Do you have one or the other? Which do you prefer? I'm getting a Samsung for sure

Good call on the Samsung. My dad has one (not sure if it's plasma or LCD) and it's amazing, much better than his other one upstairs which I can't remember the brand.

Who voted for Plasma?

It honestly shouldn't even be a poll. It's like asking if you like DVD or VHS better. Plasma TVs heat up to very hot temperatures, the liquid has to be replaced, they cost more, they've been known to burn out quickly, and the picture isn't as good as LCD.

i dont know much about tv's, but i've always heard LCD > Plasma.

I'm happy w/ my Samsung LCD

I was recommended to buy LCD over Plasma, and i really like the picture on mine (Toshiba), so i would have to say LCD.

buy a plasma if youre cheap as **** and never, EVER, want to play a video game on it, EVER, if you think maybe someday youll throw in a game within the next 10 years, then dont get the plasma

LCD>PLASMA, dont be cheap, dont be a loser, get a lcd

Lcd

It's nice to know that all of you guys have fallen for LCD's marketing bullshit. I will admit that up until a few years ago, plasmas did have terrible burn-in. However, for at least the past year, this problem has all but disappeared if the set is treated correctly for the first few hundred hours of use. All big name manufacturers have almost completely gotten rid of burn-in even without proper set conditioning. To properly condition a plasma, all you have to do is download a free DVD iso from the Internet (avsforum.com) and run it on the plasma for a couple days when you first get it. It is even okay to only run the disc during the time you are not watching regular programming if that is preferred. Also, anyone who honestly believes that LCDs have better picture quality than plasmas is completely blind. Plasmas have much richer blacks than LCD. Next time you are at Best Buy, compare a Samsung 705 series LCD to the newest Pioneer Kuro (Kuro should be found in the Magnolia Theater section). You will be blown away by the difference in black levels. The Samsung blacks look gray in comparison to the Kuro. The new sets coming out also have even richer blacks than the ones out now. Pioneer also showed off an infinite contrast prototype at CES 2007. The set essentially blocks any light from showing through a pixel if it is supposed to display true black based on the color information the TV receives from the content. If you say, "But LCDs have xx,000:1 contrast ratio! That's so black!" then you are completely wrong. These numbers used by the marketing teams (for both LCD and Plasma) are completely useless. They tell you the dynamic contrast ratio of the sets, which is a pointless statistic. This measures the brightness of the set when it is displaying a completely white image, and then compares it to a completely black image displayed on the set. This is useless in the real world because you don't care about the difference of two different colors displayed at different times, you care about the difference of the two colors when displayed at the same time.

It's nice to know that all of you guys have fallen for LCD's marketing bullshit. I will admit that up until a few years ago, plasmas did have terrible burn-in.
a few years ago?? how long has the plasma technology been built into tvs and sold to consumers? go look at a calender

However, for at least the past year, this problem has all but disappeared if the set is treated correctly for the first few hundred hours of use. All big name manufacturers have almost completely gotten rid of burn-in even without proper set conditioning. To properly condition a plasma, all you have to do is download a free DVD iso from the Internet (avsforum.com) and run it on the plasma for a couple days when you first get it.
and im sure EVERYONE has sat around looking up plasma information to know to go to some forum download an iso, burn it to a dvd, hope your dvd player can read it, hope that the person even has a dvd burner, and have that person know to run this for a couple DAYS, if you go buy an lcd you can actually use it for what you bought it for right out of the box

It is even okay to only run the disc during the time you are not watching regular programming if that is preferred. Also, anyone who honestly believes that LCDs have better picture quality than plasmas is completely blind. Plasmas have much richer blacks than LCD.
are we talking about picture quality or contrast? ill let you know that the three LCDs that i own will shit all over your plasma, i bet you dont even have a plasma, regardless, lcd picture quality >>>>> plasma picture quality

and if you know so much about the picture quality of a plasma how come you never brought up REFRESH RATES which causes GHOSTING, tell me you can run cod4 on a plasma side by side with an lcd and you wont notice anything in the plasma.. read a book fool

id rather watch a movie and see FAST MOTION with a screen that refreshes the monitor faster, and not some ghosting bullshit

Next time you are at Best Buy, compare a Samsung 705 series LCD to the newest Pioneer Kuro (Kuro should be found in the Magnolia Theater section). You will be blown away by the difference in black levels. The Samsung blacks look gray in comparison to the Kuro.
lets talk about sony's lcds and how the blacks arent abnormally dark as found on the kuro, because ive seen the kuro compared to the latest set of consumer sony lcds, cool, the plasma IS dark, but its too dark, show me some contrast LEVELS not just HIGH CONTRAST

The new sets coming out also have even richer blacks than the ones out now. Pioneer also showed off an infinite contrast prototype at CES 2007. The set essentially blocks any light from showing through a pixel if it is supposed to display true black based on the color information the TV receives from the content.
cool pioneer displayed a prototype tv that did something cool, how about you get a hold of that tv so we can compare it to what we are talking about in this thread, CONSUMER TVS NOT PROTOTYPES

If you say, "But LCDs have xx,000:1 contrast ratio! That's so black!" then you are completely wrong. These numbers used by the marketing teams (for both LCD and Plasma) are completely useless. They tell you the dynamic contrast ratio of the sets, which is a pointless statistic. This measures the brightness of the set when it is displaying a completely white image, and then compares it to a completely black image displayed on the set. This is useless in the real world because you don't care about the difference of two different colors displayed at different times, you care about the difference of the two colors when displayed at the same time.
irrelevant to current discussion

plus, look at a sony xbr5 or 6, YES SOLD AT BESTBUY, the xbr6 disproves everything you just said about your lcd hating

but what can you expect from some troll with an HD-DVD avatar.. do you 'know it all' about hd-dvd too?

