Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
Sorry the cores didn't help. Like I said, experts could speak more on them.
I've already read up on the topic, so I know what the experts say about ferrite chokes, which is why I corrected you. Suggesting that they would address mechanical noise is simply spreading misinformation. Even Samsung states they are included to "reduce interference".
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
I have no problem with pointing out the issues to an extent. It just got so out of hand that I had to speak up.
And I submit to you that the only thing which may have gotten a little out of hand was people posting who have no direct experience with this set.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
And, Samsung or any other manufacturer couldn't care less about these posts.
Let's agree to disagree then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
What they do care about are calls and service visits, because in both instances they have to pay people to give you some attention.
Agreed. Precisely what I have been encouraging in the
relevant thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
Floating Blacks are a "feature" of all current plasmas. Said that a few pages back. It's the C.A.T.S setting that you can't totally turn off due to energy ratings. They can fix it if enough let them know DIRECTLY through an update.
The source of the problem is well known and you're not the first to point it out here. Unfortunately, the implementation is severely flawed. Energy standards do not require this function to be locked in as it has been. At the very least, there should be a reduced brightness setting that will eliminate the pops. Janos offers some good insight
in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BAMABLUHD 
By peer review, I did not mean scientifically, but literally. A reviewers "peers" are other reviewers. Credibility leads to readers, so I did not flub on that point either.
I simply expressed my opinion that this is not a term to be used casually. Suggesting that the few review sites out there (some of which are highly questionable to begin with, IMO) can be considered "peer reviewed" is misleading. At best it's casual, but what effect is it having?
Most importantly:
How many review sites actually use random samples? For example, cnet gets their review set direct from Samsung.
How many review sites actually spend the time required to fully experience the set? I mean, really LIVE with it? None.