CRT TVs

Page 2 of 4  
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Yes something I find really annoying when the government announces they just "made" $10 billion from a spectrum auction. They didn't "make" anything since whomever bought the spectrum will need to recover the expense from their subscribers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:35:44 GMT, Trent Stevens

True. Color quality is one of the disadvantages of NTSC. The picture is also never as steady as with more modern systems. I find these problems make more of a difference (between NTSC and something better) than the increased spatial resolution.

And you also get interference from the business-controlled government (DRM).

If you have cable or satellite (which do not ever use ATSC), you're likely to already have a converter (the cable box or sat receiver). If you can continue to use that, you won't need to buy anything else to watch TV. Those converters are mainly for use by people with antennas.

Yes, although one thing that should change is the relative lack of non-NTSC INPUTS, which allow much of the versatility of current NTSC equipment. For example, if you want to add a video caller ID device.

Yes, we could have converted to metric, and also gotten rid on the inconvenient QWERTY keyboard layout.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So you focus on one promised benefit and neglect myriad costs?

Oooooops. You just invited all manner of disagreement.
Damned if I know how you can claim "everyone is better off in the end".
Correct me if I'm wrong. You are not 100% in touch with:
What digital eqpt. will be offered and at what price.
Exactly what dig. transmissions will be offered and when.
What the overall cost/benefit relationship will look like.
Etc, etc.
The whole thing is driven by the Fedral Gummint and the dreaded "Entertainment Industry", both of which are primarily concerned with extracting more $ from your pocketbook and mine.
I was considering purchase of a new tv and had little idea which way to jump (HD, etc), so I asked a career cable tv friend. He advised to do nothing, buy nothing, as the proverbial shit is *bound* to hit the fan around 2009, and noone can much predict how it will all shake out.
I expect a hideous, hideous mess and a massive, behemoth boondoggle.
Cheers, Puddin'
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, some will be worse off, but not by much. There is a small minority that receive NTSC today over the air and don't accept the value proposition of having an HD picture that puts to shame what they are watching now, or simply can't afford a new TV. They will have to buy a converter. The cost is estimated at a whopping $50 to $100. And the fed govt has already announced a program to give any household that requests it, 2 rebate coupons for $40 each. That means you could still use your 2 existing TV's for a cost of ~$70.

The digital eqpt is already being offered in just about all new tv's. There was an ATSC phase in schedule started couple years ago, first for big screen tv's, then working down in size. Today the overwhelming number of tv's actually being bought have atsc.

It's offered right now in most of the US.

The overall cost/benefit of the whole deal right now is overwhelming. Are you saying most people would rather continue to watch a crappy picture, invented in the 50's/60's, instead of HD? Good grief, take a look in the stores at what's flying off the shelves. Now, you could argue about the cost benefit of doing it differently, like not turning off NTSC and resellling the spectrum. But for a program as a whole deal, the cost/benefit is fantastic.

Yes, but the vast majority, who value a superb picture, are now able to get it and enjoy it.

With all due respect,.your friend is an idiot. In most areas, you have a wide variety of HD programming available via Cable, Sat, or OTA. And it's increasing all the time. Millions of HD sets have been sold, they are flying off the shelves. The transmitters for ATSC are built and running. Places like Costco have no focus on regular TVs anymore, because fewer and fewer are buying them. Do you really think it's all going to be undone? Sure, they may push out the NTSC turn off, or increase the rebate. But what does that have to do with buying a new TV today?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:37:43 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:
[snip]

Strangely, I find the difference (HD resolution compared to 480 lines) to be nearly insignificant. There is a considerable difference, but most of that is in ATSC, rather than HD.
Of course, these people will still need a converter for 480-line ATSC broadcasts.

[snip]
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

This was an important part of my point. There are many (myself included) who are 100% happy with good current-generation analog reception, and view the "Great Upheaval" (the "digital" changeover) mandated by the gov't as just another terminal insanity dictated by the Vested Interests and not likely to be in the interest of the public at large.

