1080 HD TVs

"Ed" <eabowden RemoveThis @onetel.com> wrote in message
news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>

Well it is allways the same today, something better tomorrow.
Just think about the PC you on. Buy another today and it better and likely
cheaper.
Maybe when HD TV readily available TV sets will be even better.
You know unless you really want a new TV wait.
Regards
David
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

On 22 Oct, 09:54, "David" <david.p....TakeThisOut@tesco.net> wrote:
> "Ed" <eabow....TakeThisOut@onetel.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> > flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> > now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>
> Well it is allways the same today, something better tomorrow.
> Just think about the PC you on. Buy another today and it better and likely
> cheaper.
> Maybe when HD TV readily available TV sets will be even better.
> You know unless you really want a new TV wait.
> Regards
> David

That's true, we were going to buy a flat screen LCD TV to mount on the
wall last year as we thought it would look cool; then we decided to
wait until our current TV breaks down and replace it, I'm glad we have
as the prices have had a nice drop in the meantime and the quality is
getting better. I'm still not convinced with the picture quality I've
seen on the large LCD's in the shops, whether it's because they can't
be bothered to set them up correctly or they are genuinely poor I
don't know. I am however hoping our current TV breaks down in
January ;-)
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <1193042260.694387.244020.TakeThisOut@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Ed
wrote:
> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?

No, you're not alone. Of course it's a massive scam. Flat screen
displays only show the sharpest pictures when the pixel resolution of
the signals fed to them is the same as the physical resolution of their
screens, so the fact that the displays on sale in the shops are all
different means that whatever system we end up with, it simply isn't
possible for all of them to show the extra resolution properly, which
rather negates the purpose of broadcasting it.

Then there's the size of the screens. I recently had need to buy a
combined TV/PC monitor, predominantly for computer use but with a SCART
input for video as well, so a 16:9 screen with a 19" diagonal seemed
about right, and TV looks OK as well. But it is labelled "HD Ready",
and I cannot help wondering at what viewing distance anybody would
expect to see a difference on a screen that size even if I had an
appropriate signal to feed to it.

HDTV systems with 1000 lines or more have been around for about a
quarter of a century, but none of them has yet been implemented on a
significant scale. If this ever happens, and if the programmes seem to
be worth watching, *then* will be the time to shop for gear.

Rod.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

"Ed" <eabowden.DeleteThis@onetel.com> wrote in message
news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>

Maybe, but if you are going to spend a grand on a TV and not research it
first ...
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

g.skinner wrote:
> On 22 Oct, 09:54, "David" <david.p....DeleteThis@tesco.net> wrote:
>> "Ed" <eabow....DeleteThis@onetel.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
>>> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
>>> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>>
>> Well it is allways the same today, something better tomorrow.
>> Just think about the PC you on. Buy another today and it better and
>> likely cheaper.
>> Maybe when HD TV readily available TV sets will be even better.
>> You know unless you really want a new TV wait.
>> Regards
>> David
>
> That's true, we were going to buy a flat screen LCD TV to mount on the
> wall last year as we thought it would look cool; then we decided to
> wait until our current TV breaks down and replace it, I'm glad we have
> as the prices have had a nice drop in the meantime and the quality is
> getting better. I'm still not convinced with the picture quality I've
> seen on the large LCD's in the shops, whether it's because they can't
> be bothered to set them up correctly or they are genuinely poor I
> don't know. I am however hoping our current TV breaks down in
> January ;-)

I'm hoping that by the time my current TV breaks down, OLED screens will be
available at a decent size and a decent price.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> Then there's the size of the screens. I recently had need to buy a
> combined TV/PC monitor, predominantly for computer use but with a
> SCART input for video as well, so a 16:9 screen with a 19" diagonal
> seemed about right, and TV looks OK as well. But it is labelled "HD
> Ready", and I cannot help wondering at what viewing distance anybody
> would expect to see a difference on a screen that size even if I had
> an appropriate signal to feed to it.

