Originally Posted by venus933
What's simply not true? Perhaps it wasn't clear but those comments are also from the author of the article. I think we all understand your views but I don't know how I can make it any more clear from my prior post that cnet (i.e. Katzmaier) rates the M series higher than JU7100 strictly on PQ - forget about perceive value and the final score.
He is testing the TV in a totally dark room except when he tests for glare and reflections. If you light a candle in the room the FALD technology advantage goes away. He does not share this in the article and I think it is misleading. I would say 99% of my customers say they watch TV with some ambient light in the room. Also, Vizio's Fald tech has too few zones and is not highly rated.
He then goes on to say related to video processing "The M series performed admirably in this area, almost as well as the P series (after its software update) in fact. Neither quite equal the Samsung displays, but are still very good."
So "he" says the Samsung's have better video processing but yet he rates the Vizios higher related to picture quality because they deliver slightly better blacks in a "totally" dark room that will only benefit a small group of people. I maintain that this review is biased toward Vizio and he touts the black level thing because this is the only advantage he can find with this TV.
I don't want to be labeled as the great defender of Samsung but I think my customers need to know the whole story. Sometimes what is "not" said is more important than what "is" said. I don't own a Samsung TV and hope I am never forced to buy an LCD TV so I am not defending a TV I currently own. In other words, I don't have a horse in this race. I am using Samsung as a reference because 95% of my customers are only interested in 2 companies (Samsung and Vizio). Even though I think Sony, LG and Sharp make great products as well but only a very small percentage of customers are interested in those lines. The bottom line is Samsung makes a better TV than Vizio but it should be better because it costs more.
As for performance in a room with ambient light, again from the cnet review of the M series:
"The screen finish on the M and P series is an identical semi-matte that does an excellent job controlling reflections -- better than any glossy screen. On the other hand it fails to preserve black levels as well as the glossier finish of the Samsungs, robbing the image of some contrast. That said I find bright reflections more annoying than lack of contrast in bright rooms, so overall I consider the Vizios (and the matte Sony) superior to the Samsungs in this category (Bright Lighting)."
I'm certainly not asking you to accept Katzmaier/cnet as the final authority but if you want to represent his views/cnet accurately then there's no way around it - he simply thinks the M series has better PQ regardless of price and lighting conditions.
He is confirming here what I have said. The Vizios can't compete with the Samsungs when ambient light is present. Also, this is his opinion which is subjective related to reflections. I can tell you that the majority of customers prefer the Samsung gloss glass over the Vizio "hazy/foggy" glass. The video has more "pop" with the Samsungs and most customers prefer the light absorbing/blackish tint with the Samsungs versus the Vizios hazy/foggy glass. Some customers have even said we need to clean the Vizio displays with Windex.