<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Switched - Comments for Best HDTVs Under $1000 13</title>
<link>http://www.switched.com/2008/12/11/best-hdtvs-under-1000-13/</link>
<description>Switched Comments for Best HDTVs Under $1000 13</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Best HDTVs Under $1000 13]]></title><link>http://www.switched.com/2008/12/11/best-hdtvs-under-1000-13/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.switched.com/2008/12/11/best-hdtvs-under-1000-13/</guid><description><![CDATA[How can you say that DLP technology is going "the way of the do do"? Many cinemas are beginning to ditch LCD displays, for more up-to-date DLP technology. If anything it is LCD that is slowly becoming more and more obsolete. <br><br>In addition, for anyone interested in purchasing a large screen TV (46" and higher), it's recommended that they go DLP. DLPs are cheaper and significantly more light weight than their LCD counterparts (of equivalent screen size). Not to mention that the picture quality of LCD displays degrade as screen size is increased, while the picture quality of DLPs are near perfect, regardless of screen size.<br><br>Just to note, I'm not advertising for DLP, since I owned an LCD television. But, do everyone a favor and get your facts right, you n00b, and don't spread misinformation.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Byron]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 17th 2008 6:41PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Best HDTVs Under $1000 13]]></title><link>http://www.switched.com/2008/12/11/best-hdtvs-under-1000-13/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.switched.com/2008/12/11/best-hdtvs-under-1000-13/</guid><description><![CDATA[This is a very amateurish article. You seem to focus on features that are unimportant, and show a lack of understanding of the technology. The 120Hz feature that you were disappointed to not find in some of these panels, firstly does not do anything to reduce "pixellation", that's up to the resolution of the source content and the quality of upscaling. The 120Hz feature simply interpolates an extra "estimated" frame in between the 2 frames that are actually provided by the input in order to create the illusion of more fluid motion. Keep in mind that 120Hz is not a "refresh rate", as LCD and plasma screens do not have a refresh rate. 120Hz is simply the name that has been given to this particular feature.<br><br>Most importantly, this feature does nothing to improve the image, and MIGHT improve fluidity in sports, but it invariably looks bizarre, and that's what you would expect really, considering the TV calculates a whole frame and interpolates it. Just watch a movie or anything that isn't sports with the 120Hz feature turned on to see how ridiculous it looks. It even looks weird in sports for me. If you want nice motion then buy a good panel, don't rely on silly features made to impress people who don't know what they're doing.<br><br>I always find it amazing that showrooms turn this feature on on all their panels even if they aren't showing sports, and they actually boast about it and will show it off to you if you show interest. Next time you see this, just ask to borrow the remote for a second, go find the 120Hz feature and turn it off, and you'll see how much better the image looks without it, with no strange motion artifacts or unnatural motion.<br><br>Also - I could never take an article that recommends an LG panel seriously. Come on.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mel S.]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 18th 2008 9:13PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
