Hands-on with JVC's "thinnest" LCD
By Richard Lawler 
posted Jan 8th 2008 9:14PM
posted Jan 8th 2008 9:14PM
posted Jan 8th 2008 9:14PM
The percentage of electronics at the end of their lives which were recycled.
The EPA found that the percentage remained consistent from 1999-2005. Even as recycling rates went up, the amount of electronics reaching end of life outpaced the increase, leaving the figure static. (source: EPA, July 2008)
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Wo, it's thin enough to bite!
1st. Whatever.
This years TVs seem to be thin but personally under 3-4 inches is thing enough. I care more about a thin bezel. That was I could fit a 46" where I would be able to fit a 42". I'd rather have more screen in the same space. There are some panels out there, but more selection would be better.
This years TVs seem to be thin but personally under 3-4 inches is thing enough. I care more about a thin bezel. That was I could fit a 46" where I would be able to fit a 42". I'd rather have more screen in the same space. There are some panels out there, but more selection would be better.
This years TVs seem to be thin but personally under 3-4 inches is thing enough. I care more about a thin bezel. That was I could fit a 46" where I would be able to fit a 42". I'd rather have more screen in the same space. There are some panels out there, but more selection would be better.
This years TVs seem to be thin but personally under 3-4 inches is thing enough. I care more about a thin bezel. That was I could fit a 46" where I would be able to fit a 42". I'd rather have more screen in the same space. There are some panels out there, but more selection would be better.
Whats the point of thinner TVs? They all are either wall mounted or on a stand. Either way a a "Phat" and a "Slim" will take up exactly the same space.
I'd prefer them to concentrate on higher contrast ratio, or somthing else useful
Whats the point of thinner TVs? They all are either wall mounted or on a stand. Either way a a "Phat" and a "Slim" will take up exactly the same space.
I'd prefer them to concentrate on higher contrast ratio, or somthing else useful
Whats the point of thinner TVs? They all are either wall mounted or on a stand. Either way a a "Phat" and a "Slim" will take up exactly the same space.
I'd prefer them to concentrate on higher contrast ratio, or somthing else useful