When I look at this new Samsung LCD for example. They become more goodlooking every day from other brands.

 Samsung's LE40A656 40in, Full HD LCD TV

 

 

http://whathifi.com/television/archive/2008/03/06/exclusive-review-our-verdict-on-samsung-s-le40a656-40in-full-hd-lcd-tv.aspx

In the past, the CRTs from B&O have never looked like any other TV and B&O could profit from their strength in design. With the flat panels, it is more difficult to stand out from the mass, as there is not as much to design as it was the case with CRTs. 

On the pictures, this Samsung TV really looks good. But I am sure that the touch of the Samsung is by far not as good as the touch of a BV. The materials that most companies use are not as luxury as the B&O-materials. 

samsung 80% plastics

Very nice - I like the look of it.

If I was to buy a TV soon (which I do kinda need to do, my TV is getting painfully unreliable), I'd get a Samsung LCD. I simply cannot justify the price of a BeoVision...

On the picture is looks kinda good, but the real problem with Samsung is that it will look very cheap and plastic in real life. If they can fix that, it will be a nice screen...
 

I have some of the older Samsung stuff that does have that standard cheap plastic look, but our new Samsung LCD has that gloss black (I think they call it piano black finish) frame, which looks much better than the past plastics.  As said before though, part of the question is how many $1000's you're willing to pay for the nicer frame.

Alex:

samsung 80% plastics

As is my beomaster 6500  

I don't think that the gap can ever be closed by traditional consumer electronics. As certain designers at the forefront of the current "wave" of design would stress, design concerns itself principally with the operation and intent of a product. What most of these brands are doing here is called "decoration." While it may look nice, and I agree that it looks just fine, it doesn't meet the holistic criteria of good industrial design. The decorative shell, for example, serves no operational purpose. Deiter Rams taught us that design must be consequent down to the last detail. Many of the decorative decisions made with a screen like this do not add to the ease of use, the longevity, or the performance, and so are inconsequent. Take the way most TVs have some obnoxious light (usually blue). I can only assume that this is to indicate that the television is turned on. I can't imagine why an image on the screen would not be enough to convince an observer that a screen is turned on.

My point is that design is not a race, and if design is good and genuine, then I would welcome it in every product. I am saddened, however, that decoration and design have become interchangeable. 

   

camshaft:

I have some of the older Samsung stuff that does have that standard cheap plastic look, but our new Samsung LCD has that gloss black (I think they call it piano black finish) frame, which looks much better than the past plastics.  As said before though, part of the question is how many $1000's you're willing to pay for the nicer frame.

I recently bought me a new monitor to work, a Samsung 226BW 22" TFT.  The "piano black" frame really looks good, and on the occasions that I watch digital TV on it, I have to say I really like the colour tones and it's rather good in the dark end too (to keep my opinion in perspective, I've worked for more than 10 years as a vision / camera controller for various broadcasting operations, and I've been really skeptical with flat panel TVs until just now since none of them could even approach a studio quality CRT monitor). And it was surprisingly cheap to begin with!

-mika

TripEnglish:

I don't think that the gap can ever be closed by traditional consumer electronics. As certain designers at the forefront of the current "wave" of design would stress, design concerns itself principally with the operation and intent of a product. What most of these brands are doing here is called "decoration." While it may look nice, and I agree that it looks just fine, it doesn't meet the holistic criteria of good industrial design. The decorative shell, for example, serves no operational purpose. Deiter Rams taught us that design must be consequent down to the last detail. Many of the decorative decisions made with a screen like this do not add to the ease of use, the longevity, or the performance, and so are inconsequent. Take the way most TVs have some obnoxious light (usually blue). I can only assume that this is to indicate that the television is turned on. I can't imagine why an image on the screen would not be enough to convince an observer that a screen is turned on.

My point is that design is not a race, and if design is good and genuine, then I would welcome it in every product. I am saddened, however, that decoration and design have become interchangeable. 

   

TripEnglish, I have the same view on design. This certainly is a post I support 100%.

I also agree TripEnglish and beocool, but I wouldn't proclaim B&O as a company of pure design and not decoration.  Obviously there is nothing design related about B&O offering speakers in umpteen different colors.  The company furthermore advertises how well many of its products will match your home decor.  I think it's fair to say that B&O counts on many of its buyers choosing the brand for decorative purposes, with performance taking 2nd place.

Austin

Oh, and you can turn off the blue light in the settings menu