Talk:Plasma display

message: Somebody mention the various prices over the years.
Any chance someone in the know could add a pros and cons section like over at the DLP page?
This article is not NPOV --Tykell 00:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Various prices & pro/con

message: That page is not very accurate. For example it mentions phosphor and electron beams for plasma, when there is no such thing used in plasma displays. --Xerces8 (talk) 16:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: More precisely, color plasma displays have phosphors; the original orange displays mentioned in the History section do not. Paul Koning (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate

message: I don't think this article is detailed enough. It is neither as detailed as the artclies about LCD nor DLP screen technology. There is only one con section there, which talks about burn in. What about the stuff where sunlight hits the tv making the gas messed up or something similar that I heard of.
I would like to be able to compare the technologies better; however, this article is lacking for a comparison. Sp0 (talk) 22:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs a pro con section or something similar 

message: I found this link while doing a research project:  Any ideas on how it happened? Is it a consumer risk? Or just a rare occurence? However since this story has no proof behind in (no news references), it may just be spam. Still, I would like to know if anybody has any idea on whether or not it is an issue to be concerned about. Thanks much. 71.193.160.181 (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Dangers

message: Is partial vacuum necessary to create these noble gas plasmas? -- Beland 08:52, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pressure 

message: There seems to be an urban legend going around that plasma TVs have a working live of not much longer than 4 or 5 years... any information on this? it sounds incorrect to me... perhaps this myth could be debunked (or if it is true (unlikely)) confirmed. Hydroksyde 10:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC
:As far as I know that's not right — [Mac Davis] (talk)
The earliest consumer models did suffer from an unacceptably high rate of premature panel failure, particularly when their price was taken into account. Sony stopped supplying Plasma panels in 2005 after being bombarded with complaints from early adopters. Five years was a pretty good lifespan for some early panels. It only takes one faulty transistor out of the thousands on a typical panel to make the panel unusable. 
LCD screens run at much lower voltages and so are not nearly as prone to panel failure. Modern Plasma panels are much more reliable than they used to be, but I think 27 years is pretty unrealistic. In any case, it's far more likley some other more mundane component will fail before then, making the panel just as uneconomic to repair. Essentially a 27 year lifespan is  not really appropriate for something that will probably get replaced for other reasons long before then.
Ultramince (talk) 04:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban Legend 

message: The last external link (Plasma TV) goes to govinda.nu/electronics/tv/plasma-tv/index.htm
where you can 'buy' Plasma TV at 'e-bay'
Another one: I removed the link to www.lcdplasmatvguide.com PDP TV Buying Guide, which has three blocks of ads on every page and barely any text.  It's useless. -- Skierpage 23:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPAM ALERT =

message: I think it would be great if this article had excellent illustrations, like the CRT article, but I wouldn't know where to find a good one that wasn't copyrighted.  Any help?  Nicholasink 18:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a figure describing the composition of a PDP (matrix electrode model ACM). I also drew cells (WAFFLE), but I don't know if the ACM's use stripes instead. I have understood that nowadays the coplanar electrode structure is more advanced. Hope the figure is useful, though! Note: I am a newbie in drawing, so the result is far from perfect (made with inkscape). Yartsa 15:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Take a look in the Wikipedia image collection at .  It's a nice historic image of a U of Illinois monochrome plasma panel in a second generation Plato terminal.  Shows how far things have come with this technology. 128.255.45.57 (talk) 19:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration 

