Inept marketing is the problem

[Biges]

Here at forum we mostly know difference between various LCD technologies and problems/benefits they provide.

But my personal experience as an IT journalist is, that the marketing departments and/or PR companies are absolutely inept when trying to explain this to the general public.

In Czechia NEC is probably the worst. They use nearly the identical description for MVA panels as well as for TN or IPS. I got their PR about NEC 2490 being introduced in Europe. We all know here it is an excellent monitor, or at least it used to be before other come. But the PR was horrible, they totally failed to explain why the monitor is so great. No wonder the press release hasn't been widely published. I had to write my own news on the topic.

The people in the NEC marketing department are nice and trying to be helpful, however they can barely distinguish between H-IPS and TN. For the, the gamut is something cool and every monitor "increases productivity" and blah, blah.

So! Customers are not stupid. But not every customer can do a through research amd it is up to the marketing people to truly explain, why the hell is that damned monitor so expensive. And it can be a long adn tedious work, but it pays back eventually.

For xample the knowledge about LCDs in Czechia is so bad, that even some professional graphic designers are willing to say that PVA is better than IPS. (Eizo has a very good propaganda here )

(Publishing this article on a Czech forum would probably result into me being bashed by Eizo and Samsung hardcore fans )

 

[brumwald]

I don't agree. PR people can do whatever they want (or don't want) - it shouldn't matter. Even good PR is utterly useless to base a decision on.

What matters is reviews and the reviewers of LCDs truly do a poor job. They *all* (even respected ones) say that wide-gamut is a good thing eventhough for most people it's the opposite. And everyone seems to believe that higher brightness is better, even in absurd levels - which is just soo wrong.

Reviews also tend to keep it very simple. This is the best/worst monitor is basically the conclusion you get out of many reviews when in reality it depends on so many factors which is never even brought up.

It's no wonder manufacturers doesn't seem that keen on bringing quality products to the market, noone would notice them anyway.

 

[Biges]

While you don't agree with me, I agree with you
Yes, reviewers tend to keep things simple. And not to criticize the reviewed monitors much. To keep good relations.

 

[Snowdog]

PR sucks everywhere, with every product. Their job seems to be to hide the truth whenever possible and harp on meaningless things. They hype dynamic contrast (poison) wide gamut (more poison) and higher brightness (yet more).

They won't tell us black levels, panel type (and thus REAL viewing angles), input lag...

On TVs they have already stopped reporting real contrast and only report dynamic, it can't be long for monitors to follow.

Most reviewer seem to just follow along, with the PR.

The best reviews have been advanced user reviews in this Forum IMO. Some decent reviews will make minor mention of wide gamut like it might not be ideal for everyone, but they make it seem like it would be better for most when the opposite is true.. etc...

Yeah, I basically agree with both of you, but I wouldn't call PR inept. Their job function is mostly selling the lie, not the truth. People who buy most cheap crap don't want to know that their product is inferior, thus they are keeping the masses happy. PR mission accomplished. My buddy can be happy that his cheaper screen, is Brighter than mine, has wider gamut, and has much higher contrast (dynamic). PR delivers another happy customer.