DIYbanter - View Single Post

isw

In article ,
wrote:

"Actually, NTSC color makes pretty good use of bandwidth when you're
constrained to all-analog"

Right, but that is not what I meant. I meant none of this **** is worth
watching. When I was a kid and we had like five channels we actually had to
have a discussion on what to watch.

Now hot only are there more TVs in the house than people, we got like 500
channels. There used to be shows that were entertaining, even though they
were kinda like - junk. They were entertaining. Now we are relegated to
watching people remodel houses or something, or Gordon Ramsay bitching out
restaurant owners or some retired detective describing a 35 year old case,
with re-enactment of course. Most other shows it looks like they let an eight
year old kid work the camera, I mean they do EVERYTHING cameramen were taught
not to do. It is ****ing unwatchable.

In the 1960s and 1970s having a TV was a status symbol almost. Now, it has
gotten so bad that NOT having one is, almost. Or at least leaving it turned
off.

"When it was
introduced, compatible color was right at the cutting edge of (or maybe
a bit beyond) technical feasibility for commercial (not to say consumer)
electronics."

Actually it could not be beyond since it worked.

What I meant was that it worked a lot better in the lab when being
tended by skilled technicians that it did in domestic homes when not
being tended at all. It was somewhat "drifty" and needed a lot of
tweaking.

It redefined the cutting
edge. Color TV is one of the few things the US can claim as its own
invention. Other countries came later, albeit with better systems, but I am
pretty sure we were first.

If you're talking about PAL, which came later, quite good arguments can
be made that it's not better at all; just that its weaknesses are in
different places.

Isaac