Last week, LG announced it’d shortly be advertising its 3D TVs as Australia’s preferred brand. Its competitors were never likely to be all that happy with that result, and rather predictably, Sony’s threatening legal action.
The SMH reports that Sony’s take on what LG claims was a double blind study contains elements that are “misleading”, although it wouldn’t elaborate to the SMH on what those elements were pending a response from LG. That didn’t stop LG from responding to the SMH, noting that
LG Australia has confidence in the survey results providing a reliable and adequate foundation for the claim … [and] will aggressively defend any objection or challenge against this marketing initiative.”
[SMH]
Dan Miller
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:12 AMSony are a good brand but when it came down to buying a new TV I went with LG for their passive 3D and could not be more happy. I would of gone Sony if I didn’t have to pay over $120 for 3D glasses. Same goes with all the other brands that are using active 3D. Passive is the way to go in my book.
Bill S. Preston Esq.
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:37 AM$ony are NOT a good brand for TVs. I bought a Bravia X series in 2006.
I had a few problems with it last year, After paying $120 for a $ony rep to come to my house, and push 6 buttons on my remote, he told me my PSU was on the way out. No shit sherlock. Unfortunately, they no longer make this part, and I will have to buy a new TV!! FFFUUU $ony!
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:04 AMNothing makes me more amused when people say ‘X sucks because I had a bad experience with them’.
Guess what? You don’t equal the world
Technology is not 100% fool-proof and there will be a bad batch here and there. Suck it up and deal with it.
Pres
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:37 AMThey don’t have to equal the world, it’s their personal opinion based on first hand experience.
Suck it up? Really?
It’s their opinion, if it’s not formed from first hand experience then it’s not their opinion anymore but a frankenstein of other people’s views.
John
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:54 AMOf course, I’m sure you’d be just as philosophical if you had to pay $120 for someone to come out and tell you what you already know. You practically qualify for an award there: Silliest post I’ve ever read.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 11:32 AMJohn – Really? The Internet ‘in your shoes’ bit? Would I be mad? Yes. Would I condemn an entire company as ‘not good’ because they can fix a 5 year old TV? No.
BTW you can’t “practically qualify” for something.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 11:26 AMHis one experience makes him believe that Sony TVs are not good. Therefore his thought = the world.
And yes, suck it up. It’s a TV, not life. Save for a new one and be done with it. Nothing else you can do about it.
Bill S. Preston Esq.
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 12:51 PMI never said my word was the “World”.. I was just expressing a personal opinion on their TVs, based on my experience. I have numerous $ony products, and recently both my PS3 and TV and died. Therefore I am of the opinion their Brand, which is what you’re paying for is not what it was once worth.
Sam said below, they aren’t the cheapest sets, and I as mentioned I was prepared to pay more to have it repaired. But I wasn’t even given an opportunity to do this.
I realise cayal, that this is not the be all and end all, but if you’re dropping a few grand on a TV, you’d hope you get more than 5 years out it. My CRT lasted 15 years, never serviced, and only replaced because I wanted a bigger screen. And thats my problem, if I’d have known it was going to die after 5 years, I wouldn’t have paid for what I thought was a premium (brand) product.
I know “sometimes you get a dud” I also know “they don’t make them like they used to”.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 1:00 PMSorry Bill but when you say “$ony are NOT a good brand for TVs” (especially with that stupid fanboy $ony) you are generalising a whole company brand because of one incident.
I am pretty sure (without being able to look it up quickly) that Sony have one of the better failure rates for TVs. I know they certainly do for consoles.
Bill S. Preston Esq.
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 1:47 PM*sigh* I really shouldn’t have bothered should I?
1) I’m not a fanboy http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=%24ony
I’m not generalising. If you’d read my comment, it was two incidences personally (and FYI I have repaired around a dozen fat (YLOD) PS3′s owned by friends)
2) That may be the case with failure rates of their TV’s. Great! But if they DO fail, don’t expect a repair.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 3:25 PMYes I don’t know why you bother considering how wrong you are.
You said, and I am copying and pasting YOUR comment, that “$ony are NOT a good brand for TVs.”
That is as clear a generalisation as you will ever get.
PS. I don’t really care about your YLOD story either. It’s meaningless.
Pres
Saturday, November 26, 2011 at 3:01 AMnow cayal come down from that high horse, it’s awfully dangerous up there.
Bill S. Preston Esq.
Monday, November 28, 2011 at 8:29 AMChill out Danny boy.
Peter
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:25 AMAs a seller of this stuff, I can tell you honestly that I’ve never had a Sony TV fail. I haven’t seen an LG one either, though. Several Samsung TVs, and one Panasonic. Of the major brands, Sony seem to do a bit better, but as the former owner of a Bravos, I knew they have their quirks.