I dunno why I bother to respond to stuff like this. You, kind sir, have bought into what they've told you (as did Mr. Trent). But, you, kind sir, are -not- in a position to be aware of all the problems that might well materialize when "the deed is done". If you continue to believe all that they tell you, then I know of a piece of real estate that you're truly gonna love: located right on the scenic, scenic 38th Parallel.
P
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Have you two guys even seen an HDTV with a HD source? Have you looked at a sporting event, for example? It is very strange for someone to think that a decent size screen HDTV doesn't look significantly better than a plain old TV. In a side by side comparison, the difference is huge. Many people describe HD as if they were looking at the real event through a window.. If most people saw no difference, why are they flying off the store shelves, when they cost more?
As for the argument that there are many who are 100% happy with what they have today and don't want a "digital upheaval", well that argument could be applied to any advancement. I'm sure some were upset when they stopped making LPs, and 8 tracks too. Now granted, most other changes like this are driven by market forces, not a govt deadline. But this case is a bit different. Here you would have a small minority of people ie, those who view via OTA instead of cable or sat and who don't want to move up to HD, buy a new set, continuing to use a valuable public resource (the NTSC bandwidth), that could be put to better use. And for an outlay of $25 to $50 for an ATSC tuner, those people will still be able to continue use their existing NTSC TVs indefinitely. And I would not be surprised to see the shutdown date for NTSC pushed out again, or for the govt rebate of $80 per household to be increased. Doesn't sound so bad to me.

I'd say I'm more aware of what's going on than you are. Faced with a decision of buying a TV, I prefer to find out the facts, which are readily available and actually look at an HDTV compared to a regular one. The facts are, ATSC broadcasting is up and running. The 85%+ who have cable or sat have HD available. Network prime time is in HD. NYC even has HD livecam from news helicopters. The first HD DVDs and players are appearing. All new TVs sold in the US now have a built-in ATSC tuner. The prices for HDTVs have dropped dramatically. And 16 million HDTVs will be sold this year.
You instead ask your buddy, the cable guy, who predicts that something very bad is going to happen and the changeover to ASTC is gonna turn to chaos, so you shouldn't do anything about your TV that needs replacement He's proably one of those cable guys we heard about who show up to install cable and can't figure out how to correctly hook the new digital box component video outputs up to the HDTV.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:38:34 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

You may not have read all of what I wrote. I did see a huge difference. It was just that the majority of it was with something other than spatial resolution.
BTW, I have seen real HD. Actually saw the Super Bowl in HD once (on a 65-inch screen).

Yes, that is to be expected. Things like this are seldom done at the time promised.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I read it and here it is. I stated that an HD picture puts to shame regular NTSC:

And you responded with:
"Strangely, I find the difference (HD resolution compared to 480 lines) to be nearly insignificant. There is a considerable difference, but most of that is in ATSC, rather than HD. "
Which perhaps you could explain? Certainly if you look at an HD image, the image detail is far superior. If you look at a flower, on std TV there is no detail, on HD, you can see the pollen and small hair like plant material. . And that is directly attributable to the fact that it is either 720P or 1080i, both of which have more lines of resolution. That was why they went to higher resolution in the first place. No different than looking at a picture on a VGA computer screen vs XGA, where you also saw a big improvement in detail.
At least it appears we agree on one thing, and that is that HD is a big improvement over std TV.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:14:46 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Yes, That I said that most of the difference is in getting away from NTSC rather than HD itself. I did NOT contradict you.

The problem with that is that you omitted the reference. Comparison is between TWO different things.

I did not say there was no difference. I said the difference was small compared to something else (the way a cow is a lot larger than an ant but is a SMALL animal compared to a whale).
BTW, do you know how many lines a NTSC picture actually has? It's LESS than 480.

Yes. The problem seems to be in the omitted middle. To help explain, I will mention three things here:
1. NTSC. Ordinary analog video as we've had since World War II.
2. 480-line video, as with a DVD player connected with a YUV or HDMI output. Still not HD.
3. HD: 720p / 1080i or greater.
You said that #3 was much better than #1.
I DID NOT DISAGREE.
I said that most of this difference was between #2 and #1, rather than between #3 and #2.
You may continue to disagree with me, but please try to understand what it is you're claiming to disagree with. Since this point of disagreement involves #2 above, it should not be ignored.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

OK, I see what you;'re point is now. I'm not sure I agree that the diff btwn ntsc and 480 is much greater than between 480 and HD. But I agree that it is arguable. Sorry for the confusion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
sure I agree that the

pn smaller sets certinally anything under 13 inch the difference between them cant be seen, and 19 inch is a wash, now 30+ inch screens its noticeable.
bt high def and digital have over 30 standards, of picture quality.
local broadcasters can either provide a wonderful picture or send 5 programs at the same time, or information of some kind.
they will do whats economicaly best for profits, no more no less
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What do you think the number is?
All NTSC signals have at least 480 scan lines no matter what the source. The useful *vertical* resolution is about 70% of that due to something called the Kell factor, again pretty much without regard to the source.
On the other hand, different NTSC sources have different *horizontal* resolution figures, which are quoted in terms of "lines per picture height" that can be resolved. Here, resolution is proportional to analog bandwidth, and can be as low as 250 lpph for VHS, up to about 550 lpph for professional gear. But the horizontal resolution has no direct connection to the "480 lines" of the format which is a vertical measure.

