![]() ![]() In terms of picture quality, a modern DLP-based RPTV can actually hold up pretty well against the cheap big-screen flat panels in its class, with good light output, decent viewing angles (at least compared to LCD) and acceptable screen uniformity. Others report the bulb going in a year or less. My father-in-law, who still loves the Samsung DLP I told him to buy in 2007, has never had to replace his bulb after more than five years of heavy use. The time-frame varies quite a bit, however. Most DLPs run on user-replaceable lamps (about $40 and up) that fade and eventually fail after a few thousand hours of TV watching. Then there's the specter of bulb replacement. I remember walking into my local Best Buy a couple of years ago and realizing that the wall of Mitsubishis at the back of the store was gone, replaced by LCDs and plasmas. The bulkiness of RPTVs also makes them more difficult for manufacturers and retailers to ship, inventory, and/or display. A $600 difference isn't chump change, but many TV buyers are probably willing to pay it to avoid getting a rear-projector. ![]() The cheapest comparable flat-panel I've seen is at $1,700. The company's cheapest 2012 RPTV, the 73-inch WD-73C12, costs around $1,100. ![]() The smallest TV in Mitsubishi's 2012 lineup measured 73 inches diagonal. Last year Mitsubishi had about a 1 percent share in the North American TV market, and in its bid to remain on sales floors. As flat-panel TVs have gotten larger and cheaper, RPTVs have grown to be almost comically large, yet still remain less expensive for the most part than similarly sized LCDs and plasmas.Ĭompetition is fierce among TV makers, and RPTV has been on life support for a while. ![]() Since the late 2000s RPTVs have faded into obscurity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |