What are you talking about? CNET clearly listed the SRT feature under the "bad".
CNET: "The bad: Inaccurate primary color of green and cyan; subpar uniformity; proprietary upconversion circuit introduces edge enhancement; lackluster design."
See? There it is right there, just like Darren said.
Truth Teller 3 @ Dec 18th 2008 12:21PM: "As for Darren's claims about the SRT (which is not btw the 'spurs engine' Cell design)"
First of all, nobody said anything about a "'spurs engine' Cell design". Second, that's not Darren's claim. CNET was the one who said it's gimmicky...which isn't exactly a glowing remark for the technology.
CNET: "The bottom line: Consider the midprice Toshiba 45XV545U for its decent overall picture quality, not its gimmicky standard-definition processing."
Truth Teller 3 @ Dec 18th 2008 12:21PM: "Overall they have some nice things to say about this HD TV from decent blacks to good deinterlacing to good pull-down as well as some good anti-judder settings."
And so did Darren, if you'd even bothered to read what he wrote. The only thing he really knocked was the same thing CNET did: the SRT. The rest he said was a "decent experience", which is exactly what a 3 of 5 means...not bad, but not great. Good black, but bad color accuracy. Good de-judder mode, but bad uniformity. Sounds like an average tv to me...
You talk about Darren cherry-picking, but I would say that it's you doing it. I know you dislike pretty much anything Darren writes, but I would say he was much closer to the tone of the review than you are.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
daaper @ Dec 18th 2008 1:26PM
What are you talking about? CNET clearly listed the SRT feature under the "bad".
CNET: "The bad: Inaccurate primary color of green and cyan; subpar uniformity; proprietary upconversion circuit introduces edge enhancement; lackluster design."
See? There it is right there, just like Darren said.
Truth Teller 3 @ Dec 18th 2008 12:21PM: "As for Darren's claims about the SRT (which is not btw the 'spurs engine' Cell design)"
First of all, nobody said anything about a "'spurs engine' Cell design". Second, that's not Darren's claim. CNET was the one who said it's gimmicky...which isn't exactly a glowing remark for the technology.
CNET: "The bottom line: Consider the midprice Toshiba 45XV545U for its decent overall picture quality, not its gimmicky standard-definition processing."
Truth Teller 3 @ Dec 18th 2008 12:21PM: "Overall they have some nice things to say about this HD TV from decent blacks to good deinterlacing to good pull-down as well as some good anti-judder settings."
And so did Darren, if you'd even bothered to read what he wrote. The only thing he really knocked was the same thing CNET did: the SRT. The rest he said was a "decent experience", which is exactly what a 3 of 5 means...not bad, but not great. Good black, but bad color accuracy. Good de-judder mode, but bad uniformity. Sounds like an average tv to me...
You talk about Darren cherry-picking, but I would say that it's you doing it. I know you dislike pretty much anything Darren writes, but I would say he was much closer to the tone of the review than you are.