AfterDawn: News

Vizio bows out of Plasma TV business

In March, Pioneer announced it was halting Plasma display production and today Vizio has made a similar announcement, putting another nail in the technology's coffin.

The inexpensive HDTV maker has decided to move its focus to LCD sets, and will completely halt its plasma production by the end of the year.



With Vizio and Pioneer bowing out, three major manufacturers remain in the plasma business: LG, Panasonic, and Samsung.

Plasma TV shipments rose 28 percent for the Q4 2008 and were up over 10 percent for the entire year. Despite those statistics, LCD TVs control the market, selling about seven times the amount of plasma sets over a full year.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 12 Feb 2009 20:44

• Previous article

• Free XBL coming for GTA IV: The Lost and Damned downloaders

• Next article

• YouTube goes offline - free and paid downloads

• 26 comments

• ZippyDSM

  So is plasma going out of style for TVs?

  12.2.2009 21:58 #1

• kubapolak

  I hope that the remaining guys will continue providing us with quality products. Although I would rather see only one type to choose from when shopping for TVs. There are just too many articles trying to help you decide plasma or LCD????

  12.2.2009 23:04 #2

• ripxrush

  Plasma had & still has a few drawbacks that LCD doesn't (yes LCD has their own drawbacks) Plasma - more likely to be subject to screen burn in, Plasma life isn't (wasn't) very long (i believe this has been fixed with newer sets) Plasma uses a LOT more energy per Inch over LCD! & that translates into more HEAT in your living room near your HTPC you are tryign to keep cool! A little more picky about mounting positions than the LCD versions! LCD do have back lights that can go out, their contrast ratio was lower than Plasma but are getting much better & those pesky CFL back lights are begin replaced by LED Back lights (more efficient, better contrast ratio, less heat, less likely to burn out)

  13.2.2009 01:40 #3

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by ripxrush: Plasma had & still has a few drawbacks that LCD doesn't (yes LCD has their own drawbacks) Plasma - more likely to be subject to screen burn in, Plasma life isn't (wasn't) very long (i believe this has been fixed with newer sets) Plasma uses a LOT more energy per Inch over LCD! & that translates into more HEAT in your living room near your HTPC you are tryign to keep cool! A little more picky about mounting positions than the LCD versions! LCD do have back lights that can go out, their contrast ratio was lower than Plasma but are getting much better & those pesky CFL back lights are begin replaced by LED Back lights (more efficient, better contrast ratio, less heat, less likely to burn out)Plasma can overheat and build up heat if it gets dusty, LCD is not bad with that, LCD dose have bulbs but can be replaced.

  13.2.2009 01:49 #4

• badmanvan

  Guys
  
  Plasma tech is not a new tech that just arrived last year.....Its been around for many years and the cost in producing these sets are still fairly high compared to LCD...Plasma screens take more energy, heavier, still suffer from screen burn, cant tilt to much...so what did u expect

  13.2.2009 06:00 #5

• emugamer

  meh...still getting my Viera TH46PZ85U in a couple of weeks. Plasma won't die. It's been around for a long time. The companies who can do a good job producing the TV's will continue. LCD is getting better, but still a ways back in terms of picture quality. I've viewed movies on Panasonic plasmas next to Samsung's top LCD line. The difference is definitely noticeable to my eye.
  
  I don't think it's the plasma market alone. Pioneer dropped plasma and is now dropping LCD. It's the economy. Not the technology.

  13.2.2009 06:25 #6

• nervuli

  LCD is very cheap and easy money for companies that's why they're horny about it.
  
  Generally, Plasma TVs tend to be developed and built completely ‘in-house’.
  
  LCD TVs are generally built by using a variety of third-party components, with all the quality assurance issues that entails.
  
  Even more confusingly, LCD TVs are traditionally ‘OEM’d’ –some companies buy them from another manufacturer and simply put their own brand logo on them. So with LCD, the name on the front of the TV screen you buy may not necessarily be the name of the company that built the main part of the product.

  13.2.2009 08:17 #7

• emugamer

  Originally posted by emugamer: meh...still getting my Viera TH46PZ85U in a couple of weeks. Plasma won't die. It's been around for a long time. The companies who can do a good job producing the TV's will continue. LCD is getting better, but still a ways back in terms of picture quality. I've viewed movies on Panasonic plasmas next to Samsung's top LCD line. The difference is definitely noticeable to my eye.
  
