Televisions -- HALP! :[

[pyrofyr]

I must ask, does anyone know anything about televisions? I've been scouring the internet, asking most people I know, and getting mixed information/incomplete information.

Here's what I'm looking for:
A television for my room, that is a flat panel (can be mounted on the wall easily), is 20~30", has good quality (will last at least 5 years in todays standards) and is NOT pixelated (my biggest problem).

From what I've understood from my initial searches, interlaced imaging is better than progressive and as of yet they don't even have the technology to fully utilize it. From my second search (tonight) I've found that it seems that progressive is better as most DVD players now only support progressive-scan, and it has double the frame rate, interlaced however having better image quality.

I'm pretty lost at this point, because everywhere has different information, and I figure with all the people here, (and most knowing a good deal of electronics) maybe someone will no. If not, ignore this :[

--
I'll have around 800 bucks to spend on one, but of course, the cheaper the better. Walmart has a deal on one that's amazing at the moment.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...ct_id=10248592
Well it's 23" which is definitely in my range, it's 300 bucks leaving me with a nice deal left over.
450:1 contrast ratio seems crap. I know on monitors 10,000:1 is ideal, anything lower than 3,000:1 is usually considered crap.
16-ms response time (Crap? Not sure what 'decent' or 'great' is)
1366x768 - I hear that on 1080 it just 'rounds it down' and ends up with a ****ty picture, but I'm not sure how true that is.

[vladekxbootes]

I would go for a samsung or sharp aquos tvs, they're good quality and cheap. I never heard of Polaroid so I wouldn't go for it.

[darksidehero]

Panosonicccc?