message: The history section reads like an advertisement for Larry Weber's personality cult.  I'm sure he is an impressive man who has had a lot to do with the development of plasma technology, but some of the material belongs in an article about him instead of the article about plasma technology.  (E.g., the comment that as of 2008 he is back at work, and if he is successful plasmas might regain market share vs. LCDs.  The point isn't if he is successful — it's that if anyone is successful.  In any event, this whole sentence feels out of place in an encyclopedia article, whose purpose is not to predict future developments of the plasma/LCD battle for market-share.)Dsspiegel (talk) 13:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Color, in 1977?  That doesn't sound right.  I visited SAI a year or two later.  They definitely had orange panels, like the PLATO ones but in several sizes.  In particular, I saw a 1024x1024 panel -- 16 inches square, double the 512x512 one.  I heard rumors about a 2048x2048 one but I can't confirm that.  So yes, SAI and their larger panels definitely should be mentioned. Paul Koning (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I'm not familiar enough with the subject to write about it, but I believe pixel orbiting should at least briefly be discussed in the article. If not discussed, then maybe just mentioned here and addressed in another relevant article like Phosphor burn-in or even have its own article if it isn't trivial enough. --Kamasutra 00:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pixel orbiting

message: I think that modern plasma panels don't get dimmer after only 2000 hours. I have a plasma screen playing for more than 6 hours every day since 11/2004 and the only problem is a slight burn-in from the TV channel logos. --greekalien 10:48, 26 Aug 2006 (GMT+2)
:The burn-in possibility should definitely be mentioned in the article. AxelBoldt 16:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is.  Under 'Cons', though I believe that whoever contributed that has considerably underplayed the problem.  Even real modern plasmas suffer severe burn in on static images. I B Wright 17:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lifespan

message: :where visible light is created by phosphors excited by a gas; discharge contains no mercury (in contrast to the backlights of an AMLCD).
Later in the article it explains that the phosphors are excited by photons created by ionized gas, I think this would be a bit more informative here [if it is true]. The sentence "discharge contains no mercury (in contrast to the backlights of an AMLCD)" remains obscure to me. What discharge are we talking about? Is the claim that the gas to be ionized doesn't contain mercury? Who would expect mercury in the gas anyway? AxelBoldt 16:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First sentence

message: Great article.  But should someone edit it to reflect that plasmas are being consdered superior again because of their superior resolution?  --Ughmonster 11:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why?  It isn't true.  In sizes where LCD panels are made, the Plasma panels have exactly the same resolution.  Their only real difficulty is their unacceptably short life (in spite of claims to the contrary). I B Wright 17:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First Paragraph

message: I heard there are problems using Plasmas at over +- 6,500 ft. altitutes; you get a loud buzzing noise.  Is this true?
: Certainly some of the plasma displays I've seen around 5,000 ft are noisy, but I don't know if that has anything to do with the altitude or not.  They aren't ALL noisy, but some are worse than others. --Mdwyer 17:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I found this with a quick google:   Apparently, the pressure differential means the TV has to work harder, so you hear more eletrical buzzing and possible a louder cooling fan. --Mdwyer 18:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe this is relevant to the disadvantages. On November 2009 we noted manufacturers' caveats about high altitudes, and came here to find out why. The cite above appears accurate and the website is already ref'd in this article, so I have added a line to the disadvantages paragraph. However, I will not be offended if someone has more up-to-date and reliable information to cite. Tkech (talk) 23:49, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buzzing at altitude 

message: Something to consider for inclusion: apparently there is a paste that is produced by DuPont which is used as an integral part of some plasma displays and which contains ruthenium.  A new version of the paste is being developed by DuPont which will contribute to cost reductions in the manufacture of displays.  Citation:  --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fodel paste 

message: I disagree with the statement, "Plasma displays use as much power per square meter as ... an AMLCD television."  PDPs actually lower the drive when the APL is high, because the heat and power draw would be prohibitive.  LCDs do not have this limitation. -- algocu 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power 

message: Removed link to http://www.plasma-vs-lcd.com. Link leads to all ad site. Please watch for resubmission.
>> Actually, this seems like an info site to me. Just because it has ads on it doesn't make it spam.
Can anyone tell me the difference between an LCD TV and a plasma TV???
Anyone know the reason why laying a plasma screen hortizonal flat would be bad? Is it do to the glass possibly cracking or something with the gas internally?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.48.146 (talk) 05:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  spam 

