AfterDawn: Tech news

Laser TV billed as "death of plasma"

Written by Ben Reid @ 11 Oct 2006 1:01 User comments (73)

Laser TV billed as "death of plasma" Australian firm Arasor International and its US partner Novalux have unveiled what they see as the next revolution in visual technology - the world's first laser television which is poised to be half the price, twice as good, and consume a fraction of the electricity of conventional plasma and LCD TVs.
Manufacturing firm Arasor produces a special chip, the unique optoelectronic chip which is central to the laser projection device being developed by Novalux.

And according to the Herald Sun, when displayed beside a conventional 50 inch plasma TV, the Mitsubishi-manufactured prototype does appear brighter and clearer than its "older" rival.

Worldwide retail of the new TV's - which will launch under well-known brands such as Samsung and Mitsubishi - is scheduled for the close of '07, with prices expected to be below $1,000 U.S.

Novalux chief exec. Jean-Michel Pelaprat boldly predicted that while LCD TVs would come to dominate the market below 40 inches, an end is in sight for the plasma televison. "If you look at any screen today, the colour content is roughly about 30-35 per cent of what the eye can see," he said. "But for the very first time with a laser TV we'll be able to see 90 per cent of what the eye can see.

"All of a sudden what you see is a lifelike image on display. Combine that with energy efficiency, price advantage and the fact that the laser TVs will be half the weight and depth of plasma TVS, and,"
Mr Pelaprat says "plasma is now something of the past."

Herald Sun
CNet Asia

Previous Next  

73 user comments

111.10.2006 13:07

"death of plasma" Nahhhh...

211.10.2006 13:10

Haha Rav. Would be bad news for you after you've spent thousands on plasma TVs :) I think it's extremely interesting. I will look forward to developments.

311.10.2006 13:39

Half the price?? $1000 for a 50"??? Sounds a bit off. A 50" plasma that is any good will cost around $6000 or so. The concept is interesting though. I would like to see one of these things in person.

411.10.2006 13:51

Hmmm more effient, better picture, and cheaper... budbye plasma

511.10.2006 14:10

thats one to watch for the future

611.10.2006 14:18

Wow, that is pretty awesome, my family is remodeling our house so the only hd-tv in my house is the one I bought, Its a CRT so i guess you would say its nothing "special" (Im a college student and cant afford to go paying thousands for a flat tv) but im looking forward to one of these puppies in the main room when we finish remodeling!

711.10.2006 14:26

There are/will be problems that are not yet known. It is inevitable with any new image technology. Although, the prospect is admittedly very interesting. I wonder how long it will be before I can by a laser monitor for my pc though.... Drool. There are still a lot of factors to be analyzed though. Calibration issues, burn in, response time in ms, size limitations, etc. Overall, it sounds like a great new technology to explore. That, and it's lasers man, LASERS! lol. But seriously. Anyone who says they can beat out the current HD market dominator, and for a fraction of the price is crazy. Anyone who actually comes out with a product to do so deserves a listen. I'm curious to see where this new technology goes. I'd give up my unit in a few years if bigger laser image units were available for a reasonable price. Heck, I'm just worried about reliability, but if major companies start doing this, and we get products from Sony, Panasonic, etc.... I could go for that. But hey, it's a fast moving market, who knows what's coming down the pipe.

811.10.2006 14:31

JaguarGod, they can be found if you look hard enough :)

- but remember, at this early stage, nothing is certain ;)

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 11 Oct 2006 @ 2:32

911.10.2006 14:40

hmm sounds about like vhs, sale as much as possible, then release dvd's sale as much as possible, then release hd-dvd's/blue-ray, sale as much as possible, now tv's are in on it to sheesh, I still want one though :)

1011.10.2006 14:40

hmm sounds about like vhs, sale as much as possible, then release dvd's sale as much as possible, then release hd-dvd's/blue-ray, sale as much as possible, now tv's are in on it to sheesh, I still want one though :)

1111.10.2006 14:40

This TV looks so awesome! Half the price and half the electricity! This thing is going to be sweet!

1211.10.2006 15:50

If this Novalux laser TV turns out to be better and cheaper as Mr.Pelaprat claims, I believe that the asking price for the Plasma as well as the HDTV will be reduced greatly, we have to wait and see, I sure will keep an eye out for it…

1311.10.2006 15:51

I also heard about this a while ago. It just bothers the heck out of me that is it the SED that's going to be the death of plasma and lcd or LASER? I seriouly like SED better though.

