Slashdot Log In
$90,000 103in HDTV
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Mon Apr 16, 2007 07:34 AM
from the just-a-little-excessive dept.
from the just-a-little-excessive dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Found this review of Panasonic's 103in plasma. Not only is the screen itself massive, but the price tag comes close to $100,000! I guess if you can afford a room big enough to house it, you can afford the TV. "
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Commercial Products (Score:4, Informative)
Pythagoras (Score:3, Informative)
At 2:1 aspect ratio this comes in right around 8' X 4'. Not for big events.
(a 103" diagonal is *very different from a 180)
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the time when you go to a concert, thats what the large back screens are. If they are the RGB LED, they are individual panels that are about 4'*4' wide. If you can get signal to each of the screens, then you can make the array act any way you want.
OSRAM is a manufacturer of light-bulbs, for the entertainment industry. They are releasing a super-bright LED this summer. Its supposed to be 1000 Lumens, which is th
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You could buy a Texas instruments DLP projector (the types you'll find in new digital movie theaters) for that price, not to mention the size of the screen would be capable of being much larger than 103"..
rear projection (Score:5, Funny)
Re:rear projection (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, you could use the $70,000 saved to buy a handful of Blu-Ray(TM) DVD's!
Yeah, you could probably get one or two HD-DVDs and then get the change sued off you by the MPAA For watching them.
I gotta say I like it - not so much because it's big and HD, but because it's unwieldy and thief-proof. Just imagine the poor schmuck who tries to steal it. Score one for Panasonic finally making a common-thief-proof TV. If this baby goes missing you can track down all the professional riggers and crane operators and find it in no time!
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't count on it. A friend works in the big screen business, typically supplying kit for conference centres, office meeting rooms, public buildings, that sort of thing. A couple of years back, they installed a pretty huge screen, something like 15' IIRC. They finished work late one evening, and when they went in the following morning to set up some software to use it, someone had literally lifted the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Campus police actually held the doors open and helped the guy load it in the van....
no speakers (Score:5, Funny)
Re:no speakers (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:no speakers (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Keeper? (Score:2)
Dead Pixel! (Score:5, Funny)
AAAARGH!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dead Pixel! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
how about an affordable one instead. (Score:5, Insightful)
how about a bridge in the gap between teeny tiny (and way too expensive for that size), and "OMG XBOX HUEG" (and out of reach of the average person).
the "cheap" models at walmart start at 900 and go up from there, and if you actually want color fidelity youre looking at a minimum 1500.
how long have these flat tvs been on the market? i seem to remember them advertised 8 years ago, so where the heck are the AFFORDABLE ones!
Re: (Score:2)
And we thought the rest of the world hated us because of our freedoms. It turns out they actually believe the BS the media tells us is the American Way of Life.
They don't come down in price (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, we already have a story [ajc.com] (firstborn) about a family making $48,000/year in rural Georgia with a $327 monthly car payment on a car much newer than mine, qualifying for health care assistance.
Sad thing ... (Score:2, Funny)
i'm looking forward to the day (Score:5, Interesting)
it really isn't far fetched nanotechnology, the requisite advances in semiconducting polymers means the concept is not that far off. since they already have electronic paper, liquid crystals displays are well established, and OLEDs are coming on the scene now, technologies getting close to the "paint your own tv" concept, chemically and technically at least, i really don't think this concept is that far off
think about it: at the factory where they make OLEDs/ liquid crystal displays/ electronic paper, there is a fabrication process. that fabrication process merely assembles the requisite pixels into a proper grid. someone, somewhere, will make this process automatic, like crystallization/ polymerization, so all you need is for it to "dry" after applying it to a flat surface
Re: (Score:2)
Re:i'm looking forward to the day (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:i'm looking forward to the day (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, and I want a moonbase too. 40 years later and all NASA has given me so far me is some Tang.
Parent
Re:i'm looking forward to the day (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Front projection apparatus anyone? (Score:2)
It's hard for me to understand why anyone would actually shell out the ridiculously high sticker price for this thing considering that you can have a really excellent 103" front projection apparatus for no more than $20,000, and if you shop right or are willing to forego 1080p you can do it for under $10,000. Sure, you have to design the room it's placed in such that you reduce or even eliminate ambient light for optimum viewing contrast, but given how much you save from not getting the "My God, It's Full o
220Kg? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, my 46" throws off a noticeable amount of heat. This unit might need some custom ventilation.
