Plasma tech would have been awesome if it would have kept getting enhanced. Most LED Tvs stilkl cannot beat a plasma thats the same price from a great company, will be sad to see them go when plasma ever dies, LED just cannot match it yet
I think the image burn issue with the earlier models may have scared a lot of the buying public. Although problems can be fixed over time, sometimes an initial problem isn't forgotten and remains urban legend even after it has been mostly resolved. Plasma Power consumption is still higher than the counterpart and always has been.,You cannot beat some of the amazing contrast and saturation this display has though. It's a shame Panasonic is leaving the business, I don't think many will disagree that they consistently produced the best picture quality with plasma.
@wolley74: You should check out Samsung's plasma line-up. They still "enhance" them with each generation and make very good quality TVs (considering they make the display for most companies building LEDs, too, they clearly know what they're doing).
I own a Samsung plasma about 1 year old and it's one of the best pictures I've ever seen. The response time for console gaming can't be beat, the motion blur is non-existent. In comparison, a standard LCD simply doesn't match up for motion blur issues, though a quality LED-LCD gets very close; high-end LEDs match up to plasmas, but just in the last couple years.
Color depth on plasmas also can't be beat. On top of that, Samsung has basically eliminated burn-in (unless you leave a static image on the screen for hours which is jus stupid).
I'll be sad if/when Samsung quits producing plasmas. I'm starting to like a lot of the modern LEDs, but I don't see other manufacturers stopping plasmas to fall in line with Panasonic. They're hardly an industry leader in TVs.
That said, it's unfortunate that the *myths* about plasmas have persisted even through the last few generations of improvements in them.
I think marketing has just really let down plasma, probably because of the beancounters. Plasma displays are generally more expensive to produce at a given quality level, and since it's often hard to properly market "this 60" TV has more contrast and deeper saturation than this other 60" TV, and only costs 40% more!", basically other flat-panel tech has taken off. 9 out of 10 consumers know "I want a big flat TV, say 42" to put in the living room, I see this ad for one at $899, Hi-Def, 1080P, and this other one, Hi-Def, 1080P, at $1299.... I'll go for $899." They don't stop to ask why the price difference, or more importantly, do a quality side-by-side review doing direct source material (not shared in-store signals under bright flourescent lights). Put "The 5th Element" Blu-Ray direct to a top-quality backlit panel (LED or Flouro, doesn't matter), and a top-quality plasma of the same dimensions, and it'd be no contest. But most stores that have anything on display, will put the "average" quality plasma, next to the top quality LED, and say "see, not much difference". Gone are the days of high-end showrooms, with well-trained staff, actually SELLING features, instead of just moving boxes.
My first big screen was an HD plasma, a 2006 Samsung 42" 720p. The power consumption is atrocious and the heat output is brutal (great in the winter time though). However, it still has a better picture than my 1-year old LG 47" LED minus the resolution difference. It's tempting to go out and get one final plasma while waiting for 4K TVs to drop in price and cable/satellite format to offer enough 4K channels to make it worthwhile. We are several years away from that still.
Plasma reached a kind of pinnacle with the Pioneer Kuro and since OLED is on the horizon (which will be so much better than any tech that has gone before) it makes sense to stop production now and focus on the future. 4K will go the way of 3D eventually with the sheer lack of content killing it off, but OLED will be here to stay.