What is Better Plasma or Lcd Tv?
In my opinion a plasma TV has better picture for movies and watching TV but the LCD has better versatility when it comes to using it with a computer. When looking at these TVs you have to compare the cost vs. what you want it to do. If clarity is important to you the plasma is the way to go.
If hooking it to a computer is important then the LCD is the way to go. You can find more information here: plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatvreviews/....
Better plasma or lcd tv is (without quotes):.
Plasma televisions can be a better buy than LCD televisions. Plasma TV's give a more accurate color picture, have better viewing angles, as well as allow your video playback to be a little faster. If you're at a high altitude, LCD is a better choice.
There is a reason LCD flat panels are the preferred visual display units for use on airplanes: LCD TVs aren't affected by increases or decreases in air pressure. Their performance is consistent regardless of the altitude at which they're utilized. This is not the case for a plasma.
The display element in plasma TVs is actually a glass substrate envelope with rare natural gases compressed therein. So, at high altitudes (6,500 feet and above), an air-pressure differential emerges, which causes plasma displays to emit a buzzing sound due to the lower air pressure. This noise can sound rather like the humming of an old neon sign.
ADVANTAGE: LCD and LED LCD, at 6,500 feet and higher. LED LCD television manufacturers claim that their displays last, on average, 100,000 hours. LED lighting technology has indeed changed the picture life for LCD TVs.
The reason is that LED lighting does not change color over time, while the older CFL flourescent syle backlighting does. When this happens in an LCD TV the white balance of the TV will be compromised. Current LCD TVs will probably last the same length of time as the LED LCD TVs, though your color quality will likely degrade.
In theory an LCD TV will last as long as its backlight does. Since it involves nothing more than light passing through a prismatic substrate, there is little to wear out in an LCD TV except the backlighting. Pixels may become stuck over time.
From our research, flourescent bulb backlighting in LCDs cannot be replaced cost effectively - contrary to opinion. LED backlit LCDs provide a longer lasting stability, with little to no degradation in white balance over time. One question we have with LED LCDs is how they will actually perform over time.
We have not had enough time to know for sure. Plasma TVs, on the other hand, utilize slight electric currents to excite a combination of noble gases (i.e. , argon, neon, xenon), which glow red, blue, and/or green.
This is an essentially active phenomenon, so the phosphoric elements in plasma displays fade over time. Many manufacturers state a new half life of 60,000 hours. While I am skeptical of this spec, I do believe strides have been made to nearly even the playing field with LCD and LED LCD.
At half life, the phosphors in a plasma screen will glow half as brightly as they did when the set was new. There is no way to replace these gases; the TV simply continues to grow dimmer with use. ADVANTAGE: LED, then Plasma, then LCD.
Some manufacturers of both plasma and LED LCD state up to 100,000 hours use. At 4 hours use per day that's 68 years of employment. Where do they get these specs?
LCD technology is not prone to screen "burn-in" or "ghosting" (premature aging of pixel cells) due to the nature of the technologies "twisting crystals." With plasma, static images will begin to "burn-in," or permanently etch the color being displayed into the glass display element. The time it takes for this to occur depends greatly on the anti burn-in technology of the manufacturer.
Recent improvements by plasma manufacturers have certainly extended the time it takes to burn in a plasma pixel cell. In the past I was concerned to place a DVD on pause 15 minutes. Now, many of the enhancements such as improved green phosphor material, oscillating pixels, and motion adaptive anti burn-in technology are greatly reducing the risk of burn in.
It's gotten so much better that I don't even worry about it anymore. In a new model plasma from any top tier manufacturer I would put "ghosting" estimates at hours of use (Ghosting can be "washed" out by displaying static gray material or full screen images). Permanent burn-in I would put at more than 10 hours.
ADVANTAGE: LCD, though not much of a concern unless you really try to burn in an image. All television measurements are stated in inches and are for diagonal measurement of the screen from corner to corner - not including framing. Both plasma and LCD TVs are becoming more readily available in larger sizes though plasma still leads the size battle by a great margin.
Pioneer and LG produce 61" plasma sizes while Panasonic has a readily available 65" model. Though it is not being imported into the U.S. yet, Samsung has produced a gigantic plasma of 100 inches. Though such mammoth monitors are expensive, they exhibit none of the "kinks" one might expect with such large displays.
In other words, even the largest plasma displays are reliable. Large plasma displays will consume power - try 675 watts for a 65 "display compared to around 330 watts for a 42" plasma. ADVANTAGE: Plasma, though the playing field is leveling.
Plasma TV is better than LCD with respect to picture clarity. But they are much expensive and consume more energy. LCDs also give good clarity and are less expensive.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.