1080 HD TVs

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:09:00 +0100, Stan The Man <man RemoveThis @pr100.com>
wrote:

>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.

I presume you don't have any HD sources for your TV. My satisfaction
with SD died rapidly when I bought my XBox 360.
--
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 <yjVPWSBxZNHHFwqU.RemoveThis@bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
<tony.RemoveThis@bancom.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <221020071609001672%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
><man.RemoveThis@pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>In article <HaadnSc5EI0gCIHanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d.RemoveThis@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>><nospamclayton.RemoveThis@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"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?
>>>>
>>>
>>>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
>
>And is your programme "source" Freeview in the UK then?...

No, Sky+.

Stan
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <231020070955277371%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
<man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>In article <yjVPWSBxZNHHFwqU RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
><tony RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <221020071609001672%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
>><man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>>In article <HaadnSc5EI0gCIHanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d RemoveThis @bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>>><nospamclayton RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"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?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>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
>>
>>And is your programme "source" Freeview in the UK then?...
>
>No, Sky+.
>
>Stan

Thats Sky at Standard bit rates than?..
--
Tony Sayer
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <B0kzDqE10bHHFwsh RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
<tony RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <231020070955277371%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
><man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>In article <yjVPWSBxZNHHFwqU RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
>><tony RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <221020071609001672%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
>>><man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>>>In article <HaadnSc5EI0gCIHanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d RemoveThis @bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>>>><nospamclayton RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"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?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>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
>>>
>>>And is your programme "source" Freeview in the UK then?...
>>
>>No, Sky+.
>>
>>Stan
>
>Thats Sky at Standard bit rates than?..
Yes.

Stan
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

In article <231020071227575977%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
<man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>In article <B0kzDqE10bHHFwsh RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
><tony RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <231020070955277371%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
>><man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>>In article <yjVPWSBxZNHHFwqU RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
>>><tony RemoveThis @bancom.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <221020071609001672%man@pr100.com>, Stan The Man
>>>><man RemoveThis @pr100.com> scribeth thus
>>>>>In article <HaadnSc5EI0gCIHanZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d RemoveThis @bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>>>>><nospamclayton RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"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?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>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
>>>>
>>>>And is your programme "source" Freeview in the UK then?...
>>>
>>>No, Sky+.
>>>
>>>Stan
>>
>>Thats Sky at Standard bit rates than?..
>Yes.
>
>Stan

So I presume its now improved from what it was around a year ago when I
last saw it, and then it left a lot to de desired!.

Have they upped the bitrates then?...
--
Tony Sayer
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

Ed <eabowden.DeleteThis@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?

720 is HD ready. What's the problem?

Of course it's not a scam. It's just marketing. Depending on usage 1080
has benefits over 720.

Basically they're offering shiney new things, and if people want it they
can freely choose to buy it or not. Simple. Obviously thye're going to
try and make it seem desitrable to do so - it's their job

In fact, it's beneficial for new and 'better' models to arrive. It means
we can all now buy previous generations stuff for half the price.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

Adrian A wrote:
> 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.
>
>

By which time PHOLED screens will be the ones to get due to the extended
lifespan of the blue OLED.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

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

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

In article <6QYfR9VQDiSEngt4Ku3XPSyn3QVX.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>, Kay Robinson
<Kay_Robinson.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> scribeth thus
>On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:43:00 -0000, "g.skinner"
><gp.skinner.TakeThisOut@talk21.com> sharpened a new quill and scratched:
>
>>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 ;-)
>
>Most of the shops I go in have their displays on AV channels and very
>few ever bother to set them up properly. They never did in the days
>before digital come to think. I have two flat screen LCDs, a 26" and a
>32", both have a fabulous picture. When viewing older tv progs,
>especially on the digital only channels, definitinon isn't as great
>but that's because they were made with older technology. If you're a
>fan of 1970s/80s series no amount of modern technology is going to
>make them look good LOL
>

And pray where in the modern bit rate compromised digital delivery
systems are more modern offerings any better?..
--
Tony Sayer
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

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?
>

At least 1920x1080 is the correct pixel dimensions for an HD programme
as made by the likes of me at the BBC.

Fairly futureproof unlike 'HD Ready' sets that have gone before.

Trouble is, I think that some/all 1920x1080 sets scale the picture, even
though they are being given a 1:1 mapped source.

My opinion is that when people can watch real HD on a decent screen from
a wide range of sources (shall we say 3-5 years from now) they'll be hooked.

It's been a long time coming mind.
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs 

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

>>>>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 ;-)
>>>
>>>Most of the shops I go in have their displays on AV channels and very
>>>few ever bother to set them up properly. They never did in the days
>>>before digital come to think. I have two flat screen LCDs, a 26" and a
>>>32", both have a fabulous picture. When viewing older tv progs,
>>>especially on the digital only channels, definitinon isn't as great
>>>but that's because they were made with older technology. If you're a
>>>fan of 1970s/80s series no amount of modern technology is going to
>>>make them look good LOL
>>>
>>
>>And pray where in the modern bit rate compromised digital delivery
>>systems are more modern offerings any better?..
>
>You can pray all you like but please do it in plain English or is it
>your brain that has a bit rate compromised digital delivery system?
>

OK if that was a bit difficult then, I'll put another way...

Do you think that the absolute picture quality i.e. definition,
horizontal and vertical, colour grading etc, are better with current
standard definition digital delivery via the current terrestrial AKA
Freeview based system.


Or do you think it was better for the same parameters on the older
Analogue PAL system?....

--
Tony Sayer
 >> Stay informed about: 1080 HD TVs