1411.10.2006 16:03

very intersting, sorry Rav, you should have stuck with LCD, lol

1511.10.2006 16:22

This sounds like what I have been waiting for. Someone I know that repairs TV's, including the plasma and LCD, told me to hold off on buying anything yet, that there would be a new tecnology coming out soon that would be superior than what is out now. I will be putting one of those 45-50 inch in my new family room for sure.

1611.10.2006 16:32

@Lethal_B - Nice find, $1500 for a decent branded 50" Plasma TV! I read something that said Plasmas burn-in (The ghosting look that happens if you play games etc. on a TV too long, mainly common on projection TVs.) is pretty fast compared to Projection TVs, I wonder if the laser tvs will solve the "Burn-In" problem.

1711.10.2006 16:37

Just remember they are already working on the next gen dvd virtual dvd or something like that and will it be flat enough too be like a movie screen on the wall. I think this is awsome they are one step closer too those nifty gadgets they used in earth final conflict where the screen was so thin you pulled one side and it ziped out.

1811.10.2006 16:41

I also heard about this a while ago. It just bothers the heck out of me that the LSD that's going to be the death of plasma and lcd or LASER,SED? I seriouly like LSD better though. whhoooo haaaaaa

1911.10.2006 18:52

I never thought plasma TVs would last, it would just be a matter of time until someone found a new technology to replace it, since plasma displays are so inefficient.

2011.10.2006 19:42

damn. now all my 65 inch rear projection needs to do is last another 2 years...

2111.10.2006 19:46

Thats really amazing. Right now I have 50" Samsung DLP. It was my next best choice other than plasma. Plasma TV's are way to expensive & the threat of image burn-in is a big turn off. DLP quality is much better than LCD, but just imagine everyone that we can get a larger TV in size & produces better resolution than plasma for under a $1000. I think they summed itn up best when they said "the death of plasma".

2211.10.2006 20:06

I'm waiting till around 2010 to buy an HDTV. By then everything should be sorted out and prices should be cheaper.

2311.10.2006 22:01

a can picture myself with one of those with a ps3 hmmm

2411.10.2006 23:20

the coolest thing about these laser tvs i think is that fact that you can see 90% of colors but with plasma and stuff you could only see 30-35%. everyone said that a plasma tv was like looking out your window, but these lasers will be so much better in color quality that it actually will be like looking out your window.

2511.10.2006 23:38

i got the new Sony 60 inch SXRD and the picture quality is amazing. it uses a Silicon based bulb. i can't see the laser being that much better

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 12 Oct 2006 @ 11:02

2612.10.2006 00:12

Not marketable... yet Sounds great... Unless you have seen an organic screen in person. I think this is an amazing step, but they are touting spec projections that they will not recieve. The HD world is just settling down from the three major HDTV types. If developers design something to display 1080p, then that is what you will get... period. So, if a TV has 80 billion pixel def... it still does nothing. It all still means little to me. I can see EVERYTHING that is currently offered. I have a 1080p TV. I have and HD player and a Blu-ray. Until You can get the rest of the world on board, you are hosed, peeps. But it is coo. heehee

2712.10.2006 06:13

Good work by us aussies for once in the TV department. Plasmas look like sh*t as it is compared to LCD's, il'd like to see the comparision now between the laser and plasma.

2812.10.2006 06:45

I just hope this thing is actually safe to view. I would be skeptical until long term tests are done. There isn't a single laser out there (grocery scanners, media players, etc.) that doesn't come with some kind of warning attached. If there is any kind of degradation or flaw in the screen, or even radiation from a defective unit - this could be a very unsafe technology for repeated use. I see it as more a death blow to DLP technology than the high end plasma though, since DLP caters to the low-end bargain shopper. Especially if the laser viewing angles are as poor as DLPs - then it's a better picture with the same strengths (cheap) and weaknesses (poor angles) as DLP. LCoS and Plasma are far superior to DLP already, and another player at DLP prices would just be the final nail in the coffin for DLP.

