Why are LCDs more popular than plasma?

Like most absolute universal statements, Stevecham and Soundqcar, overstate the case. Some plasmas do movies better than some LCD. I doubt either is qualified to make such absolute universal judgements.

In my experinece, the advantages of plasma are size and price; the advantages of LCD are lower weight and power consumption. The top of the line units of either technology have splendid picture quality if viewed from a position reasonably in front of the set.

db

I like the plasma as well and IMO the only choice is the Pioneer Elite, a little pricey- but worth every penny.

Dbphd...

I've had both...and currently have both. Pioneer Kuro,Samsung LCD.

You can pontificate all you like, I am speaking from experience with both formats.

I was simply tired of listening to people make assumptions towards Plasma, when it's readily apparent they don't have the first clue what they're talking about.

Yeah, Soundqcar, that's was exactly I was talking about: universal conclusions from particular premises.

db

I completely agree with the original poster. Plasma's image quality is so much better than LCD (and DLP) that there is hardly even a discussion. Colors are so much more vivid, contrast is so much better, blacks. If you want that "looking through a window" experience, then plasma is the only option.

Not to say that LCDs don't have their place, though. Airport monitors, business presentation screens, and that sort of a thing is better with LCD because of the image retention/burn-in issues with static images. In a HT though, it's either plasma, or front projection for bigger sizes.