Im in the market for e new "small" TV

I live alone and don't need a big huge TV

I can get a decent 20" analog crt based Tv for abt $150

Or a 19" flat LCD based Tv for abt $700

Im curious if LCD based television have less failure
problems than CRT based ones?

Any advice on this?

I don't mind spending a premium on new technology as
long as it has higher or AS high of reliability as the
older technology. Hence the question.

I can answer from a computer monitor perspective. We use both CRT's and
LCD's at work and by far CRTs will last longer and are more reliable.
That does not make them better per se but you will have to weigh out
the advantages. CRTs usually have a truer color and have greater
latitude in adjusting the resolution and color and are cheaper. CRTs
are heavier, consume more power, and put out minute radiation, and are
very costly at extremely large size screens. LCDs are a decent
compromise between color and resolution, can be larger, and are
lighter. They are much more expensive though. I would say if you spend
a lot of time in front of your tv, see which one you have to struggle
to see or feel comfortable. At 20" I personally would stick with a CRT.
Heck, go for a 25 or 26", they are not that much more expensive. My 2
cents.

wrote in message
...
Im in the market for e new "small" TV

I live alone and don't need a big huge TV

I can get a decent 20" analog crt based Tv for abt $150

Or a 19" flat LCD based Tv for abt $700

Im curious if LCD based television have less failure
problems than CRT based ones?

Any advice on this?

I don't mind spending a premium on new technology as
long as it has higher or AS high of reliability as the
older technology. Hence the question.

I regard LCD as less reliable and more unfixable. Good luck getting 20 years
out of the LCD model.

N

CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

CRT sets are soon to no longer be manufactured. Support for them will soon
be very limited, if any at all. The picture quality on an LCD set will also
be superior to the CRT set. It is now a question of what you are willing to
pay for.

There are many advantages of the LCD set over the CRT one. It is a question
of, if you want to pay for the newer and better technology. For myself, if I
was to buy a TV set, I would buy an LCD one. This is my personal preference.


Some advantages of LCD sets a

Lower power consumption.
Internally runs much cooler.
Not very heavy to move around.
Takes up a lot less space on a table top.
Does not use very high voltages inside, thus does not accumulate as much
dirt and dust.
Does not emit high amounts of electromagnetic radiation.
No ultraviolet emissions from the surface of the screen.
No X-Ray radiation.
No purity, or convergence errors.
No corner focus problems.
The colour temperature will not drift very much with age.


Some disadvantages:

The front of the screen is more delicate, and is easier to damage
(especially from children).
The viewing angles are more critical than a CRT set.
The contrast ratio is lower, but is still very acceptable.
When out of warranty, and some service is required, it is more expensive.


--

JANA
_____


wrote in message
...
Im in the market for e new "small" TV

I live alone and don't need a big huge TV

I can get a decent 20" analog crt based Tv for abt $150

Or a 19" flat LCD based Tv for abt $700

Im curious if LCD based television have less failure
problems than CRT based ones?

Any advice on this?

I don't mind spending a premium on new technology as
long as it has higher or AS high of reliability as the
older technology. Hence the question.

I regard LCD as less reliable and more unfixable. Good luck getting 20 years
out of the LCD model.

Point taken

Maybe I better stick with a crt based TV huh?

Heck, go for a 25 or 26", they are not that much more expensive. My 2
cents.

Understand

But il probably go with a 20" flat CRT based TV

I want something I can move around easily by myself.
When you live alone you have to "think" abt moving
things around by your self before you buy them. Ha!

Soo..... any advice on what brands of 20" flat CRT
based TV to by?

Im thinking Toshiba or Panasonic

However I did see in Consumer Reports that Sanyo has a
good reliability record.... but Im not too keen on
their picture quality

Advice?

BTW.... thanks for the help guys!!

CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

Well now you've just changed my mind back to LCD! Ha!!

Im concerned abt buying a small LCD tv cause of the
shift to HD sets soon.

Will a current analog LCD tv such as the 19" Dell TV in
link below be obsolete in a few years when the big
switch to HD transmission?

http://tinyurl.com/63bnj

That's why I was thinking of CRT based.... they are so
cheap I can just throw it away if its obsolete in a few
years. No?

In sci.electronics.repair on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:38:20 -0600
posted:

CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

Well now you've just changed my mind back to LCD! Ha!!

