I've wanted something like this for a while, but lcd is a non starter for this screen shape, and plasma isn't much better. This really only works for really big screens, for example a 50" 21:9(7:3) is the same width as a 52" 16:9, but is only as tall as a 40" 16:9. Considering that the vast majority of films are shot in 16:9 do you really want to sacrifice that much height for only a little extra width. Once screens get big enough, 80"+ it becomes less of an issue, but have you priced 50" or larger flat screens lately.

1 word: PROJECTOR

Sorry, Philips, but you're on the wrong track with this one. With so much viewing still at 4:3, with television and videogames moving to 16:9, and with most movies shot at 16:9 or 1:85:1, you're not going to get any mainstream play with this. Even niche home theater folks would either a) have a projector that can accommodate a much larger screen at any aspect ratio or b) turn their lights down so that they wouldn't notice black bars anyway.

My one word? Bizarre.

A couple years back I bought one of the last Sony 4:3 38" HDTV CRTs, with built in upconvert (even on 4:3!), and weighs in at 230 pounds, (let's see someone carry that off!). Most programing is still in 4:3. DVD subtitles on wide screen editions get put in the unused portion. Unless subtitles will be going vertical I don't see the advantage. May be with Asian languages that might be possible, but still unworkable. 21:9? I'm not all that happy with 16:9. My brother's 16:9 set ends up showing most programing with black columns on the sides. Even widescreen presentations aren't always a perfect fit. Widescreen is a marketing trick for a smaller area size to have a higher diagonal measurement. Some HD channel documentaries are upconverted at the point of broadcast, they end up squat on full mode. With my 4:3 set, I can raise the height to fit proportion, effectively full 4:3 corner to corner HD. Looks great! I really want to see 4:3 comeback, never happen, I know. Taller ratios give more flexibility. I have the option of adjusting height that a wide screen user doesn't have. And what's with that progressively widenning stretch some wide sets use to "fit" a narrower image, looks like crap. I got used to the letter box bars a long time ago. What annoys me more are vertical side bars on a wide screen, even is the presentation is in a semi-wide format. 21:9 might work for a computer monitor, side by side windows with no divider, or 180 degree view video games, like drving games or flight games. Philips you really screwed the pooch on this one.

This tech would do better for computer monitors allowing more real estate. Being a graphic designer, I would love having this kind of screenage for projects. As others have posted, projection systems can manage the wider aspect ratios

What this needs is an option to watch 2 4:3 programs side by side in splitscreen.
Monitor 2 news channels at the same time.
Watch one program while keeping an eye on the score in that sport on another channel.
It would be the ultimate channel surfing feature!

LOOKS LIKE ANOTHER HIGH TECK DEVIE THAT I WILL WAIT A YEAR TO SEE IF IT FLOATS OR SWIMS WITH THE SHARKS..
GUESS ALL YOUR 16.1E USELESS NOW PLEASE SEND TO EM LOL

THANKL YOU
CHARLEY
GOOD BYE SAMSUNG 53 INCH NEXT CHRISTMAS WILL BE IN 21.1 HAHHAHAHA

The funny thing is, movies used to be shown in the same aspect ratio as your traditional CRT. The movie industry switched to widescreen to entice moviegoers back to the theaters. Then comes the 16:9 TV. Then movies are shown in a "greater aspect". Now the 21:9 TV. Pretty soon you're going to need a 360 degree TV with a door to capture the "true cinematic experience"...

The funny thing is, movies used to be shown in the same aspect ratio as your traditional CRT. The movie industry switched to widescreen to entice moviegoers back to the theaters. Then comes the 16:9 TV. Then theaters show even wider movie aspects. Now the 21:9 TV. Pretty soon you're going to need a 360 degree TV with a door to capture the "true cinematic experience"...

Makes no sense to release a 21:9 TV.
Only the most expensive films shot on Panavision and 70mm are native 2.35:1. 70 percent of all films shot worldwide on Arriflex 35mm are 1.85:1 aka 16:9. This means that 7 out of 10 DVDs that you own are native 1.85:1 shot. This TV will only be able to show 3 out of every 10 films ever made.
Why would anyone buy a TV that can only play 3 out of 10 films properly.
Unless the whole world started making films on Panavision (not possible), I don't see how this TV is even relevant.
The only thing this TV's good for watching "Transformers" over and over again.