2912.10.2006 07:07

Plasma is the best on market RIGHT NOW!!!

plasma look like shit compared to LCD [quote/] so not true! i was shopping for a TV last year for at least 4 months (was raising the money at the time) and i can say that allot of then (plasma) look pretty bad, but not all, i can say that i got one of the best TV, Hitachi 42HDF52 .... 42" that display 1080i, you can compare this tv with any LCD and then you who is the real shit, i can watch on this tv in any angle of a room. Just the best picture ever on its category. Not the best sound though, but i have H.T. that is what make all the work babe... until you guys wait for the next technology i'll enjoy today’s tech, and tomorrow you never know, maybe i'll upgrade too but thats is in about 2 to 3 years, so you know what just bring to PS3 and I’ll be all set. Even that i'm already happy with my Xbox360.

3012.10.2006 07:54

i prefer holding slides in front of a fire and projecting them onto cave walls, but thats just me.

3112.10.2006 08:34

Been 4 or so years since I speculated that although plasmas are a decent technology, they will die really hard. Practically speaking.........EVERY flat panel monitor for a computer is LCD and it is just not going to happen where the world will turn towards plasmas as a standard when all the manufacturers have to do is change the size of LCDs rather than change to plasmas. LCDs have longer life, can be brighter, higher resolution, viewable from extreme angles (plasmas too I guess) so peeps that buy plasmas I think are wasting their money in a dying technology. These laser TVs look awesome and the technology makes sense because if anyone has watched a laser-light show then one can see the possibilities.

3212.10.2006 09:07

I knew something of this scale was going to happen because the risk of a Plasma dont out weight the reward for getting it.

3312.10.2006 09:16

That sound awsome. More competition means better tv for all of us, means less money to pay, and more technologies emegin, hey if that doesnt sound exciting, then i dont know what does? Yeah baby.

3412.10.2006 10:58

Pop_Smith since games are like movies now adays isn't burn in almost a myth? well I guess game suse a slightly different way to interface with a TV thus could burn in,I mena if you pause a CGI movie or any movie long enough wouldn't that burn in? punt my arse up to speed please :P

3512.10.2006 11:01

SED will owned plasma,lcd and laser tvs.

3612.10.2006 12:35

SED: best display you'll never see... Laser display INTRODUCTORY prices expected to be below $1,000 U.S. Laser displays will win. Duh. Hope they can adapt the technology to projection systems.

3712.10.2006 13:17

Wtf is SED?

Spellcheck is a nice invention.
Using BitVomit hurts the swarm your in, get a decent client.

4012.10.2006 19:08

sed is a new display that'll come out.
here noob
Can laser beat
contrast ratio of 100,000:1
50,000:1 contrast ratio
1ms response time
Brightness of 450 nits
CAN IT. CAN anything beat this TV?????? no i didn't think so so STFU noob.
The noob part is a joke. just watched south park.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 12 Oct 2006 @ 7:34

4212.10.2006 22:19

SED seem fishy, especially these specs...

contrast ratio of 100,000:1 50,000:1 contrast ratio
Now, I may not be considered a "smart man" (WTF! #$(( yes I am), but this seems just slightly contradictory.

4312.10.2006 22:29

Can't beat a good plasma right now IMO.

Thoose SED TV's look an interesting concept, however since its too early, you can't claim stuff like this:

SED will owned plasma,lcd and laser tvs.

Yours Truly; Rav
BitTorrent Safety Guide:
Free Security Software:
The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month. - Fyodor Dostoevsky

4413.10.2006 07:38

SED is a GREAT idea but not practical to manufacture, too expensive, a looooong way from practical implementation and simply just not going to happen inside 10-12 years. So STOP saying "STFU noob" you rude P.O.S. and have a little respect for those who oppose you in recognising that this ain't gonna happen ANYTIME soon. When buying a's important to realise that it's for the IMMEDIATE future and will become obsolete within 10(ish) years. But I guess the rude P.O.S. is buying televisions based on what they will be doing and where they will be living and their tastes, personalities and preferences 10 or 20 years from now. Hey while you're buying a tv for the future.........would you let me know what the winning lottery numbers are then too so I can pay someone to track you down and kick you in the A$$ for being a prick?

4513.10.2006 10:10

Can't beat a good plasma right now IMO.