I'd be very surprised if the screen you have is 16:9, _all_ the 19" screens
I've seen have been 16:10.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

"Ed" <eabowden RemoveThis @onetel.com> wrote in message
news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>

Why not? Not so long ago many people were prepared to pay a huge premium for
a bigger screen that was only wider, not taller and wider as previously,
just because it was the 'latest thing'.
The TV manufacturers have got keep the money coming in somehow, but if you
want value for money better to be a late adopter rather than an early one.
1080p sets will soon be down at current 720p levels. Personally, it is
content that determines how much I enjoy a program or film, and resolution
and aspect ratio are insignificant in comparison.

Z
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

"Ed" <eabowden.TakeThisOut@onetel.com> wrote in message
news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>

Undoubtedly.

Early widescreen plasma sets were 872x480. Early adopters were caught by
this, since such sets (made for the US market) can't even display EU
broadcast TV properly.

Next up came 1366 X 768. This was useful as it can do a reasonable job of
displaying the output of a PC and is about half way between current
broadcast and the 1080 that is likely to be the maximum for some time.
Early big plasma sets had this resolution, along with smaller LCD sets.

Now we have 1920 X 1080, either interlaced or not. A 768 or 1024 x 576
broadcast will fit in this window at double size, with minimal cropping (36
pixels vertically and 64 pixels horizontally (in widescreen)).

OTOH full res LCD sets are now pricing out not much more than lower res'
sets, so it might be time to buy...
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 01:37:40 -0700, Ed <eabowden.RemoveThis@onetel.com> wrote:

>Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
>flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
>now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?

I am very happy with my 720P LCD that I bought over a year ago. I knew
about 1080P, but couldn't afford one back then. When I upgrade next it
will be 1080P, but for now 720P is a "mahoosive" upgrade from SD and
does me just fine.
--
Andrew, contact via http://interpleb.googlepages.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <HaadnSc5EI0gCIHanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d DeleteThis @bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
<nospamclayton DeleteThis @btinternet.com> wrote:

>"Ed" <eabowden DeleteThis @onetel.com> wrote in message
>news:1193042260.694387.244020@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>> Am I the only one that thinks this is a scam on a mahoosive scale by
>> flogging people 'HD ready' TVs that weren't even proper HD, and are
>> now going to flog the same people a new line of 1080 TVs?
>>
>
>Undoubtedly.
>
>Early widescreen plasma sets were 872x480. Early adopters were caught by
>this, since such sets (made for the US market) can't even display EU
>broadcast TV properly.
>
>Next up came 1366 X 768. This was useful as it can do a reasonable job of
>displaying the output of a PC and is about half way between current
>broadcast and the 1080 that is likely to be the maximum for some time.
>Early big plasma sets had this resolution, along with smaller LCD sets.
>
>Now we have 1920 X 1080, either interlaced or not. A 768 or 1024 x 576
>broadcast will fit in this window at double size, with minimal cropping (36
>pixels vertically and 64 pixels horizontally (in widescreen)).
>
>OTOH full res LCD sets are now pricing out not much more than lower res'
>sets, so it might be time to buy...

I think you have rather simplified the timeline but I won't hear a word
against my Panny Viera 37in plasma with its SD 852 x 480 resolution
screen. It excels with SD source material and only yesterday a friend
who had just bought a Sony Bravia HD LCD was watching my TV and said:
"I should have bought one of these". Sure, I will upgrade when the
amount of HD TV broadcasting justifies it but there is no rush
whatsoever.

Stan
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <CPSdnUzAZLVYHYHanZ2dnUVZ8qugnZ2d.RemoveThis@brightview.com>, Adrian A wrote:
> > Then there's the size of the screens. I recently had need to buy a
> > combined TV/PC monitor, predominantly for computer use but with a
> > SCART input for video as well, so a 16:9 screen with a 19" diagonal
> > seemed about right, and TV looks OK as well. But it is labelled "HD
> > Ready", and I cannot help wondering at what viewing distance anybody
> > would expect to see a difference on a screen that size even if I had
> > an appropriate signal to feed to it.
>
> I'd be very surprised if the screen you have is 16:9, _all_ the 19" screens 
> I've seen have been 16:10.

True. It's 1440 x 900, which is 16:10. I'm annoyed now.

Rod.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs