panasonic BD55 player that is very thin (vertically) too...thanks to more advanced electronics integration. That in itself does not make it better, but it is a sign of things to come.
OTOH my Oppo BDP 83 player and that is like a thick slab of granite.
But the performance is certainly top notch!
So really, kind of a non-issue.

They all look about the same 'thinness' (is that even a word?) when viewed straight on. I know every time I try to watch it from the side I don't see anything, just hear some dialog.

 

[patnshan]

Thin is very overrated. I'd rather spend my money on screen size than on something thinner.

I have a 67" Samsung LED DLP and couldn't be happier. The picture is excellent, and for under $2000 it is a tremendous value that LCD or plasma can't compete with.

I just bought a 55" LCD (650 series) to be delivered friday (can't wait). I set out to buy a set like yours but they stopped making it. I guess the thin revolution caused that too!

I didn't need thin, which is the reason I went LCD instead of LED. The picture was indiscernible to me, especially for $900 more

Pat