Im concerned abt buying a small LCD tv cause of the
shift to HD sets soon.

Will a current analog LCD tv such as the 19" Dell TV in
link below be obsolete in a few years when the big
switch to HD transmission?

http://tinyurl.com/63bnj

That's why I was thinking of CRT based.... they are so
cheap I can just throw it away if its obsolete in a few
years. No?

Don't throw it away. That's incredibly wasteful. Give it to me. I
live alone too, and when I want to get HD, I'll get one tuner that
I'll put where my VCR is now, and use the same distribution system I
have now to send the signal to the tvs I have in most of the other
rooms. (Upstairs: Bedroom, Office, Bathroom. First floor: Living
room, kitchen. Basement: "Club room", laundry room. Attic. I didn't
really a cable outlet in the laundry but it only took about 15 minutes
and cost less than a dollar, so what the heck.

If you don't want to give it to me, give it to Goodwill Industries.

Even if such tuners didn't exist, there will still be people happy to
have an analog tv until the last station is off the air, and after
that they can use them to play dvds and tapes.

Meirman
--
If emailing, please let me know whether
or not you are posting the same letter.
Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

In sci.electronics.repair on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:16:14 -0500 "JANA"
posted:

CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

CRT sets are soon to no longer be manufactured. Support for them will soon
be very limited, if any at all.

But most of them don't break anyhow.

The picture quality on an LCD set will also
be superior to the CRT set.

Will be? But he's buying one now. If he wants to see which looks
better now, he can go to the store and look at each of them.

(Don't look at cartoons btw. They almost always look great. Look at a
complicated picture with lots of little things)

It is now a question of what you are willing to
pay for.

There are many advantages of the LCD set over the CRT one. It is a question
of, if you want to pay for the newer and better technology. For myself, if I
was to buy a TV set, I would buy an LCD one. This is my personal preference.


Some advantages of LCD sets a

Lower power consumption.
Internally runs much cooler.
Not very heavy to move around.

That can mean different things to different people. I though that LED
monitors were light until I actually picked one up. I guess not as
heavy as a crt monitor the same size, but much heavier than it looked.

Takes up a lot less space on a table top.
Does not use very high voltages inside, thus does not accumulate as much
dirt and dust.

I think of it as a dust remover for my house. Once it's in the set, I
never see it again. Seriously, I have a dusty house and for a while I
had smoke film from a badly adjusted oil furnace. Didn't affect the
tvs, except I had to clean the screen of some of them. Not sure if an
LCD screen would have gotten dirty too, but maybe.

Does not emit high amounts of electromagnetic radiation.
No ultraviolet emissions from the surface of the screen.
No X-Ray radiation.
No purity, or convergence errors.

These problems are not common anymore either. I did once walk by one
tv with a big magnet from a hifi speaker, but the built-in degausser
that all color sets have got rid of the problem after a couple weeks.

No corner focus problems.
The colour temperature will not drift very much with age.

Haven't seen any or much of these two either.

And I get all my tvs when they are several years old.

I did buy one new, a 12" color years ago when 210 dollars was the
cheapest they had. AOx something brand. It broke several times and
finally I couldn't fix it anymore. Don't think it was the picture
though. One time it was the turn on relay.

Some disadvantages:

The front of the screen is more delicate, and is easier to damage
(especially from children).
The viewing angles are more critical than a CRT set.
The contrast ratio is lower, but is still very acceptable.
When out of warranty, and some service is required, it is more expensive.


--

JANA
_____


Meirman
--
If emailing, please let me know whether
or not you are posting the same letter.
Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

wrote in message
...
I regard LCD as less reliable and more unfixable. Good luck getting 20
years
out of the LCD model.

Point taken

Maybe I better stick with a crt based TV huh?

Eventually you won't have a choice, but tube technology is old and well
known. For now it's a better bet. 8mm movie cameras are also reliable and
robust, but they're a bad economic choice now compared to a camcorder.

N

If CRT sets were so reliable, I would have been unemployed years ago!!!
It is the LCD sets that I fear that will put more TV service people
out of work.

In our IT support area, we have been working with LCD monitors for
about 3 to 4 years now (from when they first came out in mass), and
have had very few few failures. The newer ones are even better than
that of a year ago!!!