I think Suhpreem has covered it fairly well, but I'll respond anyway. My answer is LCD. I've done quite a bit of research lately as I've been trying to decide between purchasing a 32" plasma or LCD for my dorm room early next month.
Burn-in is still a problem. Manufacturers of plasma sets have been working to fix it and have made some headway, but it still stands that plasma is much more susceptible to burn-in. I've seen a number of sets that ended up with temporary burn in after only a couple of hours of testing. Sure it went away within 24 hours but that's still incredibly annoying and this is with rather short tests. The fact that your fix is what I assume to be a screensaver of some sort proves it. You don't need to go to AVS to download an iso for an LCD because burn-in is not a problem. It's even more ridiculous that the videophiles themselves had to engineer some fix to this rampant problem, rather than the manufacturers suggesting or supplying such a screensaver disc. The situation is improving, but it is still an issue.
LCDs are less of energy hogs. I have enough stuff running in my media area without having to deal with plasma power consumption. Plasmas also have a shorter lifespan; again, manufacturers have significantly improved the lifespan of plasmas, but they've only reached a level of being equal to or only slightly less than a similar LCD.
LCD's also have better native resolution, more times than not, and that's what really matters to me: the sharpness of the picture, and a greater number of pixels given the same amount of screen real estate fills that need. I'll give you the fact that plasmas do display richer blacks and probably will always trump LCDs in that category, but it's not something I really care about. Additionally, the plasma's contrast doesn't look good in a lit room; LCD's do much better with ambient lighting or any kind of real world lighting. I'm not always going to be sitting in a perfectly dark room watching TV; sometimes I'm going to turn it on with the overhead lights and in those instances, a plasma's screen would reflect light and really lose its ability to maintain such high level of contrast. The issue with motion is also somewhat of a moot point, as many budget LCD tvs now have down to an 8ms response time and that's actually enough for the vast majority of people so that they don't detect blur.

Sometimes I wonder if he's joking.

Please, go read avsforum.com. Everything I stated is backed up by many videophiles. Also, 120hz refresh rate it not needed in plasmas because they have a much lower response time than LCD, so you will not experience any ghosting when watching 30fps or 60fps material. If someone is buying an HDTV, it is pretty safe to assume they have a DVD burner and know how to burn an iso. As I stated above, COD 4 would not have any ghosting because it runs at a native 60hz, not 24hz. Response time is much more important when playing video games such as COD 4, so a plasma would actually be better than an LCD. LCD response times are usually 4-8ms for a normal consumer model, while plasmas generally all have 4ms response times or lower. I have seen Sony Bravia XBR sets, and I have to say, the comparable Samsung sets produce a better picture quality when properly calibrated. I do not see how liking HD DVD would cause me to be a troll who does not know anything about HDTVs, when in fact HD DVD, being a Hi-Def format, requires vast knowledge on HDTVs and surround sound audio. And yes, I do "know it all" about HD DVD, although that does not matter.
What I suggested is not a screensaver disc. It is a disc that alternates solid color images over the course of a few hundred hours to condition the new plasma so that it is much less susceptible to burn-in. AVSForum users did not come up for the DVD, in fact, plasma manufacturers do recommend that you use a DVD like this, or if doing so would not fit your schedule, displaying an HDTV channel that has no black bars or static logos displayed on it as the next best thing.

^^You're not a troll because of your avatar. That just makes you kinda dumb; you're trolling because it seems like you enjoy picking the least popular view in any electronics thread and using bs logic to insist that everyone is wrong and you know all. I got a definition of a screensaver for you. From wikipedia: A screensaver is a type of computer program initially designed to prevent "Phosphor burn-in" on CRT and plasma computer monitors by blanking the screen or filling it with moving images or patterns when the computer was not in use. Alright, so how is a disc that you use when a screen is not in use....that displays solid blocks of color.....designed to condition your set against burn-in not a screensaver? Because that seems to be what it is by definition. Again the fact that the manufacturers and users are having to resort to things like that disc or those suggestions proves that burn-in is still a problem; they just know better how to deal with it and make it less of an issue. I'll again point out that 8ms and below is usually more than enough for the average eye to not be able to detect rampant motion blur and artifacts. Most bargain brands hit 8ms and the majority of the sets I've looked at (mid to lower range) reach 5 ms response time.

you are too smart to be 14 years old

for shits i asked a few people i know if they had dvd burners, most said 'i dont know' but had one when i asked what kind of laptop/desktop they had, and i said 'whats an iso' NONE of them new

even asked my mother, she said if someone asked her to make her an iso disc she would just ask me to do it for her

anyway, im done arguing with you, troll, you can keep thinking youre right about everything tech bc of some forum full of people who agree with you or tell you to think a certain way, but im pretty sure i know more about you in your category of 'expertise', fool

create a thread trying to one up me, and ill shit all over you

especially with your 'audio' bragging bullshit, as a producer myself, im sure my knowledge of audio and different types of media used to push audio far outweighs yours

but keep typing on your windows xp machine, sir

From what I've heard LCD is better than plasma although I've mostly only heard that the power consumption for Plasma is like 10x higher than an LCD.

wow, some pretty large posts but thanks for the thoughts....I'm pretty sure I'm gonna go with a Samsung LCD that is 40" 1080p with 30000:1 contrast ratio

I do know that plasmas get better and more colors and supposedly have reduced the risk of burn in but I will be playing lots of video games and maybe hooking up my computer

I'm sure both are good in their own way and both have negatives

plasmas with videogames= death
lcd with video games - life