message: Is there anywhere any info how the picture data is "put" into the pixels on a typical plasma display (like a TV set)? One after another ? Line by line ? At what frequency ?
--Xerces8 (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture data input 

message: "In an effort to stem the growing popularity of LCD panels in the market Vizio has unveiled a 32" plasma television which will debut shortly. This set will use a 32" panel made by LG. This set promises to offer contrast ratios that greatly exceed those of competing LCD TVs in the size range. This segment previously has been limited to LCD TVs, and will offer another choice of plasma display technology to consumers in a smaller size allowing them to sample both technologies and recognize some of the benefits offered by plasma technology."
Could this be taken as a form of advertising and/or bias? Bizzmag (talk) 12:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising? 

message: I NEED TO KNOW WHAT NOBLE GASES ARE FOUND IN THESE THINGS!!!!!!!! NOW!!!!!!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.84.8.64 (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good heavens what's the urgency? Rico402 (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Noble gases

message: Some of the history section has an "essay-like" feel, with
overdramatic expressions like "it is no exaggeration" and
"in the wilderness" and, worst of all, "certain death".
Someone who is more interested in this subject than I am
should clean it up.  I'm adding the applicable tag.
--208.76.104.133 (talk) 07:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style problems 

message: I felt the old one was a bit ad-hoc (off angle, lots of glare on the screen) and out of date for such a rapidly advancing technology, so I decided to upload a picture of my own. If anyone has any objections, feel free to bring them up.
Gamer112(Aus) (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Introductory Picture... 

message: The environmental aspects of nitrogen trifluoride  have no relevance to plasma displays (PDPs) since the material is used for etching in some processes, it is not part of the functionality of PDPs; it is used for etching other devices also. I propose to delete this section unless someone can show how nitrogen trifluoride is specific to PDPs. --Damorbel (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nitrogen trifluoride 

message: If someone wants to go ahead and cleanup or cite the original research, please do so, otherwise the tag comes off. --IncidentFlux [ TalkBack | Contributions ] 10:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Original research or unverified claims tag removed, no one pointed to any specific examples since June 2009. --IncidentFlux [ TalkBack | Contributions ] 13:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the original research? 

message: Kálmán Tihanyi?--B@xter9 14:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussed at Talk:Plasma_display#Patent_statements_as_facts. Binksternet (talk) 15:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: THX! :)) (But I mean from the article?)--B@xter9 15:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Where is...

message: if anyone knows where panels are manufactured (by or for who) i think it would be useful information. Especially as when a company initiates a new plant, technological advances are often forthcoming and the extra competition may affect prices thus availibility. 79.76.210.228 (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Manufacturing Plants (where)

message: Why didn't anyone mentioned on pro/con page, that most plasma displays have greenish trails after bright fast-moving objects? Videos demonstrating this effect can be easily found on youtube.
Also, why no mention of PWM noise?
Both problems are easily noticeable on my Viera PY(PZ)80
80.249.84.110 (talk) 17:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure the artifacts arise from defects in the plasma display? Care is needed when looking for image defects since it is not easy to find an artifact-free video signal. Computer generated video, as in games and cartoons can be very good, generally better than broadcast signals, but as always it is the weakest link that defines the quality of an image. The most sensitive test I know for plasma images is zooming a face or other low contrast image in a digitally signal. I first bought a plasma screen about six years ago, eventually choosing a Panasonic partly on the basis of this test, there was a "video ally" and some models were quite poor or this admittedly tough test (you won't notice unless you are looking for it). Ten years ago this was a hot developement matter, I know because I was dealing with patent applications at the time. I couldn't say which technology(ies) won out but I got a good idea what to look for in a display.--Damorbel (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plasma ghosting and other image artifacts 