  I don't think it's the plasma market alone. Pioneer dropped plasma and is now dropping LCD. It's the economy. Not the technology.Minor change to my post - I meant to say that Pioneer dropped plasma and is also dropping LCD. I'm not sure how that ties into whose name is on the TV. As far as plasma drawbacks, they are pretty much non-existent if you are an owner who knows how to take care of things. You'd have to be an idiot to have burn-in and retention these days. Manufacturers have even built in ways to prevent this. Plasma takes some effort on the users part to care for. Once the phosphors are hardened, everything should be fine. Care should always be taken of any purchase of this price magnitude anyway.

  13.2.2009 08:30 #8

• cult4me

  Bring on the laser TV, this will be the newest tech for TV's in the future as soon as the technology becomes cheaper you will see them flood the market as did the LCD's

  13.2.2009 10:41 #9

• pirkster

  Originally posted by ripxrush: Plasma had & still has a few drawbacks that LCD doesn't (yes LCD has their own drawbacks) Plasma - more likely to be subject to screen burn in, Plasma life isn't (wasn't) very long (i believe this has been fixed with newer sets) Plasma uses a LOT more energy per Inch over LCD! & that translates into more HEAT in your living room near your HTPC you are tryign to keep cool! A little more picky about mounting positions than the LCD versions! LCD do have back lights that can go out, their contrast ratio was lower than Plasma but are getting much better & those pesky CFL back lights are begin replaced by LED Back lights (more efficient, better contrast ratio, less heat, less likely to burn out)Not sure where you're getting your "facts" from, but plasma has a higher contrast ration than LCD. Also a better picture.
  
  Heat/power consumption is true, but burn in is no longer an issue. And, they do last just as long or longer than LCDs (not sure where you dreampt up that little tidbit, either.)
  
  If folks are going to decide to no longer make them, it's purely because of cost to manufacture. Because, the best plasmas still produce the very best picture you can get, bar none.

  13.2.2009 12:45 #10

• Xplorer4

  Burn in is still an issue. I just got a Vizio 50 inch plasma 2 months ago, brand new, and already have some minor burn in from a stationary image on the screen for about 20 minutes one day. This isnt meant to degrade plasma as I like plasma over LCD. I just feel Vizio makes a cheap product. You get what you pay for phrase comes to mind here.

  13.2.2009 14:48 #11

• blueroad

  hmm...for now i can live with my 46 inch CRT..it may be big at it shows pictures..hopefully wen OLED or laser technology wud b cheaper then plasma and LCD wud b too and that will be the time i will buy one..hav relly high hopes for OLED tho..if they can jus make a bigger screen this decade tht wud b nice

  13.2.2009 15:48 #12

• imnomyth

  Quote:Originally posted by ripxrush: Plasma had & still has a few drawbacks that LCD doesn't (yes LCD has their own drawbacks) Plasma - more likely to be subject to screen burn in, Plasma life isn't (wasn't) very long (i believe this has been fixed with newer sets) Plasma uses a LOT more energy per Inch over LCD! & that translates into more HEAT in your living room near your HTPC you are tryign to keep cool! A little more picky about mounting positions than the LCD versions! LCD do have back lights that can go out, their contrast ratio was lower than Plasma but are getting much better & those pesky CFL back lights are begin replaced by LED Back lights (more efficient, better contrast ratio, less heat, less likely to burn out)Not sure where you're getting your "facts" from, but plasma has a higher contrast ration than LCD. Also a better picture.
  
  Heat/power consumption is true, but burn in is no longer an issue. And, they do last just as long or longer than LCDs (not sure where you dreampt up that little tidbit, either.)
  
  If folks are going to decide to no longer make them, it's purely because of cost to manufacture. Because, the best plasmas still produce the very best picture you can get, bar none.As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.

