LCD vs Plasma: The Truth Behind the Flat Screen Battle
According to the 2006 Nielson study, cited in USA Today, an average American family watches about 8 hours and 14 minutes of television a day. Clearly, since the days of turning knobs for volume and channels have vanished, the hours spent in front of this tube have only increased. It’s almost sad to say that the days of referring to the television set as a tube are also numbered because let’s face it- a flat screen is just beautiful.
Yes, beautiful, because now unlike the regular CRTs (Cathode Ray Tube) that we have grown up with, we have our HDTVs- sleek, shiny models that mock the bulky sets of black boxes sitting on tables about to fall due to accruing layers of dust. It’s not 
as if we can even walk into
The two most popular types of televisions in the up and coming market are LCDs (Liquid Crystal Display) and Plasma. To the naked eye, each shares physical similarities; however, what lies beneath the surface is what characterizes these two displays. The plasma monitor, for example, functions by the help of tiny gas plasma cells that are charged by exact electrical voltages to create a picture. While also being able to show blacks better, providing better contrasts when demonstrating other colors, the plasma screen offers a higher resolution than either the CRT or the LCD monitor. At the moment, plasma also offers wider viewing angles than either TV. Its characterizing mark, though, is how it can be molded into a lightweight mode of style, perhaps only three inches wide able to hang on your wall like a picture frame- it’s too bad that they’re just a smidgen beyond a college student’s budget!
LCDs, on the other hand, offer a compromise that is seemingly ideal. Unlike plasmas, the LCD operates with the use of a liquid crystal solution that wavers between a solid and liquid state and rests between two polarizing transparent panels. Innately are lightweight by design, which makes them perfect for laptop and desktop monitors or any screen less than forty inches. The most enticing aspect of the LCD screen is that the burn-in settles in at a much slower rate than the plasma, allowing for a longer lifespan.
Sadly, each screen has a few drawbacks that prove difficult when having to make the choice for yourself. With the LCDs, for example, they have lesser quality in black levels which mean that colors are not as vibrant. The viewing angle is narrower as well, and instead of looking uniform throughout the screen, certain areas appear lighter or darker which take away from the overall viewing appeal.
Not to take away from the pleasure of watching an LCD screen because they do offer quality that rivals any plasma monitor; it’s just that the plasma screen has very few faults. Such perfection, though, comes at a steep price- the prime fault. Plasma screens also provide a lesser native resolution- the resolution at which a TV or monitor is designed to display images. And the worst facet is its susceptibility to a quick burn-in, which attributes to its shorter life-span.
However, to the viewer sitting in front of the television set for eight hours a day, I doubt he or she would notice the narrow viewing angles of the LCD or the lesser native resolution of the plasma. Each screen offers a myriad of positives, but naturally is coupled with negatives that force the consumer to be wary of choice. If you are interested for a long-lasting TV but willing to sacrifice quality, shoot for the LCD, but if you want to show off a sleek design, go with a plasma. Just don’t forget what it was like watching saved by the bell on ye old cathode ray tube!
Video Link: http://youtube.com/watch?v=3DAr8Udu-vU
