Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:28PM EST
See Comments (344)
If you went shopping this weekend, you might have noticed that deep discounts were comparably lacking on new flat-panel TVs, at least compared to 2006. Instead, they've simply gotten bigger, part of manufacturers' strategies to avoid getting sucked into the huge discounts that siphoned away virtually all profits for the sets during last year's cost-obsessed holiday season.
Jumbo sets are flooding the market this year. Sony has 20 models measuring 40 inches or larger in LCD alone, now making up 68 percent of the company's TV lineup, according to the Wall Street Journal. And Sony, like everyone else, is hoping you'll go big: At $1,273, the average 40-inch TV offers substantially better profit margin than a $763 32-inch set (in part because there is less competition in bigger sets from budget brands like Olevia and Westinghouse). The goal is obviously that you'll get sucked into jumping up a size or two when you see the difference in the stores.
Still, prices are dropping, just not as much: 12 percent on average this year for LCD sets. As well, technology continues to improve, with focus on deeper blacks, faster response times, and even lighter and thinner screens. Interestingly, Sharp says it can now fit a 42-inch screen into its old 40-inch frame because there's less wasted space around the edges.
So... are you TV shopping this season? If so, what's the magic number (in inches, I mean) that's tickling your fancy?
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
WOW this is stupid because most people out there dont understand the difference between all of the differnt types of tv's. They just buy it now for the size and think they are getting a good because it is on sale. It's on sale for a reason it's last years model the newer ones are coming out and they need room in the back for them. What can I say I work in the back of receiving at SEARS.
There was a time when I would have agreed that Sony was Better than Sharp, but when I did the research the Aquos was superior in picture quality. I bought my sets a couple of years ago and I still enjoy them and have not had any picture problems or quality issues, If I was in the market today I would go with the Samsung Elite that is one heck of a set.
Bilko_ca is the only one on here who understands what they are talking about.
Who's shopping for a 9incher? Now thats tickling your fancy's this year isn't it. It always looks bigger in HD. Viva la revolution Fing funny.
i got my 50" panasonic plasma new in a box for $140. th-50px75u, beat that losers. especially you gerald.
My old RCA TV finally died earlier this year, so I walked into Sears, saw a nice 19 inch set for $109, and bought it. No need for humongous screen TVs!
I got a 65" 1080p for $1,599 at best buy.
Yea I got a 52" from Best Buy last year for a good deal. HD is amazing :)
Good to hear so many people correct re: 1080p, which is unless you have a blu-ray dvd player, don't even bother. BUT, if you are one of us weirdos who loves blu-ray movies, let me recommend that you put the Sony Bravia XBR4 on your list. It's just CRAZY. I could spout all the technical stuff on it, but it will just lead to this statement: it makes blu-ray movies more amazing than words can describe. I promise. The new Samsung LN-TXX71 series is on this level as well, but the glossy screen doesn't fit my taste. Happy couch potato-ing!
i'm waiting for a deal on the 52" Toshiba Regza Cinema Series with 120 Hz refresh rate. wow, that TV is killer. probably the nicest LCD on the market right now.
If your looking for the BEST OF THE BEST.... GO WITH .... SONY KDS-R50XBR1 50" GRAND WEGA HD 1080P TV .... I bought this 2 years ago when it first came out. Paid $5000. You can now get it for less then half that now! Its definitely worth it! Dont be fooled and go with anything less then 1080P because it is not TRUE HD and you wont get the same picture as what you think your getting.
My husband (60) and I (57) bought a 60" Sony LCD a year ago at Sam's Club. We had been looking for a long time and when we saw it at Sam's we bought it on the spot. At the time Sam's had a policy if anything ever happened while we owned the TV, they would replace it with a comparable or better TV for free. We thought we had misunderstood, but we got the manager's signature on the receipt and also a brochure reiterating the same policy. We absolutely love it. It was one of the best purchases we have ever made. It is like a movie theater in our home. Sports in HD are incredible. It's like you're there only with perfect seats and weather!
To the person/people who keep stating 720p is not true high definition, I would suggest they go and do some research on the topic. I have a 42" LG 720p that looks great with HD broadcasts (air signal). Standard defintion DVD's (480p) vary in quality, some look good and some are terrible...depends upon what the studio puts out. Unless you're upgrading to BlueRay/HD-DVD or are a serious gamer, I wouldn't sweat the 1080p hype.
carruthers41 i feel sorry for you, i sell t.v.s for a large company and the t.v. you got IS a 1080p unfortunately it cant support a 1080p feed. in fact sony lost a lawsuit regarding this issue on your exact tv. should have gone with the kds-r60xbr2. enjoy your 720p resolution champ.
Am I missing something? Everyone states that you do not need 1080P except for DVDs and gaming? Is there some kind of new technology in the US that I do not know about? Does nobody actually watch movies on DVD or BlueRay? Does nobody there game? I am buying a TV with great picture to watch movies, game, etc. I do not need HD TV or perfect resolution for my fiance to watch Dr. Phil and Oprah.......of course I want the good picture for DVDs....isn't that obvious?
get the 73" mitsubishi 1080 dlp,,,the best,,,,$3000.00
Rule of life....buy who bash things probably can't afford them!!!! I bet 95% of the people who down-talk people who buy HDTVs deep down want one too!!!!
I've learned a tremendous amount on HD's here but I work in hundreds of homes w/ systems from old style tubes to the latest and greatest systems. One client I had told me to wait 'til the "laser ray" tv comes out. Any body hear about it?
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
326 Posted by kardonius2002 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:46PM EDT Report Abuse
I got my 42" Vizio refurbished from MacMall last year for around $700, inc. shipping. There was an $80 manufacturer's rebate involved. To be honest, I'd have been perfectly happy with the 37" I initially bought for $550 (same place).. I had decided on the 37" because the 42" was over $1000 at the time, while a 32" was about 450 (no rebate)... so my decision was almost wholly price based and completely relative (I wanted an LCD TV, I knew it was a good deal, the model had a good review, and the extra $100 was worth the 5 extra inches). The upgrade to 42" was basically an impulse purchase after a deep price cut (5 more inches for 250, instead of 500) so I found someone to sell the 37" to at cost when it was delivered, and bought the 42" that I have now). I also considered that the model got a decent expert and user reviews on Cnet.com... although it is 1080i capable though I'd need an antenna to get that broadcast (Comcast only sends HD signals in 780p). I didn't care about the tuner, since I use a digital cable box/DVR anyway- though it does have one. One thing that also wasn't a dealbreaker for me but is a nice option is that this model has removable speakers (for those planning to use a surround sound system). If I could rationalize paying the cost of the TV all over again to have it wall-mounted ($750, Circuit City), I would definitely prefer my 42" screen or might even think about a larger one... but after researching the cost of having it done (I don't trust mounting 75 lbs of TV and another 75 lbs in wall mount to a DIY job)- and considering I only plan to be in my apt. for about 3 years- I decided to put casters on my TV stand instead ($15, Lowes). Now, if I really want a hi-res, widescreen experience, I can just roll the stand a few feet closer to the sofa... as a result, I probably could have been more than happy with that 32", even with the wasted space in non wide-screen modes. On the plus side, the 42" is *just* big enough to play video games using the picture in picture option in side-by-side mode (about equivalent to a 13" TV, maybe?) while watching something on another channel. If this is an issue for you, 42" or larger is probably the way to go.