Thoose SED TV's look an interesting concept, however since its too early, you can't claim stuff like this:
Sorry Rav, but plasmas are on the way out, LCDs are taking over, although i cant see any real visible difference besides knowing that plasmas have some ghosting later in their life, but if i had 3 42inch plasmas, i wouldnt care either :)

4613.10.2006 11:26

simply just not going to happen inside 10-12 years

Toshiba's president announced the company plans to begin full production of 55" SED TVs in July 2007.
The technology has been in development since 1987.

4715.10.2006 08:34

I don't care what is the best. Most of what is on TV or on DVD isn't worth watching anyway, so I myself cannot see spending all that money to watch trash. But I think I would buy a laser to watch sports on.

4815.10.2006 09:26

I doubt anything will beat my Runco CRT projection system. Laser might replace it due to ease of use and daylight watching but the pure visual impact of CRT projection IS home theater.

4915.10.2006 09:35

Every thing is evolving these laser tv's are just another step to full 3d VR tv's and holodecks yes i am a sifi geek but just think whats going to be selling in 50 years from now long way from a big wood box with a BW Round screen with 2 channels witch is only 50 years ago

5015.10.2006 10:55

Well here we go again! Just as I am about to purchase something, Along comes something better! So if in a year when I get the LASER TV , what will be announced then? Hollographic Tv's? They have holographic disks now for storage, so why not. I guess if the price is decent I will do it. But for now I will stay with my good ol flat screen till it dies, Then I will upgrade. Cheers on the Ausies for coming up with some new technoligy though, Good on ya.

5115.10.2006 12:05

the next step would be SED or at the least a format that has the size of plasma,lazer,LCD but the clearlity and ressulion of CRT *yawns*

5215.10.2006 12:21

sorry for my ignorance..but what does SED stand for?

5315.10.2006 12:24 m well sced anyway *L* might be to hard/costly to mass produce tho.

5415.10.2006 12:25

LOL N/M I guess I should read the whole forum...I got it now.

5515.10.2006 21:57

About 7 years ago, I went to work for an Audio Visual company. Plasma was just coming out. Far too expensive for the most sophisticated Board Room and only for rich folks. The "real" primary market was directed to "Point of Sale" kiosh monitors for buildings. The industry wanted to put them in every airport and into every hotel and shopping mall. This is where they quickly learned about burn in. They even put in special features on some units that "shut down" OR went to safe mode after so many minutes of a static picture. The colors would reverse to prevent burn in. It would stay that way until "awakened" with new data. Never really worked, and walking through some areas looking at negative images, was like a scene in some of those spooky new age Sci Fi movies. Most people did not know that the glass screen on plasma limited the size because of production problems. The breakage percentage of just getting the things to market was very high. You cannot ship a plasma on its flat side. The center weight will flex and break the honey comb screen. Technology was refining the LCD. At first there were too many coming off the lines with dead pixels. For several years, the cost of producing any thing larger than 15 inches was way too high. PC mag now says that the LCD will dominate the PC market with 15" screens and above and the CRT is on the way out. Like most, I still have a projection 52" TV. Never have been able to keep the RBG aligned. I would like to pose a question to the forum. I have RR cable TV. At first I got good or fair reception. Then I started to get very poor reception. I had the cable company come out several times, and they said it was nothing wrong. I get extremely sharp images when I use the DVD, and even old tapes. Every time they come out, they try to push me to the new "digital" signal. They say it is analog now. Then they say my set is already set up for HD, and I need to buy the HD package. I can't see spending the extra 10 bucks for the digital. Seriously, I think they have deliberately lowered the signal quality to force you in to purchasing the digital, which we should already have in the TV package. Comments? Meanwhile, I will start saving my money for the new laser tv. By that time the $600 bulb in my projection TV will dim or blow and it will be time to move on. Tejas

5616.10.2006 01:17

i have a plasma tv and the picture is very good with dvd or digital hd signals but not so good with standard signals, it has trouble showing black levels but not noticable on most shows, they are still developing leps a british invention that has all the advantages of plasma with the contrast of crt, i think samsung has a working 42" model available.

5716.10.2006 01:51

Personally I can't wait for the laser tv to come out because even if it's more than advertised it's still going to force prices down on the stuff that's already been coming down. :)

Spellcheck is a nice invention.
Using BitVomit hurts the swarm your in, get a decent client.

5816.10.2006 03:41

What about Helio?? Somewhat like a holograph a bit expensive $20,000, but you can manipulate the image by sticking your finger in the stream and moving it around. Check it out on youtube just type Helio for your search...