Sam
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:29 AM3D TV – Shits given: 0
Chris
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:31 AMI agree Sam. Stuff 3D and I have never liked LG’s product.
paul
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:35 AMi just watched avatar on 3d tv. bloody brilliant. some of the imax stuff is good too. whats not to like?
Sam
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 12:39 PMWhat’s not to like? It causing me eye strain, slight double imagery, and the fact my wife is blind in one eye, so 3D is completely lost on her.
Hence shits given = 0
Mr Odd
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:52 AMI hate when companies say “buy us, because more people like us”.
It’s such a dumb point. The useless pollies only got there because a lot people like them.
Remember half the country is below average IQ (well, maybe not exactly but you get my point).
Pres
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:39 AMExactly, popularity is absolutely no sign of quality. One only needs to turn on the radio to find painful, ear bleed inducing evidence of this.
TSH
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 9:52 AM3D isn’t really something that I care much about, but I fully support “passive” 3D in preference to active-shutter glasses. It boggled my mind when the first 3DTVs came out with active-shutter as the preferred design.
Matt L
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:12 AMThe difference between LG and Sony has always been price, even tho it might be small, the LG’s are nice TV”s, very simple to use over Sony and Panasonics, particuarly when it comes to menu navigation… Spare parts are WAY cheaper… I’m a tech, my opinion is based on failure rates… LG are on par with Sony, the only reason I see more LG – They sell more, way more.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:24 AMPersonally I find no difference between LG, Sony, Samsung etc, they all make fine TVs and my choice is based on best value.
Sam
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:57 AMI tend to be a bit wary of “in house” brands (think AWA and Big W, DSE at Dick Smith, etc) – but I generally have found the playing ground between the likes of LG, Panasonic, Sharp, Samsung, Sony, etc pretty even. Really, it comes down to what features are offered on each major brands models, and the value for money offered.
I bought a Sony Bravia a few months back, arguably wasn’t the cheapest TV, but various reviews put my model head and shoulders ahead of the competition for picture quality, and it was one of few models that offered the LAN port for use with internet content – not just firmware update (other models that fell in this catagory required a USB wireless dongle, which adds to the cost).
adam
Saturday, November 26, 2011 at 2:42 AMLOL all samsungs include a LAN connection and so to LG.
Sicarius123
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:24 AMWhen I went to buy my TV it came down to Sony and Samsung.
The Sony was $500 more, and had a year warranty.
I went with the cheaper Samsung with 3 years warranty (this was a couple of years ago).
Now? I’d probably go with Sharp, as far as I’m aware they’re the only TV manufacturer confident enough in their product to offer more than a 12 month warranty on an electronic item that costs thousands of dollars. I sure as shit don’t want to be buying a new TV every 12 months, and extended warranty’s are a nightmare.
John
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:57 AMThere’s such a thing as a statutory warranty though, admittedly, you’ll probably need to go to court to enforce it. But, when I had problems with my three-year old Samsung and had to pay to get it fixed, I simply emailed the chief exec of Samsung Australia and complained – I got a brand new replacement TV within a week.
spk
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:33 AMSamsung Televisions are superior to both LG and Sony… Thats my opinion anyway. I think Samsung TV’s both look better and have a better UI. The LG UI on their TV’s is horrible.
cayal
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 11:41 AMI saw Samsung’s massive 60 or 65″ 3D TV in Thailand, I think they sell them here, and it was magnificent. Probably the best TV I’ve seen.
Ozoneocean
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 4:20 PMI agree. Samsung have the best looking TV designs by a very long way. The other brands are years behind in industrial design.
The picture quality tends to look better as well.
Zac
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 6:58 PMI also agree. I have a 64D8000 Plasma and its fantastic. The active 3D is so much better, especially at those sort of sizes. I don’t know how LG can claim their 3D is 1080p. Between both eyes yes but not each. You close one eye with passive you get half that. Close one eye with active and you get 1080p still.
veddermandan
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 3:40 PMSony are the best when the enter the market than they start making everything cheap and nasty to recoup costs.
Take car stero equipement and TV’s for that matter. Sony were the best 10-15 years ago. Now they are not even in the top 5.
Sony only make good gaming consoles. Thats about it.
amitava
Saturday, November 26, 2011 at 4:30 PMLG CAN NOT BE ANY COMPARISON WITH A BRAND LIKE SONY….
SO WHATEVER THE PRODUCT LG IS FOR THOSE WHO CAN NOT AFFORD SONY…
chris
Tuesday, November 29, 2011 at 3:13 PMThe only reason LG might win a study like that is because the majority of people shop on price per inch and LG is the cheapest , and you get what you pay for. So if you can handle inferior 3D and picture quality then you mose well get an LG (which is normally the case) But for myself i like quality picture etc and Samsun has a nice Price for that. Sony is a little over priced in my opinion but then it all comes down to what brand you prefer from past experiences in electronics.