We have a Sharp Aquos LC-52D62U LCD in the Den and a Panasonic TH-50PX60U plasma in the bedroom. The two strike me as ever so slightly different from one another in ways that are hard to put into words and which I wouldn't associate with a difference in quality. We probably would have purchased two of the Panasonics (better price) except for the real or percieved plasma burn in factor (Seems like everyone you ask has a different take on this issue but some variation on the "LCD is less prone to burn in than plasma" tends to come across from 13 to 15 or so of every 20 salespeople you talk to.). The Sharp is being used hooked up to a video gaming console among the other usual inputs...
Why are LCDs more popular than plasma?
I have a rough time seeing differences in picture quality between brands and models, but the difference between plasma and LCD are overt even to me. When I go to bestbuy, fry's, etc. and gaze at their displays of flatpannels, plasma televisions just look beautiful, despite the reflections, while LCDs just remind me of working on my laptop. Is there more merit to the quality of LCD than I observe or is there some other reason LCDs outnumber plasmas?