message: Greetings.
In my posession is a 37 year old Digivue PDP. It is integrated into a UNIVAC military display predating the particular PLATO personal computer/terminal example pictured in the Wikipedia article. 
The contract date of this equipment is 1972, and date codes for the various devices I have examined inside this equipment are no more recent than 1973. 
The verification is online at my website:
http://www.bunkerofdoom.com/computers/univac/1562/index.html
The display tube and driver assembly appears to have nine rows of 32 circuit connections on each of four sides of the PDP which is an array of 576x576 connections. I suggest that its actual resolution is 512x512 as in the PLATO system. 
I have not applied power to this relic because it is one of a kind, serial #1 (or #0 depending which nomenclature tag is to be considered), and it is not worth risking circuit failure to appease curiosity. It requires 120V 400Hz aircraft-type power.
No others of this model were built. I assert only that it predates the commercial Digivue-empowered example photo by several years. 
The display was used by the U.S. military and the engineering was managed by UNIVAC and E-systems.
At this time I cannot share more information than what is on the www page. The slow process of gathering information from the display unit continues, and I hope that once all of the subassembly numbers are retrieved, it will be possible to obtain permission to obtain engineering drawings and make them available for historical study.
I suggest therefore that someone familiar with editing the wikipedia may care to include some of this information, perhaps some images from the website, concerning PDP history. 
Permission is hereby granted to use, all or in part, the text and images from http://www.bunkerofdoom.com/computers/univac/1562/index.html to improve the article on wikipedia.
Anecdotally, at one time the display was put up for sale to collectors. A person claiming to be descended from one of the designers of the display tube contacted me wanting to buy the display tube only, and asked me to remove it and ship it alone, simply to avoid the cost of crate & freight for the 160 LB display unit. No doubt the intention was to frame the poor old tube on the household or office wall, which would probably result in it eventually being discarded by future generations. While respecting the person's desire to posess a relic of their cherished forebears work, I could not allow historical equipment in my care to be treated in so vulgar a manner as to slight the overall artifact, not to mention insulting the life work of the engineers and technicians who created the larger system. Once a unique technological artifact is destroyed, it is gone forever.
regards, 
Opcom (talk) 06:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Digivue (the manufacturer name you can see on the display module, in the bottom right photo) is the manufacturer of the display units in PLATO terminals.  And that unit looks similar to a PLATO display.  Don't be confused by the 1981 date on that PLATO terminal photo; that model (the "PLATO V" programmable terminal) appeared in 1978, and the original PLATO IV terminals date back at least to 1973 (that's the date on the terminal manual published by University of Illinois). Paul Koning (talk) 17:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier example photos of UNIVAC military plasma display c. 1973 

message: Hi. The advantages section is not exactly correct about the blacks. Black levels vary with manufacturer and model and are often worse than LCD tvs nowdays. There are many sony and samsung LCDs that have just as good or better black levels than competing plasma displays. 75.143.111.129 (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages 