In the higher end models, they are looking more like the CRT monitors
for their look and they way that they display images. The new 8 ms ones
are actualy faster for the refresh rate, than the CRT monitors. The
fast CRT monitors are about 10 to 12 ms.

I'll stick to the LCD monitors!

Jerry G.
======

In article , JANA
writes
CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

CRT sets are soon to no longer be manufactured. Support for them will soon
be very limited, if any at all. The picture quality on an LCD set will also
be superior to the CRT set. It is now a question of what you are willing to
pay for.

That's not true, the picture on an LCD set is nowhere near as good as a
good CRT. Try watching a night time scene, you get a clear picture on a
CRT but you can't see anything on the LCD.
--
Tim Mitchell

Eventually you won't have a choice, but tube technology is old and well
known

How much longer do you think before you wont even be
able to buy a CRT based TV?

is it as short as two years maybe?

I'll get one tuner that
I'll put where my VCR is now, and use the same distribution system I
have now to send the signal to the tvs I have in most of the other
rooms.

What kind of distribution system do you have and how
does it work? You've caught my interest on this
system you have. G

You have not seen some really high end LCD monitors!

Jerry G.
======

I have been to some computer stores, that don't even stock CRT monitors
any more. There are fewer models available as time goes on. I read some
articles that there will no longer be CRT monitors or TV sets to be
available in about 3 to 5 years.

Maybe some countries like China may produce some low end CRT monitors
just to fill in the markets where there are people who really want a
CRT monitor no matter what. This is soon to be seen.

Jerry G.
======

"Jerry G." wrote in message
ups.com...
I have been to some computer stores, that don't even stock CRT monitors
any more. There are fewer models available as time goes on. I read some
articles that there will no longer be CRT monitors or TV sets to be
available in about 3 to 5 years.

Maybe some countries like China may produce some low end CRT monitors
just to fill in the markets where there are people who really want a
CRT monitor no matter what. This is soon to be seen.

Even that is doubtful. It'll be a price driven process. All over the world
there are millions? of old standard 8mm movie cameras. Good luck buying
film. I have a couple of CED disk players and 200 movies. Good luck getting
parts. Some people still have Beta VCRs. I haven't seen tape for a long
time. Obsolescence is now a fact of life.

N

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:46:04 -0600, wrote:
Eventually you won't have a choice, but tube technology is old and well
known

How much longer do you think before you wont even be
able to buy a CRT based TV?

is it as short as two years maybe?

More like ten.

First things first, LCDs have to cost less.

On 30 Mar 2005 02:54:22 -0800, "Jerry G." put
finger to keyboard and composed:

If CRT sets were so reliable, I would have been unemployed years ago!!!
It is the LCD sets that I fear that will put more TV service people
out of work.

In our IT support area, we have been working with LCD monitors for
about 3 to 4 years now (from when they first came out in mass), and
have had very few few failures. The newer ones are even better than
that of a year ago!!!

LCD monitors/TVs may be more reliable (???), but I expect they will
all need a lamp and/or inverter replacement at some time in their
lives. That said, I guess it's a job anyone could do with minimal
training.

In the higher end models, they are looking more like the CRT monitors
for their look and they way that they display images. The new 8 ms ones
are actualy faster for the refresh rate, than the CRT monitors. The
fast CRT monitors are about 10 to 12 ms.

I'll stick to the LCD monitors!

Jerry G.
======


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:05:38 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:
On 30 Mar 2005 02:54:22 -0800, "Jerry G." put
finger to keyboard and composed:

If CRT sets were so reliable, I would have been unemployed years ago!!!
It is the LCD sets that I fear that will put more TV service people
out of work.

In our IT support area, we have been working with LCD monitors for
about 3 to 4 years now (from when they first came out in mass), and
have had very few few failures. The newer ones are even better than
that of a year ago!!!

LCD monitors/TVs may be more reliable (???), but I expect they will
all need a lamp and/or inverter replacement at some time in their
lives. That said, I guess it's a job anyone could do with minimal
training.

LCD backlights are too fragile to be replaced. Look at the lamp funny
and it'll break. Ask a company to ship you one and they'll just laugh.

wrote in message
...
I regard LCD as less reliable and more unfixable. Good luck getting 20
years
out of the LCD model.

Point taken

Maybe I better stick with a crt based TV huh?