There is a huge range in quality depending on the source (VHS, over the air, laserdisc, DVD). These are all 480-line format, but horizontal resolution varies. There's also a large difference in the colour resolution between composite and component connections.

This is a specialized subset of #1, with the image stored digitally at 704x480 pixels, and fed to the monitor either digitally or in analog component form. It's still 480-line format, but horizontal resolution is about 500 lines per picture height (for 4:3, less for widescreen).

Now you're getting greater horizontal *and* vertical resolution, and possibly better temporal resolution too (in the case of progressive scan).

This is sort of meaningless since #1 is a bucket that contains such a huge range of quality. If your #1 source is a VHS tape running at SLP speed, any DVD will be much better. If your #1 source is a laserdisc, it's going to be pretty close to the DVD in quality despite being composite analog.
To make a comparison that everyone might be able to agree with, you'll need to be more specific about what kind of analog video you're comparing against as #1.
    Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:38:34 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Industry hype.

I've seen 'em. In the store (a somewhat artificial environment), they look better. But not -that- much better.
'Tis the cost/benefit curve, as applied to the public at large, that you fail to comprehend. Possibly because you're just not interested in what effects others.

Hey, it's OK to get abusive. It's obvious that you lack info about both my circumstances and my friend (who, 'tho retired, knows vastly more about the industry than either of us).
They pump up the hype in preparation for shoving the unproven technology down the consumers throats. You seem to accept it all at face value. You are their "Perfect Consumer". Or perhaps an industry employee. Eh?
I'll have the real estate agent from Seoul give you a call ... :-)
P
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Look, there is plenty of info available today about HDTV from a variety of resources, many of which are not connected to some evil industry conspiracy. You obviously won't even look at it, yet you go around telling people calamity is ahead. You can stick you head in the sand, while the rest of us move ahead.

And do you know what you were looking at? Just because it's an HDTV doesn't mean the program that happened to be on at the moment was HD. In stores, I've seen all kinds of material being shown and at times, it wasn't HD at all. It's gotten better in the last couple years, but before that in many stores that I've seen it was pretty bad. But if you have an HDTV with and HD source, and a regular TV next to it, the difference is huge.

You make these sweeping statements with out elaboration. The cost to the public at large? If you have 2 tv's and buy 2 ATSC tuners, you'd be out about $50. Is that so bad? When the local or state govt decides to buy open land or make a new park and your tax bill goes up that much for something you personally never will use, do you get all upset too? And further, for the public at large, the fed govt is gonna get billions when they sell the bandwith previously used by NTSC. That sounds like a lot of money they can piss away instead of instead of taking it from taxes. So, where exactly is this big cost/ benefit problem that I fail to comprehend.

Yeah, I tend to get that way when someone who dismisses readily available info from a wide variety of sources and obviously knows less than zero about HD, tries to tell me I'm some kind of mindless dummy that's bought into a bunch of hype.

What exactly is "unproven"? About a third of US homes now has an HDTV. ATSC broadcasting has been up for years. Every TV set sold now has an ATSC tuner. Geez, I notice for all the facts and statistics I cite in an attempt to have a reasonable discussion, you counter with what? No facts. Just personal feelings, and the opinion of your buddy the cable guy, that HD/ATSC is unproven stuff, heading for calamity. Now thats what I call hype.
BTW, I'm not an industry empoyee, though I am an electrical engineer, so perhaps I know a little more about technology than you or your cable guy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:41:08 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Who posted opinionated stuff first? You or I?

Granted a material difference.
I have no problem with your wanting your pretty pictures in highly defined resolution. You will pay for what your get. I begrudge you nothing in this regard.
Remember the "Vast Wasteland"? It still exists. Millions of viewers lounge around every evening in front of the tube or son-of-tube. They scarcely take notice of what's on the screen because they know it's mostly drivel. ATSC/HD drivel is not materially superior to NTSC drivel.
Lord help po' me. I read books! :-) Part of me wants to pitch the goddamn tube out the window.

You haven't exactly flooded the byte-waves with source-info your-own-self.

Suggest you Google "ATSC tuners" re price and availability. And who wants an external box when they don't need one?

Depends on lots of things.

They'll be cashing in on a public resource. It's an entirely different topic, but I damned well don't like what they're doing with our money.

It's something you've chosen not to contemplate.

Let the record show that the "mindless dummy" phrase was of your own devise. I implied only gullibility and/or personal interest. The net is rife with both.

More sourceless claims. Even if true, ATSC is still an unproven tech. in the homes of a majority of US folks. More than that, the relative utility of ATSC vs NTSC given costs of each is very much unproven. It's not enough to (correctly) say that it's a "much prettier picture".

Lordy Mercy! A conspiracy of one? Hype?? <g>

And, as an EE, I'm sure you and your employer(s) reap no benefits whatsoever (direct or indirect) from the ATSC mandate. :-)
Perhaps as an EE, you have some idea of what a mess they made of NTSC over the years?
And you think it will truly be different with ATSC?
That's it, I'm out of here. No further response will ensue.
Puddin'
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well you began the discussion back and forth with this:
"I was considering purchase of a new tv and had little idea which way to jump (HD, etc), so I asked a career cable tv friend. He advised to do nothing, buy nothing, as the proverbial shit is *bound* to hit the fan around 2009, and noone can much predict how it will all shake out. I expect a hideous, hideous mess and a massive, behemoth boondoggle. "
So, I'd say it's clear who posted opinionated stuff first.

Hmmm, now how can that be? You claimed that HD/ATSC was just a scam being perpetrated on a dumb public by "the industry" through hype and NTSC was perfectly fine. Yet, now there is a "material difference" So, which is it?

Then why were you considering buying a new TV at all? Just turn it off.

Just do nothing, your problem will probably go away in 2009

Now please. You posted this gem:

I told you every friggin TV set sold in the US as of NOW has a frigging ATSC digital tuner in it.
and this gem:

I told you it's been available for years in most of the US. You could do a little web search and find out yourself, but any info available, according to you, is industry hype. Here's an idea, call up your local TV stations and ask.

This isn;t some deep dark unknown mystery. The electronics chips have been developed and are in mass production. At the present rate, 16 million will be sold this year, which means they are in volume production and inexpensive. They are going into every TV set in the US made today and haven't impacted the price noticeably. So, what great technological, manufacturing, or economic hurdle remains? All that needs to be done is put the same chips in a little box with a power supply and remote. Which means the cost projections of the standalone ATSC tuners costing $75 bucks in 2009 are based on real data and are accurate. Not convinced? How about this? You can buy an ATSC tuner box today on Ebay for $90
http://cgi.ebay.com/RJ-1000ATSC-ATSC-QAM-Digital-TV-Tuner-NEW_W0QQitemZ230145116977QQihZ013QQcategoryZ61396QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Is that enough info for you?

I have contemplated it, as has Congress, the broadcast industry, consumer electronics industry, and the 30% of US homes that already own an HDTV. All you do is come up with nonsense like this without any explanation about exactly what is troubling you so much. Instead of listening to your cable guy friend and buying into his FUD, you can go down to the mall tonight and buy that TV with an ATSC tuner in it. You'd never even know it's there.

I'll let other judge who has a command of the facts and knows what he's talking about and who obviously knows less than nothing.

Here's a source for you:
"CEA Report Finds 30 Percent of U.S. Households Own Hi-Def TV
ARLINGTON, June 27: A new report from the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) reveals that 30 percent of U.S. households now own high-definition televisions (HDTV)-expected to rise to 36 percent by the end of this year-but also finds that more consumers are buying HDTVs to improve their movie and gaming experiences rather than for watching television programming
The new CEA study, HDTV: You Have the Set, But Do You Have the Content?, found that 16 million high-definition televisions (HDTV) will sell this year, bringing the total number of HDTVs sold in the U.S. to 52.5 million"
Yet according to you and your cable buddy genius, it's all hype and unproven.

No, just two dummies.

Yeah that's right you dope, because I'm self employed today as a trader and have nothing to do with any company involved in any way with TV or consumer electronics.

Funny from the guy that wants to keep NTSC going and says how its all the vast majority want or need. LOL And for the record, anyone who understands how far NTSC got us for half a century would not refer to it a mess that someone made.

That's good, we've had enough of you making an ass of yourself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark Lloyd wrote:

Because everyone seems to confuse what is happening. The only requirement is that analog OTA must be turned off and then all OTA can only be *digital*. There is no requirement that OTA digital must be HD.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, it's true that with ATSC there is no mandatory reqt that it be HD. But there is plenty of HD programming available today. Much of network prime time is HD. Sports are in HD. There is plenty of HD available on cable channels too. And the main point of moving to ATSC was to get HD. So, when someone says the difference between HD and regular TV is significant, one assumes they are talking about viewing material on an HDTV that is HD. And how anyone can look at that and call it an insignificant improvement, is beyond me.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:00:34 -0000, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

I was accused of saying that but did not . Someone didn't read what I wrote (I just put more information in another post).

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.