For the US-centric... (Score:5, Informative)
1) $90,000 is the price after currency conversion and VAT (UK's 17.5% "Sales tax"). Without VAT, the TV is $78,000 in a pure currency converted price.
2) This is only the price with a currency change. Some products don't fluctuate much, but many things are ridiculously expensive in the UK when compared against the same product in the US. Judging by the pricing on the UK Top Gear, for example, cars are often $10K-$15K more for the same product. Computers are a little more reasonable, but you can still find a huge difference. The 30GB iPod (US $250), for example, is $355 US dollars at today's rate.
It is refreshing to see a jumbo plasma TV that isn't a low-res, corporate boardroom model, though. I only wonder how much juice this thing sucks down.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You think it isn't low-res? I was quite depressed when I saw how few pixels they'd given it. At 103", 1920x1080 equates to a rather paltry 22dpi. I just don't understand why large screens can't at least have the same resolution as a decent monitor. I mean, I'm not expecting a 103" screen with 100dpi. But just being able to match, say, the number of pixels found on a Dell 30" monitor would be nice...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The would have added that CSI miracle-zoom-in technology that would make a higher pixel resolution a sensible option, but the royalties were too high.
Premier League (Score:3, Funny)
Ob. Penny-Arcade (Score:4, Funny)
Sadly.. (Score:2)
Not as big as Frank's... (Score:3, Funny)
It dwarfs the mighty redwoods and it towers over everyone
I still remember when that delivery truck came down our block
What a lucky guy, I hear he got the last one in stock
And the neighbors are just green
They say, That's the biggest screen we've ever seen!
It's Frank's 2000" TV (Frank's 2000" TV)
Everbody come and see(Frank's 2000" TV)
Frank's 2000" TV (Frank's 2000" TV)
( Weird Al Yankovic of course, http://www.whatarethelyrics.com/WEIRDALYANKOVIC/F
Re:Not as big as Frank's... (Score:4, Informative)
Quick math on Frank's TV: if it's 4:3, 2000 inch diagonal would be 1200 inches (100 feet) high. Widescreen 16:9 would be 720 inches, or 60 feet.
Basically, Frank's TV is the size of a drive-in theatre screen.
This post has been a public service of the Federal Useless Consumer Knowledge Statistics Department
Parent
Replacement (Score:3, Funny)
Power Consumption (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Priceless? (Score:3, Funny)
2. Ferrari car: $1,000,000
3. Watching aftermath from a too frantic Wii car game: Priceless.
1920x1200 is not enough (Score:2)
Japanese price (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not to rain on your parade, but this may not be entirely practical with a 103" Television. I can foresee a whole host of problems that the mega-rich which this is marketed towards, may rather want to pay $40000 to avoid. I assume the US price, like the UK price, also comes with a whole team of professional installers, cranes and the like.
From the review the television is 220 kilograms or 350 kg i
Costs $0.41 Per Minute To Watch (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Costs $0.41 Per Minute To Watch (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
a much cheaper solution (Score:3, Insightful)
2) Buy 4 42" plasmas for each person in your family so everyone can sit closer.
My personal impression (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, it is ridiculously huge, just bit over 2.6 metres from corner to corner.
It's also not a TV, it's just a monitor. From what I was told it takes both VGA and DVI inputs, and it has an RS232 port for controlling brightness etc.
HD looks great on it, the colours are good, and you can easily view it from almost 90 degrees to the side without any real loss of color or contrast. Then again, you really have to be at least 3 or 4 metres away from it to be able to see the whole image comfortably.
There are 12 (yes, twelve!) fans on the back of it to provide cooling, which I guess you need every bit you can get of, considering the monitor uses 1500 watts when in use.
I think their target market is high-end home cinemas, but at that price and at that power usage, I would think an HD projector would be more economical. The monitor is useful in daylight though, you can't really say that for most projectors.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean seriously. You came all the way to an online forum, clicked on a link to a story about TVs, and took the time to post a comment about how you don't watch TV. ?!?!?