Not nessesarily, I would say an LCD TV should be more reliable than a modern
CRT TV, usually the first thing to go is the backlight tube and they last
almost as long as a modern CRT. Also there's very little in the way of high
power electronics which are the most common failures in a CRT display.

"meirman" wrote in message
news
In sci.electronics.repair on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:16:14 -0500 "JANA"
posted:

CRT sets will last about 30,000 to 40,000 hours on the average. The new
LCD
sets will probably last about 50,000 to 60,000 hours.

CRT sets are soon to no longer be manufactured. Support for them will
soon
be very limited, if any at all.

But most of them don't break anyhow.

The picture quality on an LCD set will also
be superior to the CRT set.

Will be? But he's buying one now. If he wants to see which looks
better now, he can go to the store and look at each of them.


It depends. The geometry, convergence and purity will be dead-on perfect,
something that's just not generally possible with a CRT. The thing I notice
with LCD TV's is that I can usually see some visible pixelation or
compression artifacts, hard to explain it but scenery like blue sky tends to
make it really stand out and to my eye it just generally looks like crap.
The small size is handy though, and for some material the picture looks just
fine. Of course I haven't looked at any high end LCD stuff, just the TV's
they have at Costco and whatnot.

LCD backlights are too fragile to be replaced. Look at the lamp funny
and it'll break. Ask a company to ship you one and they'll just laugh.


Huh? I've replaced about half a dozen of them without much trouble, new CCFL
lamps are readily available and not terribly expensive.

wrote in message
...
Eventually you won't have a choice, but tube technology is old and well
known

How much longer do you think before you wont even be
able to buy a CRT based TV?

is it as short as two years maybe?

I would predict CRT sets will be reasonably obtainable for another 10 years
or so, there's enough people out there who demand a CRT for one reason or
another and it'll be at least a few years before the cost is comparable to a
CRT. Something better than LCD will have to come along to kill CRT entirely,
perhaps if OLED really matures, though they may never resolve the lifespan
issue.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:17:56 -0600, TCS
put finger to keyboard and
composed:

LCD backlights are too fragile to be replaced. Look at the lamp funny
and it'll break. Ask a company to ship you one and they'll just laugh.

There are companies that specialise in this area, eg
http://www.lcdtvrepair.net/. Over time their numbers should grow.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

Even that is doubtful. It'll be a price driven process. All over the world
there are millions? of old standard 8mm movie cameras. Good luck buying
film. I have a couple of CED disk players and 200 movies. Good luck
getting
parts. Some people still have Beta VCRs. I haven't seen tape for a long
time. Obsolescence is now a fact of life.

N



The thing is 8mm cameras are MUCH more hassle to make and watch movies,
camcorders caught on quickly because of the convenience factor, you can
record something and watch it moments later, make copies at home to send to
relatives, etc. CED never really caught on, I only ever ran into one person
who owned one even in their heyday if you can even call it that. Beta is
another format that never attained widespread use, sure they sold a decent
number of them, but compared to VHS machines it was about zilch. VHS is a
good example of why I think CRT's will stick around for a while, it's been
effectively obsolete for what, close to 10 years now? DVD players are
cheaper and offer far superior performance and have been for at least a few
years now yet VHS clings to life. It's well on it's way to obsolesence but
even so it'll be around for a few more years.

"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:OMK2e.35060$mq2.29455@trnddc08...

DVD players are
cheaper and offer far superior performance and have been for at least a
few
years now yet VHS clings to life. It's well on it's way to obsolesence but
even so it'll be around for a few more years.

I hope. I hear many retailers are getting out of VCRs for HD/DVD recorders.
No margin in VCRs anyway.

N

The lamp and ballast replacement in the LCD set is a lot cheaper than a
CRT replacement in a CRT type set!

The amount of training and ease of lamp replacement is dependent on the
design of the screen. Many of the newer LCD screen lamps are starting
to not be replaceable. They are becoming an intigral part of the screen
construction. This is to have a greater efficiency, less optical
losses, and less shading problems. This is part of the process for
getting higher amounts of brightness, with more even shading in the low
levels of lumination.

Jerry G.
======

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:11:51 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:17:56 -0600, TCS
put finger to keyboard and
composed:

LCD backlights are too fragile to be replaced. Look at the lamp funny
and it'll break. Ask a company to ship you one and they'll just laugh.

There are companies that specialise in this area, eg
http://www.lcdtvrepair.net/. Over time their numbers should grow.

