The XBR4 is an awesome set and it does have a matte screen. The 650/750 series of Samsung's are equal or better in picture quality and are cheaper, they do have high gloss screens though. The 630 series should be shipping about now, which is basically the same thing with a matte screen, though they will be a little pricier since they just came out.

I honestly wanted an XBR4, but the price tag was a little intimidating. After a few weeks of research, I chose a 46" 650 series from Sammy. The high gloss screen really does make the picture pop and the reflection doesn't affect me at all in my settings. If you have a really bright room, like windows with lots of sunlight, a matte one will probably suit you better.

You really can't go wrong with the 2008 higher level models from Sony or Samsung right now, they are just both really impressive.

If other posters are correct when they say that Plasmas can still have burn-in with just a few hours of displaying a paused game screen, that alone would be enough reason for me not to buy one.

When I buy a multi-thousand € appliance, I don't want that money to go to waste just because of a simple oversight such as forgetting to turn off the TV/console.

 lol thats my bigest fear from the plasma.

anyone know which time the OLED TVs will come ??

It'll be awhile before they are affordable. The 15" Sony one is $2500. Samsung has gotten one as big as 40", but it was just a tech demo. Laser TV's might actually come out sooner, but will be expensive at first as well. Best to get a TV now and plan on getting one of those in 2-3 years when they have the bugs worked out and they are affordable.

Laser vs OLED will be the new LCD vs. Plasma soon enough. I think OLED will be better, but who knows.

On a side note, they are testing OLED paint, I think they can already have rooms change color. Eventually you will probably just be able to paint your wall, add some special hook-ups, and boom, wall size TV. OLED is also supposed to be able to collect solar electricity, paint the outside of your house and it's one big solar panel!

Technology is cool.

 lol yah really ... but also confusing.

Ok, here ya go.

Plasma and LCD both have distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Plasma:

+ Pure blackness levels, they are able to turn off pixels. Because of this, it is said they have better contrast, due to deeper blacks. This is the only reason they have better contrast, however. You don't get a "better picture" with plasma.
+ Better viewing angles

- Plasmas suffer from screen burn in, an affliction not as commonly associated with LCDs
- Use more energy in general than LCDs
- Plasma TVs are heavy and more difficult/dangerous to mount
- At larger sizes, Plasma cost more than LCD, generally

Myths:

1. Plasma pundits will tell you that some LCD screens have a tendency to blur images, particularly during fast moving scenes in movies or in sports. While that was true for older generation LCD screens, newer models have improved significantly -- so much so that the differences in performance between LCDs and plasmas in this regard is almost negligible (here's a tip -- if you're shopping for LCDs, check the pixel response time, measured in ms. The lower it is, the better the image quality in fast moving scenes).

2. Traditionally, the biggest advantage plasmas have had over their LCD cousins is price, particularly in the large screen end of the market. In the past 12 months, this has changed, with LCDs matching or even beating plasmas in both resolution and price.


LCD

+ LCD's tend to have a higher native resolution than Plasmas of the same size.
+ LCD's tend to consume less power than Plasma TVs
+ LCD's are lighter and easier to mount
+ LCDs have a longer lifespan than plasma screens, LCD's are guranteed for 60,000 hours, Plasma tend to average 30,000.

- Tend to have worse viewing angle
- Can't show pure black, due to inability to turn off pixils, thus plasmas tend to have better contrast ratios.

Myth - LCD's have slower response time than Plasma. False. Explained above, repeated in case you missed it. Most LCD's from decent brands, like Samsung(the best brand) are made with gaming in mind.


A bit on contrast ratio. The numbers aren't regulated. Therefore, they are only useful for comparing TVs within the brand you're choosing from.






Zenfoldor's advice:

Get a LCD.

It lasts longer, it won't burn in your health bar from Bioshock on the top of the screen and ruin your TV, and it's at a higher resolution for cheaper. LCD is the mainstream TV. Plasma just isn't.

Plasma will have a better picture(all things being equal) due to its ability to turn off pixels making them completely black. However, usually all things aren't equal. Like with all TV's a cheap plasma is still crap and will look like it up next to a good LCD. In the store, you're probably gonna go straight to the series 4 Samsung LCD's when you just pick which ones look best.

Screen burn-in isn't as bad now as it once was, and it's no longer permanent, but it still exists, and in fact, most gamers who own plasmas, do get temporary burn in everytime they play. Games are actually designed with burn-in in mind, now. However, it's not as noticable or permanent like once was.

Your TV will lose half its life, that's a certainty. Plasmas, all things being equal, don't last as long as LCDs.


As for resolution? You're going 42" I suggest 720p. You'll never need 1080p, at that screen size, and you'll never notice the difference. Trust me.

As for a TV to recommend to you?

I recommend the Toshiba Regza LCD 42" 42hl67. I have a 1080p model for my living room, and for the price, the 42HL167 IS the best TV. I'd assume the 42HL67 is just as good, but you'll want to get some reviews. I'm pretty sure you can get that set for under a thousand bucks fairly easily, and I'm talking about the 1080p model.

/bow

It is very simple. U want it for games, so, by far LCD is the better for games and as a PC monitor for the net and such.

If u want it for movies and/or TV, then Plasma is by far is the better.

Things too note;
1.Yes, plasma has a higher contrast ratio about 3000/1 with LCD at about 2000/1.
2. Plasma has more colours
3. Plasma needs a blackend out room to look good, NO light, but LCD can run in sun lite rooms no worries [Big minus for Plasma there].
4. LCD still has a bit more longevity.
5. With gaming, plasma gives me more motion blur than LCD for some reason and does not look quite as good and fresh for gaming as LCD does.
6.Plasma gets screen burn and bad! This is a huge problem for gaming, LCD does not.
7. Plasmas are bigger in size, but this has been changing recently.

Conclution; LCD is better as a monitor and plasma is better suited for movies and such. Why do u think most monitors are LCD these days?

Refresh rates are much better these days for LCD too, I get very little to none on my 2 LCD's.

Neither is "by far" better at anything. That's simply, the truth.

Also, lemme say this.

Obviously Rock_on_2008's fanboyism extends beyond consoles. He said:

" 50" Sony Bravia 1080p Plasma HDTV. Is the best TV for HD gaming and for watching fast moving sports."

That's total BS.

You guys might not know much about TVs so let me tell you what that is like, relating it to gaming consoles.

Lets say I went on a casual gaming forum and someone asked, "what is the best HD console to buy, I have no idea."

Then I said, "Xbox 360 is the best console for HD gaming, period. Its got the best games, period." You might assume I knew what I was talking about, while in reality I was a fanboy stating my opinion, but disguising it as a fact, to get sales for my crappy product, that I shill for.