Sharp's 20-inch AQUOS DX LCD HDTV has a built-in Blu-ray player, no 1080p panel

Cute Sharp, real cute. Brag about releasing the world's first 20-inch LCD HDTV with a built-in Blu-ray player, but don't even mention to consumers that they won't have the luxury of seeing their flicks in full resolution. For reasons unknown, the latest set in the AQUOS DX range does indeed pack a remarkably convenient integrated BD player, but the 1,366 x 768 resolution makes the whole thing sort of pointless. As Liz Lemon would say: "That's a deal-breaker, ladies." At any rate, folks who snap one up in Japan will also find a digital TV tuner, DVD support, a 1,500:1 contrast ratio and 450 nits of brightness. It'll be available in black (LC-20DX1-B) and white (LC-20DX1-W) for ¥150,000 ($1,593) at the tail end of next month in the Land of the Rising Sun.

[Via Engadget German]

Gallery: Sharp's 20-inch AQUOS DX LCD HDTV has a built-in Blu-ray player, no 1080p panel

• 
• 
• 

[muddyh2o @ May 22nd 2009 7:49AM]

Liz Lemon! What a creative and topical reference!

[eric f. @ May 22nd 2009 9:10AM]

I hope you're being sarcastic...

[supernads @ May 22nd 2009 7:55AM]

Who needs 1080P on a 20" panel? Are you sitting 2" away?

[Tim @ May 22nd 2009 8:57AM]

At least if it was a higher resolution it could double as a computer monitor.

[Matt @ May 22nd 2009 9:28AM]

You read my mind. Seems to be a waste to spend the $$$ on blu ray for a measley 20 inches. Pop a dvd in that bitch and move on.

[EtherGnat @ May 22nd 2009 12:45PM]

Yes, 1080p would be pointless on a 20" set unless you were sitting right in front of it. You can see at difference in 720p over 480p from 6-7 feet though, so that's not unreasonable. This TV can still show 3x the resolution you'd get with a DVD.

Even if you're sitting far enough away you can't see the greater resolution having a Blu-ray player can still be a benefit. If you're buying Blu-rays for the big screen in the living room you don't want to have to also buy a DVD for the TV in the bedroom.

[wrs589 @ May 22nd 2009 7:59AM]

Over $1,500 for a 20" LCD with a blu-ray built in?

Very pricey!

[Boards of Canada @ May 22nd 2009 8:44AM]

I know I know, welcome to Japan! You can have a big 30 inches Dell monitor (2560 x 1600) for that price.

The same model will be less expensive when its out of Japan though...

[Rick @ May 22nd 2009 9:15AM]

I was thinking the same. I got a 20" HD Vizio for $350. And you can get a BRD player for $200 now. So, hmm, $550 or $1500?

[CJ @ May 22nd 2009 12:59PM]

I wonder. . . if I put a bluray player in my computer, will it instantly be worth an extra $1200?

[Casper42 @ May 22nd 2009 3:20PM]

No kidding, Here's an IDEA, buy a Dell Bundle with a 24" 1080p LCD that includes Speakers and a TV Tuner (T240HD, etc) AND AN ENTIRE COMPUTER for less than $1500.

You can still watch TV and Blu-Ray and then pretty much do whatever you want on the PC to boot.

[ElevatorHappyFun @ May 22nd 2009 8:00AM]

Well in order to even see the 1080 on a screen that size you have to sit about 3-4 feet away. The human eye can not tell the difference between 1080 and 720 on a 50" screen if you sit farther away than 9 feet.

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

putting a Blu-ray into a screen that small was pointless to begin with, other than marketing fluff.

As a former, honest, home theater salesman; don't let them trick you into something you don't need.

[Barky @ May 22nd 2009 8:33AM]

Most blu rays don't even have enough detail to take advantage of 1080p resolution. Film encodes are usually soft enough that a 1080p encode looks identical to a 720p encode upscaled to 1080p.

[crystalsinger @ May 22nd 2009 10:23AM]

"As a former, honest, home theater salesman"

Hey Santa Claus called - he wants to know if you're still on for poker with the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy next Friday...