Actually, over time, LCD prices will drop and the panels will be truly
disposable. Places that repair LCD panels will vanish just like the local TV
repair shop. But not in the next two years... more like ten.

Good to know in the meantime; thanks for that link.

"Jerry G." wrote in message
ups.com...
I have been to some computer stores, that don't even stock CRT monitors
any more. There are fewer models available as time goes on. I read some
articles that there will no longer be CRT monitors or TV sets to be
available in about 3 to 5 years.

Maybe some countries like China may produce some low end CRT monitors
just to fill in the markets where there are people who really want a
CRT monitor no matter what. This is soon to be seen.

Jerry G.
======

With the alternatives the OP presents, the LCD would presently cost more
than four times the CRT model.
So; buy two CRT TVs and keep one as a spare. That might also take of not
having to move the TV around; however moving can also be taken care of by
using some kind of TV cart or perhaps a kitchen type microwave trolley? Also
arranging to just plug TV in a couple of places around ones domicile.
I used to have TV in the bedroom by feeding an old VCR as a channel changer
into an old Commodore monitor! It was small, very cheap and the 13 inch
quality was quite good enough for a late night watch of the news etc.

In article xvC2e.113659$ZO2.77747@edtnps84,
NSM wrote:
Some people still have Beta VCRs. I haven't seen tape for a long
time. Obsolescence is now a fact of life.

Pro Betacam tapes work just fine in a domestic Beta, and are still
available from specialists.

--
*Why is it that most nudists are people you don't want to see naked?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:34:23 GMT, "NSM" wrote:


"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:OMK2e.35060$mq2.29455@trnddc08...

DVD players are
cheaper and offer far superior performance and have been for at least a
few
years now yet VHS clings to life. It's well on it's way to obsolesence but
even so it'll be around for a few more years.

I hope. I hear many retailers are getting out of VCRs for HD/DVD recorders.
No margin in VCRs anyway.

**I love my VCRs *and* I love my DVD recorder as well as my DVD
players I use them all. It's a bummer that VCRs are hard to get in
brick and mortar stores (well, except for the el cheapos). It just
forces people to the Internet if you want a better VCR, hmm, maybe I
should just say more expensive. It's sad that you can't get good VCRs
anymore.


kaboomie

"kaboom" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:34:23 GMT, "NSM" wrote:


"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:OMK2e.35060$mq2.29455@trnddc08...

DVD players are
cheaper and offer far superior performance and have been for at least a
few
years now yet VHS clings to life. It's well on it's way to obsolesence
but
even so it'll be around for a few more years.

I hope. I hear many retailers are getting out of VCRs for HD/DVD
recorders.
No margin in VCRs anyway.

**I love my VCRs *and* I love my DVD recorder as well as my DVD
players I use them all. It's a bummer that VCRs are hard to get in
brick and mortar stores (well, except for the el cheapos). It just
forces people to the Internet if you want a better VCR, hmm, maybe I
should just say more expensive. It's sad that you can't get good VCRs
anymore.



What's to like about VCR's? They were great for a while, but whenever I use
mine (nice high end Sony from a few years back) I'm struck with how crappy
the picture looks in comparison to DVD's, add to that the tapes are big and
clunky, wear out with age, have to be rewound, etc. Now that DVD-R's are
inexpensive I see no more reason to keep a VCR around than an old DOS PC,
with both I keep one stashed around for those rare times I need to use
legacy material.

"kaboom" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:34:23 GMT, "NSM" wrote:


"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:OMK2e.35060$mq2.29455@trnddc08...

DVD players are
cheaper and offer far superior performance and have been for at least a
few
years now yet VHS clings to life. It's well on it's way to obsolesence
but
even so it'll be around for a few more years.

I hope. I hear many retailers are getting out of VCRs for HD/DVD
recorders.
No margin in VCRs anyway.