  13.2.2009 19:11 #13

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Quote:Originally posted by ripxrush: Plasma had & still has a few drawbacks that LCD doesn't (yes LCD has their own drawbacks) Plasma - more likely to be subject to screen burn in, Plasma life isn't (wasn't) very long (i believe this has been fixed with newer sets) Plasma uses a LOT more energy per Inch over LCD! & that translates into more HEAT in your living room near your HTPC you are tryign to keep cool! A little more picky about mounting positions than the LCD versions! LCD do have back lights that can go out, their contrast ratio was lower than Plasma but are getting much better & those pesky CFL back lights are begin replaced by LED Back lights (more efficient, better contrast ratio, less heat, less likely to burn out)Not sure where you're getting your "facts" from, but plasma has a higher contrast ration than LCD. Also a better picture.
  
  Heat/power consumption is true, but burn in is no longer an issue. And, they do last just as long or longer than LCDs (not sure where you dreampt up that little tidbit, either.)
  
  If folks are going to decide to no longer make them, it's purely because of cost to manufacture. Because, the best plasmas still produce the very best picture you can get, bar none.As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.Plasma is better at mid and high range only the high range LCDs seem to be able to keep up, but with prices falling and changing I would have to say warranty and stats of the device would be more important.

  13.2.2009 19:14 #14

• nervuli

  Quote:BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.Everybody who takes a part on blind test chooses plasma display for the best picture. So yeah you're right!

  14.2.2009 02:02 #15

• Xplorer4

  Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.

  14.2.2009 08:06 #16

• emugamer

  Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  The "shorter" lifespan you speak of is negligible. I guess if 20-30 years is too short for you, then yes, that would suck. Longevity is between 30,000 and 60,000 hours - lower to higher end. Let's see, if you watch TV 10 hours a day every day, and you want your TV to last more than 8 years, then you should avoid plasma. You should also buy stock in your electric company.

  14.2.2009 13:24 #17

• ZippyDSM

  DP!!DP!!DP!!!!!
  >>

  14.2.2009 14:06 #18

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  The "shorter" lifespan you speak of is negligible. I guess if 20-30 years is too short for you, then yes, that would suck. Longevity is between 30,000 and 60,000 hours - lower to higher end. Let's see, if you watch TV 10 hours a day every day, and you want your TV to last more than 8 years, then you should avoid plasma. You should also buy stock in your electric company.sick im emu!! :P

  14.2.2009 14:06 #19

• emugamer

  Quote:Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  The "shorter" lifespan you speak of is negligible. I guess if 20-30 years is too short for you, then yes, that would suck. Longevity is between 30,000 and 60,000 hours - lower to higher end. Let's see, if you watch TV 10 hours a day every day, and you want your TV to last more than 8 years, then you should avoid plasma. You should also buy stock in your electric company.sick im emu!! :Plol....I apologize ahead of time if I'm coming off as rude.
  
  As for better picture being a matter of opinion, that is totally true. But one can't dispute the actual visual difference. Deeper colors, darker blacks, better refresh rate cannot be disputed. If one doesn't like deeper, richer colors, then one would probably pick LCD over plasma. Not being able to tell the difference is a bigger issue altogether.

  14.2.2009 14:50 #20

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Quote:Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  The "shorter" lifespan you speak of is negligible. I guess if 20-30 years is too short for you, then yes, that would suck. Longevity is between 30,000 and 60,000 hours - lower to higher end. Let's see, if you watch TV 10 hours a day every day, and you want your TV to last more than 8 years, then you should avoid plasma. You should also buy stock in your electric company.sick im emu!! :Plol....I apologize ahead of time if I'm coming off as rude.
  
  As for better picture being a matter of opinion, that is totally true. But one can't dispute the actual visual difference. Deeper colors, darker blacks, better refresh rate cannot be disputed. If one doesn't like deeper, richer colors, then one would probably pick LCD over plasma. Not being able to tell the difference is a bigger issue altogether.

  14.2.2009 14:53 #21

• Xplorer4

  Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  It was indeed a new tv, just got it before x-mas, but the burn in happened after the 100 hour break in, so i stand by my statement.
  
  I was/am aware of the still image thing, just got distracted and wasnt able to turn the tv off. Plus the image wasnt completely stationary. It was actually the dvd menu for the tv show Weeds that caused the minor burn in. It only noticeable at close range and during the right conditions.

