Ignorance is bliss. Not even going to bet that you didn't give them the reasons it had burn-in. It was obviously abused. Therefore they made an unfair judgement, fuelled by your keeping information from them due to your zealous LCD/LED-backlit LCD bias.
Look - I'm not going to argue again.
I had a plasma and although I did enjoy the picture, the IR annoyed me. I was swayed by guys coming on here and telling me it was non existanent as well. When I complained, I was told that no ones else does it and I have a crap panel, TV, engine and every other reason.
Fact is - I like watching a TV without limits ... there's no need to activate features to protect, stop things 2 hours down the line, worry about falling asleep, worry about a contrast issue and everything else. I've got that now.
Where I will agree with you plasma folk, is at the lower end of the market the plasma is a better buy than teh LCD. If you're going R15,000+ - the gap narrows hugely with LCD coming ahead in many areas - including the old 'black level' debate.
Ask thought with mid-high end LCD/LED what they think?
Fair enough, you have very valid points. Watching with limitations is a bit of a pain in bum, but I guess that is the price you pay for having a massive TV with great picture @ a reasonable price.
I actually have both a LCD and Plasma so I can react fairly neutrally. Both are great. Personally I am not a fanboi of either.
wow I am also kinda lost here.
Dolby, I would say price is very relevant when it comes these discussions. I don't think PP was brushing aside the price of the Panasonic you say has burn in, the fact of the matter is that any plasma irrespective of price will suffer burn in if abused.
Personally price is very relevant when look at the 2 technologies. Plasma I personally think gives far more bang for your buck. LCD's are horrifically overpriced as you get bigger and bigger.
Not to mention people that are in the market for a new TV, are almost always price sensitive, so highlighting the pricing is pretty important I would say.