**I love my VCRs *and* I love my DVD recorder as well as my DVD
players I use them all. It's a bummer that VCRs are hard to get in
brick and mortar stores (well, except for the el cheapos). It just
forces people to the Internet if you want a better VCR, hmm, maybe I
should just say more expensive. It's sad that you can't get good VCRs
anymore.


kaboomie

In the not-too-distant future, you'll be forced to mail order blank tapes as
well. A few years ago, I could buy high-grades -- the only kind I ever used
in my machines -- just about anywhere. Target, in particular, stocked lots
of different brands. Now, the only high-grades in town are at Wal-Mart, and
they have only Maxell. Maxell is fine, but I prefer having a choice.
Those who once stocked high-grades now barely bother with "everyday" blanks.
With blank DVD's being much cheaper, on average, than blank VHS tapes, it
won't be long till optical media will be the only type available locally
(for most people).
I still have an old Toshiba beta machine. I always preferred Beta over VHS.
The only store that still stocked blank betas last time I checked was Fry's
Electronics and the closest store is about 23 miles away.

DVD's have another major advantage over video tapes: they save space!
I'm transferring all my old VHS recordings which can't be had elsewhere
(broadcast specials, personal stuff, etc.) over to DVD because I can store
100+ DVD's in a 10" x 5.5" case. The same amount of material on VHS is
currently consuming a good chunk of the room!

When NTSC is gone, HDTV playback (i.e., Blue Ray or whatever dominates) will
the order of the day and the vast majority of viewers will want playback
that matches the capabilities of their new HDTV display. For this reason,
expect today's DVD's to disappear in the not-too-distant future in favor of
the newer, higher-density media.
Sure, there will be disgruntled holdouts who will be utterly satisfied with
their old convex GE screen and VHS-quality video, but the majority will be
ready to upgrade.

Just be a little bit careful I have VHS tapes 20 years old that still play
ok but some of my CDR's less than 5 years old are no longer readable. If you
have important data on optical disk keep backing it up and always keep at
least 2 copies.
Also a damaged tape can be repaired a damaged disk is lost forever.
Having said all that be careful and the newer disk technology will be the
way to go.
John.

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:57:22 GMT, "James Sweet"
wrote:


"kaboom" wrote in message
.. .

**I love my VCRs *and* I love my DVD recorder as well as my DVD
players I use them all. It's a bummer that VCRs are hard to get in
brick and mortar stores (well, except for the el cheapos). It just
forces people to the Internet if you want a better VCR, hmm, maybe I
should just say more expensive. It's sad that you can't get good VCRs
anymore.

What's to like about VCR's? They were great for a while, but whenever I use
mine (nice high end Sony from a few years back) I'm struck with how crappy
the picture looks in comparison to DVD's, add to that the tapes are big and
clunky, wear out with age, have to be rewound, etc. Now that DVD-R's are
inexpensive I see no more reason to keep a VCR around than an old DOS PC,
with both I keep one stashed around for those rare times I need to use
legacy material.

**When I'm talking about why I like VCRs, I'm talking about what I've
already taped/archived off of TV. Basically programs or movies that
won't be showing up on a pressed DVD anytime soon. I have a lot of old
stuff like tennis matches, etc. For instance, as soon as ST: Voyager
came out on DVD, the tapes went into the record-over pile. I never
bought actual commercial movies on VHS. Well, maybe a few. I didn't
become an avid movie watcher until I bought a DVD player. There's no
comparison. Eventually, I'll burn many of those archived tapes to DVD
so I can watch them and not worry about wearing out the tape but I
won't get rid of the tapes. I presently have a really nice older
Panasonic VCR with a great picture, I wish I could get another one.
Also, a lot of people would like a nice VCR so they can archive their
videos with the best picture possible.

Another reason I still like VHS, I tape a lot of stuff for my family.
When they're done with them, I tape over them again. If I find
something I seriously want to archive (which lately is not often) then
I tape it as well as burn it.

For me, it comes down to: the longevity of burnt DVDs isn't
established yet. I have VCR tapes from the early 80s that still
function. So I guess it's a wait and see thing. Depending on people's
needs, some have reasons to keep VCRs around and some don't, no
biggie.

kaboomie

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:43:08 GMT, "Ray L. Volts"
wrote:


In the not-too-distant future, you'll be forced to mail order blank tapes as
well. A few years ago, I could buy high-grades -- the only kind I ever used
in my machines -- just about anywhere. Target, in particular, stocked lots
of different brands. Now, the only high-grades in town are at Wal-Mart, and
they have only Maxell. Maxell is fine, but I prefer having a choice.
Those who once stocked high-grades now barely bother with "everyday" blanks.
With blank DVD's being much cheaper, on average, than blank VHS tapes, it
won't be long till optical media will be the only type available locally
(for most people).