message: A plasma display is made up of many thousands of gas-filled cells that are sandwiched in between two glass plates, two sets of electrodes, dielectric material, and protective layers. The address electrodes are arranged vertically between the rear glass plate and a protective layer. This structure sits behind the cells in the rear of the display, with the protective layer in direct contact with the cells. On the front side of the display there are horizontal display electrodes that sit in between a magnesium-oxide (MgO) protective layer and an insulating dielectric layer. The MgO layer is in direct contact with the cells and the dielectric layer is in direct contact with the front glass plate. The horizontal and vertical electrodes form a grid from which each individual cell can be accessed. Each individual cell is walled off from surrounding cells so that activity in one cell does not affect another. The cell structure is similar to a honeycomb structure except with rectangular cells.Afterdawn.com - Plasma displayGizmodo - Giz Explains: Plasma TV BasicsHowStuffWorks - How Plasma Displays WorkGoogle books - Phosphor handbook By William M. Yen, Shigeo Shionoya, Hajime Yamamoto
To illuminate a particular cell, the electrodes that intersect at the cell are charged by control circuitry and electric current flows through the cell, stimulating the gas (typically xenon and neon) atoms inside the cell. These ionized gas atoms, or plasmas, then release ultraviolet photons that interact with a phosphor material on the inside wall of the cell. The phosphor atoms are stimulated and electrons jump to higher energy levels. When these electrons return to is natural state energy is released in the form of visible light. Every pixel on the display is made up of three subpixel cells. One subpixel cell is coated with red phosphor, another is coated with green phosphor, and the third cell is coated with blue phosphor. Light emitted from the subpixel cells is blended together to create an overall color for the pixel. The control circuitry can manipulate the intensity of light emitted from each cell, and therefore can produce a large spectrum of colors. Light from each cell can be controlled and changed rapidly to produce a high-quality moving picture.Google books - Digital Signage Broadcasting By Lars-Ingemar LundströmGoogle books - Instrument Engineers' Handbook: Process control and optimization By Béla G. LiptákGoogle books - Computers, Software Engineering, and Digital Devices By Richard C. DorfPlasmaTVBuyingGuide.com - Plasma TV Screen Burn-In: Is It Still a Problem?
Composed from stuff elsewhere on Wikipedia
:By appropriately flashing the pixel on and off rapidly, the control circuitry can manipulate the average intensity of light coming from the pixel. 24.155.108.53 (talk) 03:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better 

message: Does any manufacturer of plasmas do wear leveling? They could track pixel usage activity with some RAM and flash memory. Track live cell usage in RAM, and write usage results per viewing session to flash when the monitor is turned off or the power is disconnected.
1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels  ... times 3 RGB cells per pixel = 6,220,800 cells
48-bit unsigned integer representing cell brightness on an 8-bit intensity scale (0-255) each 1/120th of a second = 572,662,306 seconds per cell (6,628 days .. 18 years at cell brightness 255)
6,220,800 cells * 48 bits per cell = 298,598,400 bits or 37,324,800 bytes of RAM/flash memory to do this intensity tracking per cell for 18 years. (At current prices, this can be achieved with 64 meg of RAM and flash for maybe 1 US dollar.)
To remove effects of burn-in, tally up the cells with the lowest usage time, display a reverse brightness pattern with the least-used cells the brightest, so that they all wear down to match the burned-in area, and the screen image looks good again. 
DMahalko (talk) 08:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wear leveling, using flash memory to track brightness? 

message: Thearticle asserts: "Plasma displays use the same phosphors as CRTs, accounting for the extremely accurate color reproduction"
The color accuracy of the display is not determined by its primary lights (in this case color phosphors).  The color accuracy is determined by how these phosphors are controlled. I don't feel bold enough to edit the text - but I suggest changing it to simply ...
"Plasma displays use the same phosphors as CRTs."
Perhaps a more experienced user would be willing to make the change.
Wandell (talk) 04:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color accuracy 

message: No visible motion blur, thanks in large part to very high refresh rates and a faster response time, contributing to superior performance when displaying content with significant amounts of rapid motion This is incorrect. There is no actual motion blur on (modern) LCDs. The blur is an optical illusion caused by afterimages on the retina. CRTs and plasmas do not cause this becuse their light isn't continuous but rapidly flashing.--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 13:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And of course you have a reliable source for that statement?--Asher196 (talk) 16:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motion blur 

message: Let me quote: This PLATO V model illustrates the display's monochromatic orange glow as seen in 1988. This is confusing, since the device is from April 1981 (as to be read in the image's info) -andy 217.50.53.134 (talk) 09:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  PLATO 

message: I believe parts of the article are exceptionally negative and take on a very biased tone to deter interest from the actual article. Such as the section on "Notable manufacturers that abandoned Plasma", which is largely absent from other viewing technologies. A very large and extensive list of cons that are extremely specific. The LCD article on Wikipedia doesn't even have a Pro's or Con's section. Plasma display's aren't even really mentioned in the LCD article. They're only compared to CRTs, where as on here Plasma is directly compared to LCDs at every benefit even if LCDs don't pose a real advantage at the remark.
Overall it seems like heavy and underhanded editing took place to make Plasma seem like a completely inferior technology to LCDs and Plasma comparisons in the LCD section are completely absent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.58.81 (talk) 05:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overall Tone and Bias 