[ElevatorHappyFun @ May 22nd 2009 6:37PM]

Haha!

Yeah yeah, at least I wasn't a sleazy car salesman!

[Nathan @ May 22nd 2009 8:00AM]

Wouldn't 1080p on a 20" screen be kind of pointless?

[Kenjis9965 @ May 22nd 2009 8:20AM]

Exactly...

Even for Blu-Ray, 1080p is largely overrated....unless you're sitting very very close

[nikster @ May 22nd 2009 10:14AM]

1080p looks awesome on a high quality HD projector. It totally blew me away. But that was a 6' screen, with a $5k projector.

On 20" it's most certainly overkill. Not a dealbreaker by any means. What is a dealbreaker is the price on this puppy. Then again, maybe it makes sense in urban Japan, where space is at a premium - maybe you want to have a 20" screen because you put it in a tiny room.

[Reallynotnick @ May 22nd 2009 8:05AM]

Wow aren't we picky! It's a freaking 20in. BD looks great on a 720p screen, a big step up from a 480p DVD. Not to mention it's just nice to be able to play your BD movies on any TV.

[james @ May 22nd 2009 8:03AM]

What the hell??
what planet are Sharp from?
That resolution + blu ray is like Fiat fitting 10 year old Puntos with farrari slick tyres??

[nikster @ May 22nd 2009 10:15AM]

Fiat - Fix It Again Tomorrow.

[dandmcd @ May 22nd 2009 8:05AM]

Darren, you can't see the extra 1080p pixels on a tv of that size, so why would they even bother to make the TV 1080p? So they can sell it to uneducated people saying 1080p is way better then 720p on a tiny screen?

Sometimes I wonder if you ever learn anything working over there..

[nxp3 @ May 22nd 2009 8:07AM]

It's so irresponsible of companies these days to do shit like this. A lot of consumer aren't educated enough to know. Some will just think, ok its flatscreen, it got bluray so it must be what's everyone is buying, I'll get it too. It's 20 inch for god sake, get a dvd player instead. I kind of think portable bluray players are pointless also, but I guess some might come with an hdmi output to a large tv. I mean how do you explain the success of the netbook

[Bengt_Nilsson @ May 22nd 2009 8:08AM]

That's one ugly tv. The stand looks really cheap.

[Superstition @ May 22nd 2009 8:12AM]

All that's missing from the pic is the word "FAIL" in big, white bubble-letters.

[Aspartame @ May 22nd 2009 8:48AM]

FAIL

[Freddie @ May 22nd 2009 9:00AM]

Your eyes aren't capable of telling the difference between 720 and 1080 on a screen that small, provided you aren't sitting so close you could lick the screen.

[seanbradford @ May 22nd 2009 9:47AM]

It's not the lines of resolution, but the lack of compression that's the big thing with BD...

[singj65 @ May 22nd 2009 10:49AM]

I don't think that Blu-Ray is catching on as fast as they would like.
http://jamesmsingleton.com

[strider_mt2k @ May 22nd 2009 11:37AM]

Weak sauce indeed.

[guy943 @ May 22nd 2009 1:40PM]

Summation: The dealbreaker isn't the 720p, which is okay for 20"; it's the price, which is not okay for 20".

Me want foooood! I mean... That's a dealbreaker, ladies.

[arkweld @ May 22nd 2009 2:09PM]

You're all missing the point.

This shouldn't be intended as a main video source. It's a secondary unit you can stick in a bedroom, kitchen or workout room that allows you to still watch your collection of discs and their interactive content.

Buying a VHS and DVD copy of everything 10 years ago so you could watch in separate rooms wasn't fun then either. That's when people just started buying equipment for all rooms that could play the same thing.

It's no surprise this is Japan-only. They more easily adapt to new technologies and accept they will be the norm in the future far more easily than the Western world.

[Invisiblemoose @ May 22nd 2009 3:58PM]

The unit itself has merit -- the price is absurd. That's what most of the discussion's been about so far...

[nthn @ May 23rd 2009 4:19PM]

Even if it did have 1080p, there's still the problem of that 20" screen. 1080p won't really make that much of a difference on a screen that size.