Yes! What about power consumption? How green is it? You should also list that...

@Noobs-R-Us:

...and not just when it's turned on, either. Let us know how much it's sucking on when it's in "stand-by" mode also. 150 watts when I'm not even watching it is completely ridiculous.

@Noobs-R-Us: This is strictly about weight loss. We'll deal with your request in an upcoming feature, I PROMISE!!!

This should all the companies to improve their profit margins by saving on shipping costs from China.

Thin looks a lot better mounted on my wall. Also, by reducing the weight flexible mounts are much more viable. This allows the TV to be used a multiple viewing angles more safely. Imagine an open floor plan where the TV could be viewed in one of two rooms at a time just by pivoting it towards it.

I long for the day, when I screw two circuit boards to the wall, program how far the are apart into them, paint the wall between them and have a display as big as I paint it right on the wall.

I was hoping that the TV's would actually get heavier. Carrying that new TV into the house is the only exercise I get every 10 years. Fat guy watching watching skinny TV.

When OLED TVs come out, these thin LCDs and Plasmas are going to look FAT!

prepubescent cheerleaders FTL

@Kaiser-Machead:
she looked pubescent to me, officer

You can tell there was absolutely no debate about which of those girls got the center spot.

@tdj114: 150watts in standby mode? I don't think there has ever been a TV that used 150 watts in standby. You must be mistaken. My 42inch plasma uses about .7W in standby.

Coming from the "wussy girls with no upper body strength" crew, I'm OVERJOYED to see these numbers! Now I can move a TV all by myself. Awesome.

Now I just need these thin TV's to be at a reasonable price when I buy a new one this time next year. Well, assuming I can wait that long ;)

Thin is stupid.

I can get a cheaper one that's not much thicker and includes an optical drive!

@mrgingis: I think he's referring to an article that stated a 50ish" plasma uses around $150 worth of electricity a year if left in standby. Assuming that electricity cost around 11 cents per Kw/H.

@mrgingis:

Upon further review, 150 watts is overstating it. However, I've found comparisons with a couple of plasmas in the 65-8 watt range. Gizmodo or Engadget (can't remember which) did their own comparison a few months ago testing an assortment of HDTVs and all found them to be surprisingly hungry in standby mode. Unfortunately, I couldn't find either through a quick search. If you don't believe me, feel free to Google it on your own.

@Wilson Rothman: From your mouth to Buckwheat's ears, may god rest his poor soul.

The thin ones are not plasma or LCD. They're organic LED.

The downside to lighter TVs is that a single thief can carry it away.

Dude, 50% reduced weight in plasma sets is amazing. I can actually mount a plasma by myself now. Ive seen some scary shit where plasmas just fall off the wall. >:(

@CaliforniaKid: If you rig it to explode while being stolen, it won't matter.

@CaliforniaKid: Exactly what I thought. If I can carry it on my own, I expect that a thief could too.

Maybe you could hide the TV under the sofa at night.

@tdj114: come on dudes, dont ask so much from a tech news blog. They are not the UL.

Does the weight really matter all that much?

I hate the fact that I jumped on the 1080P bandwagon too soon. Now my XBR3 is outdone and obsolete with the new 120Hz buzzword and tech feature, and then the new thin is in. How can I trade in my Sony and get the latest and greatest, when I thought that was what I was doing when I bought my first LCD with 1080P? Do I make the jump now to the new 1080P, 120Hz, thin or do I wait to make sure there is nothing more revolutionary on the horizon again?

the tv's are getting thinner while the viewer is ghetting fatter.

Gooo panthers! amirite?