  14.2.2009 15:26 #22

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  It was indeed a new tv, just got it before x-mas, but the burn in happened after the 100 hour break in, so i stand by my statement.
  
  I was/am aware of the still image thing, just got distracted and wasnt able to turn the tv off. Plus the image wasnt completely stationary. It was actually the dvd menu for the tv show Weeds that caused the minor burn in. It only noticeable at close range and during the right conditions.when you get it? and when was the TV made?

  14.2.2009 15:29 #23

• emugamer

  Quote:Quote:Quote:Originally posted by imnomyth: As Xplorer4 mentioned, burn IS still a minor issue with plasma. I will concede that plasma is brighter, maybe a SLIGHTLY sharper image, but LCD is the way to go. Plasma lifespan is shorter, and when they do go, they're dead, unlike lcd's which as stated have bulbs that can be replaced. BETTER picture is a matter of opinion.
  I think the burn in is mainly a factor on lower end plasmas. Vizzio sells cheap tvs because they use cheap parts it seems.Burn in should not be an issue if you've taken the right precautions. Not all plasmas require this, as I've read on many forums, but it's still a good idea to do a 100 hour break in. If you bought a plasma, then you should be aware that you need to take precautions to not keep still images up for 20 minutes when the plasma is new. The phosphors have not hardened. Don't play movies in letterbox until you've broken in the television. Full screen everything for a while. Download a break-in DVD and run that on and off when you get time. It cycles through colors for seconds at a time, breaking in the display.
  
  It was indeed a new tv, just got it before x-mas, but the burn in happened after the 100 hour break in, so i stand by my statement.
  
  I was/am aware of the still image thing, just got distracted and wasnt able to turn the tv off. Plus the image wasnt completely stationary. It was actually the dvd menu for the tv show Weeds that caused the minor burn in. It only noticeable at close range and during the right conditions.Sorry for your loss man. So how bad is it? Is it permanent burn in or retention? Did you get a warranty with it? I guess there is no recourse with Vizio, but if you got a 3rd party warranty, then you can probably get it fixed or replaced. Where did you buy it from? I was looking into the service net warranty's that Newegg offers on Plasmas.

  14.2.2009 17:58 #24

• Xplorer4

  Quote:Sorry for your loss man. So how bad is it? Is it permanent burn in or retention? Did you get a warranty with it? I guess there is no recourse with Vizio, but if you got a 3rd party warranty, then you can probably get it fixed or replaced. Where did you buy it from? I was looking into the service net warranty's that Newegg offers on Plasmas.Well I didnt buy it, it was moving in present from my dad. I imagine he got it at circuit city. I actually looked again yesterday to see if it was there and i think it has faded away. It was only visible on bright screens if you stood mere inches from the tv and looked at it from the side.
  
  If it were up to me I would have gotten a 57 inch Panasonic. The salesman at CC really put it over big time. Which doesnt suprise me from a sales men, but then I read the reviews and they pretty much confirmed all the hyoe he had given it.

  15.2.2009 09:50 #25

• emugamer

  Quote:Quote:Sorry for your loss man. So how bad is it? Is it permanent burn in or retention? Did you get a warranty with it? I guess there is no recourse with Vizio, but if you got a 3rd party warranty, then you can probably get it fixed or replaced. Where did you buy it from? I was looking into the service net warranty's that Newegg offers on Plasmas.Well I didnt buy it, it was moving in present from my dad. I imagine he got it at circuit city. I actually looked again yesterday to see if it was there and i think it has faded away. It was only visible on bright screens if you stood mere inches from the tv and looked at it from the side.
  
  If it were up to me I would have gotten a 57 inch Panasonic. The salesman at CC really put it over big time. Which doesnt suprise me from a sales men, but then I read the reviews and they pretty much confirmed all the hyoe he had given it.Well, glad it faded away. And just to clarify, it wasn't burn-in. Burn in is permanent damage. You just had image retention, which will resolve itself over time. I found it odd that 20 minutes would cause burn in. Thanks for clearing that up. Glad it's all sorted out. Regardless of model, a new TV is still a big investment.
  
  The Panasonics get great reviews. They are defintely the authority on plasmas IMO.

  17.2.2009 08:01 #26