"According to TI-"

As I said... you can believe maketing press 'data' from TI, but that makes you a sucker.

"I've watched several dozen DLP systems and never saw a stuck mirror, in some cases on systems with thousands of hours on them."

Sure you have. That's why you've never mentioned it till now that you've seen, what... 40+ DLP systems and all perfect? Uh huh.

"Perhaps your experience is not a representative sample?-"
Well, it's the only experience I can go by, and it's about 50/50 for DLP systems w/ stuck pixels. I have also read lots of others on the AVS forum finding stuck pixels.
I never guessed at how many in total number of percent or DLP's are actually bad, but I certainly wouldn't believe the lies TI fools you with.

"I really doubt the manufacturers (OEMs like Samsung, Mitsubishi and Zenith) would jump onto the worst, least reliable and most expensive technology with both feet."

First, none of them have replaced their CRT lines in RP so don't fool yourself (or others) that they've jumped in w/ both feet. They're just testing the waters at best.

Second, Samsung and Zenith are well know for being poor qualtiy brands. As is RCA who tried and failed to bring a LCoS to market. JVC had not failed in this respect.

"I expect the expert engineers and scientists in the appropriate fields at the companies in question have evaluated the competing technologies and have rational defensable reasons to recommend DMD to their employer. I have no basis to second guess that level of expertise. Do you?"

Yes. They're not the final word in production. Again... don't fool yourself and don't try to fool others here. All I do is correct all the conjecture you spit out.

As I have said (man this is annoying)... TI doesn't fix bad pixels under a certain (almost unreachable) number. All the bad chips I've seen only had one bad pixel, but that was enough to ruin the image and any reasonable distance.

For Samsung etc... why not market a system using this technology? They'll make money off of it (lots of other companies are) and won't have to bother with bad pixel complaints.

They're businesses and it's all about profit and keeping up with the competition... NOT that they actually think it's the best picture technology there is (or better than CRT or plasma or LCD, etc..).

Mitsu had one of the first rear DLP sets on the market years ago. It cost $16K (WAAAY more than their own CRT set of the same size) and looked much much worse. So why did they do it? To work on this technology. I'm sure they sold out of all these sets too to suckers who thought it was such a 'cool new thing' and were too stupid to tell the diff. from a CRT picture. Probably a few dishonest salemen helped too.

"Please understand - I don't intend any of the things I say regarding the various technologies as a personal slam. I mention this because you seem to take some of this very personally."

Well it's very annoying to have to correct you every post you make. I feel the need to so you won't fool anyone who is new to this subject. I wish you'd just quit posting these distorted bits of info though.

"I do understand roughly how the GLV stuff as published by SL works and their literature even states that the scanning beam is moved across the screen in a linear fashion. I don't understand what you're so uptight about."

Yeah, calling me 'uptight', that's not a personal slam now is it?

"Your whole point on GLV is conjecture."

"The price numbers are obviously pulled from thin air, I was merely trying to illustrate that as MEMS get cheaper to make the distribution of costs in the 1D vs. 2D approaches means the 1D approach is likely to benefit less and thus not scale as well with the technology."

Based on wild conjecture and ignoring actual 'real world' findings or that actual prototype, but what does the actual working projector have to do with anything right?

"I tried it once without an example and you didn't understand, so I tried to be helpful and make a simple example. Anyone with a background in manufacturing or engineering would understand this as almost second nature."

Oh damn! One more cheap shot! Don't claim that you don't mean any personal slams. You're just flat out full of it.

Your 'examples' were so 'simple' that they had certain words or phrases that you needed to define before someone else could clearly understand you, and your misuse of terms didn't make you any clearer either... like when you implied GLV is something diff. than a MEMS system.

"The fact that some LCDs actually need external or motorized adjustments indicates to me that in reality they all (or at least most) probably have internal adjustments."

They don't. Ask every LCD owner. And you still haven't commented on the LCD projector you claim you've seen. You say it doesn't matter if it's convergence is perfect or not (which I find funny since it probably has perfect convergence at any reasonable viewing distance and just backs up my point that color convergence error is NOT an issue.

"Also DMDs (pixels) are smaller that the LCDs I was able to find specs on which would only make the alignment requirements tighter, by a factor of 2-3 in the cases I could easily find."

There are LCD's that are just as small as DLP. You again, speak with too-limited knowledge.

"Of course the obvious thing no one has worried about is that the GLV ribbons work by flexing back and forth really really fast.-"

Well, the designers of it spoke about it, but they don't matter right? What do they know? Unlike your total trust TI's press release info. What a joke!

"-In a big scale machine that would be suicide-"

Why even bring up something so pointless as to say 'if it were really big..' You could (pointlessly) say the same thing for DLP.

The GLV ribbons have been tested just like the DLP mirrors have been tested. The GLV ribbons (unlike DLP) CAN'T get stuck (that ones's a fact) and have been found to not break due to such tiny movement. Maybe that second one's not true though and Sony's finding out they do break? Who knows. Personally I doubt it, but who cares.

It's not on the market yet so it's just pointless guessing. And maybe Sony'll release the system even if they do find the ribbons to have occational flaws.

TI has gotten away with that with bad DLP chips.

BTW, I saw a bad pixel on the Sony GrandWega a couple days ago and the store. Since it's a 3 chip system only one of the colors was out so at a reasonable viewing distance you couldn't harldy see the flaw.

I'd prefer NO flaws (like in ALL the CRT RP's there), but it was much less of a flaw than on the new Samsung with the bright white stuck 'on' pixel I saw there (that was probably the one of the newest sets in the store).