Originally Posted by patrick99
No matter what the display size it's still the same number of pixels. I think my viewing distance compensates for screen size. Since you say you won't answer any more questions on PQ I won't bother to ask what type of comparison method you used to arrive at your conclusion that the PQ was "certainly more detailed" than the PS3. I won't ask whether you had two copies of the same title, one in each player, switching back and forth to view the same scenes as close in time as possible, which is what I did.
Patrick, I just have to ask... Why do you care what I think or how I came to my conclusions? You've got the player right in front of you in your own system. You can make that determination on your own. If you don't feel like its good enough for your needs, take it back. You're looking for validation of a purchase that you just made, but only you can provide that. Myself and most everyone else here that has bought this player agree that it appears to the be the best overall Blu-ray player released. You either agree with that opinion, or you don't.Worst case scenario
, the image quality is identical to the PS3, but you still get audio bitstreaming support, profile 1.1, IR remote ability, no fans, resume on most BDs and DVDs even after the unit is turned off, and front display (one of the things I hated most about the PS3 is that I couldn't see how far I was into a film without pulling up the on-screen display). To me, even if the picture quality was 100% identical to the PS3, the Panny offers so many other benefits that it wouldn't matter. The PS3 is out of my system for good.