5916.10.2006 10:48

Honestly, I was never a huge fan of plasma or projection... Burn in was always a problem(With one or two very expensive exceptions).

I am interested to see if laser tv gets around that. Although the trick here honestly isn't that they need a better product than plasma, it's trying to *match* the product for a cheaper price, and if companies stick to that, it should be very achievable. Plasma is honestly an impractical technology; and while there are some VERY nice plasma televisions available, I'm just shocked they made it this far.

As for someone's mention of video games having no burn in problems anymore; I'm not sure if they got a simple response, so here's an easy one: When you're running through the trenches of killzone, do you not see your health, selected weapon, ammo, and stamina in the corners the entire time? When you're racing online in Forza Motorsport or Gran Turismo, do you not see your odometer constantly, as well as your position, etc? This is all it takes to burn in portions of your screen. It's more likely on projection televisions than plasma, but is still a reality on plasma.

I'm not going to pretend this is for everybody, because it's not. But I personally use a Sony CRT HDTV, because CRT is so unlikely to get burn in, and still has great color range. But I have the space, and got a steal on it.

Anyways, I do look forward to seeing how this affects the market. I don't know how much capacity plasma really has to go down in price, because it's not a simple product to manufacture, so it may phase out. And for those who are thinking that the technology of plasma is invincible as number one, let's recall, it's not really been here all that long, compared to other image technologies, it's still a baby...

"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim

6016.10.2006 10:58

thats what I wanted to know tis the stable images that are constant that burn in,so Ok I get it *L*

Is there not a way to build the that dont burn in?
Or a way to reset/flash the screen?

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 16 Oct 2006 @ 10:58

Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.

6116.10.2006 15:53

to ZIppy, Thers's nothing you can do realy apart from ( in the UK at least ) get rid the the crappy " RED BUTTON " logos. I heard that some companies ( Sony for one ) hift the image 1 pixel every few minutes. Seeing as until recently Samsung made the screens for Sony they might do the same. but basically if it were possible to stop it, it would have been done by now. Oh and to tejasmed, That's why Pioneer's ( and others )use plastic screens now. As for Laser TV , well Pioneer boast there TV's have got billions of colours( It's thought the eye can see about 10 miilion in one image) . Now it might not be able to display that many in one frame, but to show 90%? For that you need a source that is capable of showing that. Note that, at single layer at least, both BR ( 25 gig at mpeg 2, less compression than HDDVD ) and 15 gig ( mpeg 4, more compression but very effcient )a film takes up most of that. So to show 90% continuously will neeed HUGE amount of data. But if it works as they say ( does anything actually do that nowadays ) ? Then fair play and my name is on the list. But for now my LCD is fine, and look forward to SED.

6216.10.2006 16:20

snige Come on do you really think they would put soemthign into them to fix the burn in if it was 20-50% of the price? Plus they can sell more even if its at a discount,I know I am being overly asinine over saying that *L* Wait I thought both BR and HD use MP2 and MP4?

6316.10.2006 18:32

We can enjoy what we can get today or wait for better. Of course we may die before we decide. I prefer to enjoy today and maybe upgrade tomorrow. No point in arguing. It doesn't get us anywhere.

6416.10.2006 18:44

xpaphil Since I will never have a GF I have to argue wif someone 0-o

6520.10.2006 03:31

According to toshiba, There is no known product.on the market They have a screen that rivels plasma & lcd , the dying breed, apparently.. what is it with wrap,s ,roll away.

6620.10.2006 04:39

SED (and OLED for that matter) look very interesting but I expect it'll not be around and being pushed until the Olympics in 2008 (and even then the early talk of cheaper prices will be offset by the move to even larger average screen sizes than the current LCD/Plasma - 50" is planned IIRC - to maintain high margins and milk the usual early adopting crew.).

Also one must remember SED is a fixed resolution system like LCD or Plasma, meaning although a lovely 1080p (currently native res of SED) signal will look as good as the best CRT's, anything below that like 480p or i (or 720p?) will look much worst than an SD or HD CRT (and no matter how much we choose to ignore it we'll all be watching a lot of SD TV for quite some time yet).

SED cannot be made multi-sync either due to its display having thousands of mini firing guns.