**Hi Ray. You're right, we are already in the not-too-distant future.
After poking around at some other stores, I'm going to check Walmart
and see if they have anything high-grade and buy a couple of packages.
Right now, because I've replaced many tapes with commercial DVD
pressings, so I have a ton of good video tapes that had almost no use.

DVD's have another major advantage over video tapes: they save space!

**Also no rewinding, as others have mentioned, and no tape wear.
There's also convenience. But as posted elsewhe I don't have the
faith in the longevity of the burnt DVDs as others have.

I'm transferring all my old VHS recordings which can't be had elsewhere
(broadcast specials, personal stuff, etc.) over to DVD because I can store
100+ DVD's in a 10" x 5.5" case. The same amount of material on VHS is
currently consuming a good chunk of the room!

**I hear that! I had Xena, Buffy and Voyager on video tape. When I
bought the DVDs, I put the taped copies into the record-over pile.
Man, that was a lot of tapes. I want to bring copies of stuff (also
programs that can't be had elsewhere) over to DVD and then store the
video tapes away.

When NTSC is gone, HDTV playback (i.e., Blue Ray or whatever dominates) will
the order of the day and the vast majority of viewers will want playback
that matches the capabilities of their new HDTV display. For this reason,
expect today's DVD's to disappear in the not-too-distant future in favor of
the newer, higher-density media.

**Technology is turning itself over daily. In fact, it's running us
over.

Sure, there will be disgruntled holdouts who will be utterly satisfied with
their old convex GE screen and VHS-quality video, but the majority will be
ready to upgrade.

**I bought my parents a DVD player for Xmas. My sister and I decided
to get them DVDs that they would be really eager to watch so that they
would be forced to use the player. I got my Mom an Eddy Izzard DVD and
my sister bought Dad some Benny Hill. My Mom guessed when she say the
present that it was a DVD. I said: Damn it, it's the new millennium,
time to move forward. Oddly, it turned out to be the new Bambi release
that pushed Mom into using the thing. My niece made cow eyes and
Grannie melted. Now Mom thinks she's a DVD pro.

kaboomie

When NTSC is gone, HDTV playback (i.e., Blue Ray or whatever dominates)
will
the order of the day and the vast majority of viewers will want playback
that matches the capabilities of their new HDTV display. For this reason,
expect today's DVD's to disappear in the not-too-distant future in favor
of
the newer, higher-density media.
Sure, there will be disgruntled holdouts who will be utterly satisfied
with
their old convex GE screen and VHS-quality video, but the majority will be
ready to upgrade.



The nice thing about Blu-Ray is the high likelyhood that the players will be
able to play today's standard DVD media, we've seen it again and again how
much consumers value backward compatibility.

For me, it comes down to: the longevity of burnt DVDs isn't
established yet. I have VCR tapes from the early 80s that still
function. So I guess it's a wait and see thing. Depending on people's
needs, some have reasons to keep VCRs around and some don't, no
biggie.


That is a possible issue, I haven't personally had many problems with the
better brands of recordable CD's but I have had a few cheapies fail. Of
course these days it's not too terribly expensive to backup that stuff on a
USB hard drive and stash it away.

There's also convenience. But as posted elsewhe I don't have the
faith in the longevity of the burnt DVDs as others have.


You guys are right to be concerned about that. For those not familiar with
pressed dvd "rot" and the exposure effects of various light sources on
recordable DVD's, check this out:

http://www.manifest-tech.com/media_d...patibility.htm

The page includes a link to the NIST data as well.


When NTSC is gone, HDTV playback (i.e., Blue Ray or whatever dominates)
will
the order of the day and the vast majority of viewers will want playback
that matches the capabilities of their new HDTV display. For this
reason,
expect today's DVD's to disappear in the not-too-distant future in favor
of
the newer, higher-density media.

**Technology is turning itself over daily. In fact, it's running us
over.


Yeah, it can seem that way. Display technology is constantly changing,
but the format itself hasn't undergone a major change since the introduction
of color decades ago. Once HDTV is the standard in the USA, consumers
shouldn't need to worry about having to replace their HDTV move collection
in favor of yet another new standard for quite some time, probably decades.

my sister bought Dad some Benny Hill.

I didn't know that was out on DVD. I'll have to see if I can find it. I
haven't seen the show in years, but it always cracked me up.