message: * Difference between lcd and plasma tv  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhensoho (talk • contribs) 16:20, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: What about the wierd colour flashes that Plasmas and front projections emit when viewed from certain angles?Bolegash (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disadvantages 

message: How the heck is something so incredibly complex manufactured? To be more specific,I'd love to know how they fill upwards of 300,000 tiny adjacent rectangular glass compartments with gases...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.104.45.129 (talk) 04:18, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The 'compartments' are not separate, pixels are formed by the spaces between electrodes; the display is one large, multi electrode, discharge tube. --Damorbel (talk) 06:53, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  construction 

message: Plasma display emits strong radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zlouiemark45546 (talk • contribs) 12:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The article you cited of course says no such thing.  I will assume what you said is fiction, but if you have any credible sources for this claim, please feel free to cite them.  Paul Koning (talk) 17:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  health concerns 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Plasma display. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090616020909/http://reviews.cnet.com:80/green-tech/tv-power-efficiency/? to http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-power-efficiency/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090323083757/http://www.plasmadisplaycoalition.org:80/results/power.php to http://www.plasmadisplaycoalition.org/results/power.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:37, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Plasma display. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121009232700/http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/ to http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070124051027/http://tech.yahoo.com:80/blog/raskin/6813 to http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/raskin/6813
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080330224101/http://tech.yahoo.com:80/blog/raskin/6816 to http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/raskin/6816
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120305205945/http://www.techtvcanada.ca/callforhelp/shownotes/0283.shtml?regular to http://www.techtvcanada.ca/callforhelp/shownotes/0283.shtml?regular
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Fluorescence is missing from the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plasma_display&oldid=820049385 User:ScotXWt@lk 16:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fluorescence 

message: Did we already purge "drive away" the people with a basic knowledge of physics, or are there still some of them around? Would be nice to rewrite this complete article. User:ScotXWt@lk 16:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you're still here.  We can benefit from your expertise. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I stumbled upon something: https://kompendium.infotip.de/plasma-displays.html it's written in German, and it is how I think the Wikipedia article should have looked like. Have a look at the numerous schemes. Good look with your attitude! User:ScotXWt@lk 13:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article written by couch potatoes without knowledge of physics 

message: I didn't see anything in this article about these.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.193.132 (talk) 05:32, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orange plasma displays were used in laptops! 

message: the article mentions "Pinball displays started with six- and seven-digit seven-segment displays and later evolved into 16-segment alphanumeric displays, and later into 128x32 dot-matrix displays in 1990,which are still used today "
plasma displays have not been used in pinball machines for several years now due to RoHS (plasma panels contain lead), the big manufactures replaced them with 128x32 LED displays initially that had the same interface as the old plasma displays a couple years back as an interim but now all manufactures are using regular full color LCD panels  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flecom (talk • contribs) 07:18, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  pinball displays 

message: Article claims that 
: By 2013, they had lost nearly all market share due to competition from low-cost LCDs and [..] OLED flat-panel displays.
I'm not disputing that OLED TVs were on the market at that time.
I'm questioning whether OLED sales were- as implied- large enough back then to have been remotely significant in plasma's decline by 2013.
The first commercial OLED TV only came out in 2007, and that was $2500 for an 11-inch set(!)
This article from May 2012 confirms that OLED's early market share was tiny, saying that OLED was expected "to take 0.02% of TV sales through 2014".
That alone makes clear that OLED's market share was so insignificant- to the point of negligible- prior to 2013 (or indeed, prior to plasma's final discontinuation in the mid-2010s), that it isn't plausible as a notable clause of plasma's decline.
Ubcule (talk) 15:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed uncited claim (that OLED was supposedly a factor in plasma's loss of market share)