It's very interesting and very impressive but it isn't the answer necessarily to all of our needs.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 20 Oct 2006 @ 4:40

6723.10.2006 02:23

For all its worth , whitch is the best or worst in high definetion and reception in all that is availabe too all ,all over the world,
Be it lcd or plasma ,Overhead & or rear projection. Where you all have point off, enough is enough.
How bad is your vision that you forgot(mentally or memories)
What is good enough in vision , view too accept that we will never be up to date with teckno tripping into the next genaration of/.
What the fu@k is next . < that is not swearing,, it is a understanding.


6823.10.2006 05:25

Owitis it's true tech will always change (if not necessarily improve).
But the big advances in resolution are almost over.
We're at the point of 'transparency' with 35mm movie film now in many instances and 70mm film (IMax) is not such a leap.

The means of it's presentation (type and screen size) and the audio accompanying it (HD 22.2 sound?) may change
but for watching movies we're very very close to a true cinema standard in your home.

I posted this on another thread, you might like a look, it might interest you -

For 35mm film we are, at 1080p, in most instances, at the point of 'transparency' with the master.

You can't just keep upping resolution and expecting better results cos after a certain point (which we are very close to now) you just end up with the grains breaking up and 'noise'.

I've nicked this from elsewhere, I hope it helps -

It's all to do with scanning the movies and grain sizes.

2k Telecine is common (the other 'standard is 4k, usually for VFX too) apparantly grains tend to break up much above 2k.
see this -

2k is used for 1080p = transparent as many movies are processed at 2k.
This is an interesting page that compares the scan quality of various resolutions. It's actually for comparing digital cameras to film frame detail, but it's very interesting, and seems to suggest 4000dpi is commonly used, while 8000dpi is approaching the diffraction limit (ie where no more detail is possible to capture - only noise).
That said, he states he is using Velvia film, which is a film with one of the lowest amounts of grain possible, so the figures he gives are definitely upper limits.
In other words, 2000dpi would probably be more than sufficient for normal film and scanning at lower resolutions, such as 720p or 1080p.

Even if another even larger HD format arrives, there wouldn't really be any point transferring 35mm movies to anything larger than 1080p.

They would have to start filming on 70mm (imax) to go any higher.
Even at 1080p you'll see lots of grain and resolution breaking up with 35mm.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 23 Oct 2006 @ 9:41

6923.10.2006 08:50

Tech never changes.... Pfffft.

Seriously though, the advances in resolution are about to become very negligible. For the common individual with a television under 48" it's getting pretty hard to tell the difference. A lot of people can't tell between 720p and 1080p as it is; but if they try to go any higher, I firmly believe that people won't be able to tell the difference at all. It would require nicer equipment than most studios use to film with right now. I don't know how likely it is to see them upgrade that any time soon. (Although I wouldn't mind seeing shrek 3 in a theatre at 2000p, but that's a slightly bigger screen, lol.)

Really though, anything higher tan 1080p is going to be pretty futile for the general masses, for a lot of users that's already true of the current HD era. A shame too, because they're missing a lot!

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 23 Oct 2006 @ 8:51

"Its not stupid, its advanced!" - The Almighty Tallest, Invader Zim

7023.10.2006 09:45

Exactly Handsom.

Unless you have a screen supporting true 1080p (native resolution of 1920x1080) it's meaningless anyway.

The same applies to small screens (and for 1080p to mean much you are talking over 42").

Not that it'll stop people convincing themselves that they see vast differences (not when you've been only too willing to help a sales guy convince you out of £2k+ :lol: )

For anything more the whole industry needs new gear (and as yet there's precious little sign of anyone broadcasting in anything other than 720p/1080i for a long time to come - Sky and the BBC's brand new service which only started this summer for instance is firmly in the 720p/1080i camp and will be for years).

7123.10.2006 10:29

Still on a 27" tube myself... I picked it up 6 years ago for 185 bucks. I'll wait till it goes and buy another one!

7230.8.2012 04:27
Unverified new user

lol, 6 year old thread. wow times have changed, i just bought a 60" led tv for 1400 hundo.

7330.8.2012 05:01

Yea, I bought a 42" Cinema (£2 glasses) 3D 1080p set to watch the 2012 Olympics in 3D for £300 which is as good if not better than my expensive other big brand TV's !

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive