My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank

Ktech spake thus:

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.

You might have better luck with this over at sci.electronics.repair.
(Not all questions there need be about repair per se.)


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

You might want to check the availability of HD broadcast in your area.
There are few. HD tv is a waste of money IMO.

--
Steve Barker

"Ktech" wrote in message
...
My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank

see:
http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/le...e/tv_hdtv.html

Ktech wrote:
My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank

"Ktech" wrote in message
...

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------

Get to the library and look at Consumer Reports.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:34:37 -0600, Ktech wrote:

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank
A lot of information and reviews he
http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/

Walmart is your friend.


On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:34:37 -0600, "Ktech" wrote:

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.

If you have any poo, fling it now.

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, wrote:

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

Some warranties (but not all) cover bulb failure due to defects, but they
don't cover bulb failure after several thousand hours of use-they are just
"worn out."

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:

It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.

wrote:
why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.



Interesting thought process. The guy wants a 40" display. You can
get a plasma or LCD HDTV for a reasonable price that size. And if he
doesn't want HDTV, it's going to severly limit his choices, as just
about all of them that size and above support HD, because the FCC
requires digital tuners and it makes sense to make it HD at the same
time.

As for HD programming, there is quite a bit of it now. Everything
from News to most of Prime time is now in HD. Plus if you have cable
or sat, there is even more available. Plus, with 720P resolution, any
DVDs are gonna look a hell of a lot better.

IMO, anyone buying a 40"+ TV would be a damn fool not to get HD.

The thing about HD is really a chicken/egg problem. The balance is
starting to swing towards more and more HD programming because the of
the large % of new TV's that are HD ready now. You'll still need a
cable card or HD converter to translate the signal, but the picture is
amazing.

If you get one, you'll find yourself watching a lot of things you
wouldn't otherwise watch if it wasn't in HD, just because it is in HD.
It's that good.

Try watching a football game in HD, then flip over to the standard
broadcast version of the same game. The standard version is blurry
compared to HD. You can't watch it. It's that good.

HDTV was really in only a very few niche markets just 3 years ago. In
three more years, most new production work will all be HD. It would
really be a waste of cash in my opinion to buy a set that wasn't HD
ready, even if you don't spring for the converter and higher cable at
the moment. It will save you from scraping the new TV 3 or 4 years
from now.

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:

It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.

Some TVs are marked ED. Those are digital-compatible, but have a
physical resolution of 480 lines. They will usually accept a HD (720p
or 1080i) signal, and downconvert it. You don't get HD, but you do get
the other advantages of the new formats (picture stability, color
consistency, etc..).
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:24:37 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible

Over a certain size (26"?) they have to be digital now. That usually
means the new format too.

Just what do you mean by "new format"?
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, "
wrote:

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.


The CBS station (relatively new) around here has been broadcasting in
ATSC for a couple of years now. Do check if there are any digital
(ATSC) broadcast stations in your area.

Note that you do NOT need a new antenna for ATSC or HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.


DVDs look good on one of the new sets (if your DVD player has the
proper outputs, any many do now). When I first got HD (front
projector) the only source I had was DVD.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go.

Neither is available in larger sizes (over about 36 inch) yet,
although LCD may be in a few years.

If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.

If you have any poo, fling it now.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On 13 Dec 2006 11:09:14 -0800, wrote:


wrote:
why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.



Interesting thought process. The guy wants a 40" display. You can
get a plasma or LCD HDTV for a reasonable price that size. And if he
doesn't want HDTV, it's going to severly limit his choices, as just
about all of them that size and above support HD, because the FCC
requires digital tuners and it makes sense to make it HD at the same
time.

As for HD programming, there is quite a bit of it now. Everything
from News to most of Prime time is now in HD. Plus if you have cable
or sat, there is even more available. Plus, with 720P resolution, any
DVDs are gonna look a hell of a lot better.


They do (of course that assumes your DVD player has some non-NTSC
output). One obvious improvement is in color quality.

IMO, anyone buying a 40"+ TV would be a damn fool not to get HD.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On 13 Dec 2006 11:36:39 -0800, wrote:


The thing about HD is really a chicken/egg problem. The balance is
starting to swing towards more and more HD programming because the of
the large % of new TV's that are HD ready now. You'll still need a
cable card or HD converter to translate the signal, but the picture is
amazing.

If you get one, you'll find yourself watching a lot of things you
wouldn't otherwise watch if it wasn't in HD, just because it is in HD.
It's that good.

Try watching a football game in HD, then flip over to the standard
broadcast version of the same game. The standard version is blurry
compared to HD. You can't watch it. It's that good.


When I first got HD I watched some swamp buggy racing. I normally
wouldn't care for that, but the scenery looked really good.

HDTV was really in only a very few niche markets just 3 years ago. In
three more years, most new production work will all be HD. It would
really be a waste of cash in my opinion to buy a set that wasn't HD
ready, even if you don't spring for the converter and higher cable at
the moment. It will save you from scraping the new TV 3 or 4 years
from now.

It might be worth it for a small (like 13 inch) set. I think Wal-Mart
still sells those for $60.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, "
wrote:

snip
The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go.

Neither is available in larger sizes (over about 36 inch) yet,
although LCD may be in a few years.

You can now get LCD's from multiply manufactures in 46".
--
Jim Rusling
More or Less Retired
Mustang, OK
http://www.rusling.org

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:18:05 -0600, Jim Rusling
wrote:

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, "
wrote:

snip
The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go.

Neither is available in larger sizes (over about 36 inch) yet,
although LCD may be in a few years.

You can now get LCD's from multiply manufactures in 46".

They're always increasing it. Still, that's significantly less than
the 60-70 inches of a lot of big screen sets and the 100 inches or
more available with a projector.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:18:05 -0600, Jim Rusling
wrote:

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, "
wrote:

snip
The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go.

Neither is available in larger sizes (over about 36 inch) yet,
although LCD may be in a few years.

You can now get LCD's from multiply manufactures in 46".

They're always increasing it. Still, that's significantly less than
the 60-70 inches of a lot of big screen sets and the 100 inches or
more available with a projector.

I understand that Sony has a 60" model, but it is not available for
consumers yet.
--
Jim Rusling
More or Less Retired
Mustang, OK
http://www.rusling.org

Steve Barker LT wrote:
You might want to check the availability of HD broadcast in your area.
There are few. HD tv is a waste of money IMO.

Hmmm,
Watch DVD movies?

Ktech wrote:

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank


Hi,
If you like Plasma then panasonic or LG. If you like LCD then Sharp.
If you like projection type then JVC LCos. All has good and bad side.
Currently I have 42" Panasonic Plasma which we like. To get the full
benefit of it, you need a good surround sound audio package to go with
the set. I have all under one unified remote control to keep peace in
the family. Wife does not bother me any more when she wants to watch
something or listen to something from different sources. Just pushing
one button on the remote does it all. I think this is very important, LOL!
Happy holidays!

wrote:

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.

If you have any poo, fling it now.

Hi,
CRT set is very heavy! Sounds like you are talking in terms of older
generation Plasma sets. Current ones will last as long as CRT sets.
And LCD panel has light source too which can burn out!
Anyway TV format is in transition now. It is not a time to sink too much
on any set.

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:


On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:


It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.


Some TVs are marked ED. Those are digital-compatible, but have a
physical resolution of 480 lines. They will usually accept a HD (720p
or 1080i) signal, and downconvert it. You don't get HD, but you do get
the other advantages of the new formats (picture stability, color
consistency, etc..).

That is 480p vs. old CRT format 480i.

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:13:50 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:

Mark Lloyd wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:


On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:


It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.


Some TVs are marked ED. Those are digital-compatible, but have a
physical resolution of 480 lines. They will usually accept a HD (720p
or 1080i) signal, and downconvert it. You don't get HD, but you do get
the other advantages of the new formats (picture stability, color
consistency, etc..).

That is 480p vs. old CRT format 480i.

The ED TVs display either 480i or 480p. Note that even 480i looks MUCH
better when the signal to it doesn't have to go through NTSC (S-video
has a POTENTIAL for being better than composite, but not nearly as
much better as component or HDMI at 480i).

The change from NTSC to component or HDMI (at 480i)

gives much more improvement than

the change from component or HDMI (at 480i) to HD resolution

although the latter is still significant.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:11:20 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:

wrote:

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.

If you have any poo, fling it now.

Hi,
CRT set is very heavy!

My 27-inch CRT TV (bought around 1999) weighs 90 pounds. I haven't had
a bigger one, maybe 120 pounds for a 36-inch?

Sounds like you are talking in terms of older
generation Plasma sets. Current ones will last as long as CRT sets
And LCD panel has light source too which can burn out!

Some new ones are supposed to use LEDs for a light source.

Anyway TV format is in transition now. It is not a time to sink too much
on any set.

Maybe if you really want a feature that's about to disappear.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:06:57 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:

Ktech wrote:

My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank


Hi,
If you like Plasma then panasonic or LG. If you like LCD then Sharp.
If you like projection type then JVC LCos. All has good and bad side.
Currently I have 42" Panasonic Plasma which we like. To get the full
benefit of it, you need a good surround sound audio package to go with
the set. I have all under one unified remote control to keep peace in
the family. Wife does not bother me any more when she wants to watch
something or listen to something from different sources. Just pushing
one button on the remote does it all. I think this is very important, LOL!
Happy holidays!

Unified remotes really need to be learning-capable, so they can be set
up the way YOU want.

Also, if you're considering one with a touch screen, you need to try
it first. These are nearly unusable to some people.

BTW, I used that capability to eliminate the "autof*ck" button that
was on the front of my TV's remote. That's actually called "picture
reset", but you might think something else when you've spent an hour
or more getting the picture adjusted how you like and ONE
unintentional press messes that all up.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:06:57 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:


Ktech wrote:


My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank



Hi,
If you like Plasma then panasonic or LG. If you like LCD then Sharp.
If you like projection type then JVC LCos. All has good and bad side.
Currently I have 42" Panasonic Plasma which we like. To get the full
benefit of it, you need a good surround sound audio package to go with
the set. I have all under one unified remote control to keep peace in
the family. Wife does not bother me any more when she wants to watch
something or listen to something from different sources. Just pushing
one button on the remote does it all. I think this is very important, LOL!
Happy holidays!


Unified remotes really need to be learning-capable, so they can be set
up the way YOU want.

Also, if you're considering one with a touch screen, you need to try
it first. These are nearly unusable to some people.

BTW, I used that capability to eliminate the "autof*ck" button that
was on the front of my TV's remote. That's actually called "picture
reset", but you might think something else when you've spent an hour
or more getting the picture adjusted how you like and ONE
unintentional press messes that all up.
Hi,
No matter what the tool is, knowing how to use it is the thing.

Thanks to all. I guess it's up to me to bite the bullet and buy a plasma
set. Seems this is the best choice since I haven't seen a CRT set with wide
format and a screen size as large as I would like.Merry Christmas and Happy
Holidays to all you folks out there.
Frank
"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:11:20 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:

wrote:

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

HD isn't big enough yet, unless you're a sports nut and have more money
than you know what to do with, don't get an HDTV.

Also, if you get a rear-projection or Plasma type, you'll want the
extended warranty...sure it costs an extra $300, but statistically,
your bulb in the rear-projection will burn out in 3 years and it costs
over $300 for the part.

The CRT (old school tube TV's) and LCD are the only way to go. If you
bought any other type though, I'll be over to watch the game as they do
have an incredible picture.

If you have any poo, fling it now.

Hi,
CRT set is very heavy!

My 27-inch CRT TV (bought around 1999) weighs 90 pounds. I haven't had
a bigger one, maybe 120 pounds for a 36-inch?

Sounds like you are talking in terms of older
generation Plasma sets. Current ones will last as long as CRT sets
And LCD panel has light source too which can burn out!

Some new ones are supposed to use LEDs for a light source.

Anyway TV format is in transition now. It is not a time to sink too much
on any set.

Maybe if you really want a feature that's about to disappear.
--
12 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

Ktech wrote:
Thanks to all. I guess it's up to me to bite the bullet and buy a plasma
set. Seems this is the best choice since I haven't seen a CRT set with wide
format and a screen size as large as I would like.Merry Christmas and Happy
Holidays to all you folks out there.

The last I heard, a few years ago, plasma sets were having problems with
screen burn. That used to be a problem only when you played video games
a significant number of hours a day. I had heard back then of people
getting The Stain (the bright colorful logo at the bottom right of
the screen) burnt permanently on their screens by watching one network
more than others.

I honestly don't know if they've done anything to fix that in the
intervening period of time. But I'd check before buying.

--
Asking Iran and Syria to help us succeed in Iraq is like your local fire
department asking a couple of arsonists to help put out the fire.
-- Joe Lieberman

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:

It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.

Someone who does something related to this for a living, on the radio
pointed out that the rule requiring transmittion on the new
frequencies devoted to HD applies only to over-the-air transmissions.
He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.

I don't have cable tv now, but if for some reason the converter
doesn't work well for me, I'll get it then.

He also said that there is no visible difference bween HD and "RD",
regular def, in screens that are 19" or less. Or some size, 21"?

On 13 Dec 2006 06:14:40 -0800, "
wrote:

why do you want an HD? I personally prefer the standard definition
36" tube tv's... that you can get for aroun $300.

Remember, even with an HDTV, you must have an hdtv signal... which
requires Digital Cable or a Satellite dish... and even then only a few
programs are broadcast in HD.

Wrong. Most cities now broadcast hdtv over the air.

And most of the newest sets now come with built in HDTV reception off
the air without an external cable or hdtv converter

Rabbit ears are not recommended so you might want to invest in a
better antennae.

mm wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:


On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:


It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.


Someone who does something related to this for a living, on the radio
pointed out that the rule requiring transmittion on the new
frequencies devoted to HD applies only to over-the-air transmissions.
He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.

I don't have cable tv now, but if for some reason the converter
doesn't work well for me, I'll get it then.

He also said that there is no visible difference bween HD and "RD",
regular def, in screens that are 19" or less. Or some size, 21"?
Hi,
It's called backward compatible. We can't just trash millions old sets
over night, LOL!

clifto wrote:

Ktech wrote:

Thanks to all. I guess it's up to me to bite the bullet and buy a plasma
set. Seems this is the best choice since I haven't seen a CRT set with wide
format and a screen size as large as I would like.Merry Christmas and Happy
Holidays to all you folks out there.


The last I heard, a few years ago, plasma sets were having problems with
screen burn. That used to be a problem only when you played video games
a significant number of hours a day. I had heard back then of people
getting The Stain (the bright colorful logo at the bottom right of
the screen) burnt permanently on their screens by watching one network
more than others.

I honestly don't know if they've done anything to fix that in the
intervening period of time. But I'd check before buying.

Hi,
Old story! Now we're in 8th generation of Plasma business.
60,000 hours life span of a panel is how many years?

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:06:37 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 14:54:27 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

Just what do you mean by "new format"?
--
The wide short screen.

Supposed to be 16:9 and used on most (all?) broadcasts at HD
resolution.
--
11 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:37:04 -0500, mm
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:17:59 -0800, Karl S
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:47:03 -0500, wrote:

It's pretty much impossible to get a big screen TV that isn't HD these
days unless you find some old stock. FCC rules.

There is no FCC rule that says TVs must be HD. There is one that says by
2009 they must be digital compatible.

Someone who does something related to this for a living, on the radio
pointed out that the rule requiring transmittion on the new
frequencies devoted to HD applies only to over-the-air transmissions.

Terrestrial, not satellite. Probably limited by frequency range.

Note that the difference is NOT HD, but digital broadcast. This can be
480i or 480p which are not HD, as well as 720p or 1080i which are.

He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.


Some will be changing to all-digital, for other reasons.

I don't have cable tv now, but if for some reason the converter
doesn't work well for me, I'll get it then.


There are websites that give you information about ATSC (digital)
broadcasters in your area. Go to
http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx You will need to enter your
ZIP code.

He also said that there is no visible difference bween HD and "RD",
regular def,

Usually called SD for standard definition.

in screens that are 19" or less. Or some size, 21"?

However, a non-NTSC source DOES give you an improvement. Many of these
newer sets have component video input.
--
11 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:16:47 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:

Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 02:06:57 GMT, Tony Hwang wrote:


Ktech wrote:


My 17 year old TV just quit and it's time for a new one.
I would like HDTV about 40" but I am at a loss regarding them
and I don,t know where to start. Any help ---Mfg ------- type-------
reliability would really help.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Frank



Hi,
If you like Plasma then panasonic or LG. If you like LCD then Sharp.
If you like projection type then JVC LCos. All has good and bad side.
Currently I have 42" Panasonic Plasma which we like. To get the full
benefit of it, you need a good surround sound audio package to go with
the set. I have all under one unified remote control to keep peace in
the family. Wife does not bother me any more when she wants to watch
something or listen to something from different sources. Just pushing
one button on the remote does it all. I think this is very important, LOL!
Happy holidays!


Unified remotes really need to be learning-capable, so they can be set
up the way YOU want.

Also, if you're considering one with a touch screen, you need to try
it first. These are nearly unusable to some people.

BTW, I used that capability to eliminate the "autof*ck" button that
was on the front of my TV's remote. That's actually called "picture
reset", but you might think something else when you've spent an hour
or more getting the picture adjusted how you like and ONE
unintentional press messes that all up.
Hi,
No matter what the tool is, knowing how to use it is the thing.

Does that have anything to do with what I just posted? What?

I hope you're not assuming perfection. Such a thing doesn't exist, and
can't.
--
11 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"How could you ask be to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:37:04 -0500, mm
wrote:

He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.


I bet that is not going to be true. They rent set top boxes and when
they can, they will expand that market to obsolete every "cable ready"
TV they can. In my area Comcast is already moving a lot of their
content to digital signals, requiring a box to see it. For them, it is
a more efficiernt use of the bandwidth with the added value of box
rentals.
A favorite peeve of mine- local cable company moved most of the good
channels to the expen$ive digital band, which requires the damn box, and
filled the 'standard' cheap analog band with garbage. Note that some
grandfathered customers could still get the good channels, but all new
customers got notch filters and were told 'SOL', in so many words. Since I
had to have the damn box anyway, I went with a dish- same channels (the ones
I cared about, anyway), but about half the price. I still resent having to
pay for 50-some channels I never watch, but I'd rather get screwed a little
than a lot. If it wasn't for discovery, history, learning, sci-fi, and a few
other channels, I'd tell them all to go to hell, and put up a real antenna
and a rotator, like I had as a kid. One of the few things I miss about the
apartments I moved out of- their own in-house cable, all analog, including
HBO and some others, for only 26 bucks a month. I do sort of miss HBO, but
not 15 bucks a month worth that adding it to Dish would cost.

aem sends...

http://www.eff.org/IP/pnp/?f=2000091...hdtv_rule.html


wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:37:04 -0500, mm
wrote:

He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.


I bet that is not going to be true. They rent set top boxes and when
they can, they will expand that market to obsolete every "cable
ready" TV they can. In my area Comcast is already moving a lot of
their content to digital signals, requiring a box to see it. For
them, it is a more efficiernt use of the bandwidth with the added
value of box rentals.
A favorite peeve of mine- local cable company moved most of the good
channels to the expen$ive digital band, which requires the damn box,
and filled the 'standard' cheap analog band with garbage. Note that
some grandfathered customers could still get the good channels, but
all new customers got notch filters and were told 'SOL', in so many
words. Since I had to have the damn box anyway, I went with a dish-
same channels (the ones I cared about, anyway), but about half the
price. I still resent having to pay for 50-some channels I never
watch, but I'd rather get screwed a little than a lot. If it wasn't
for discovery, history, learning, sci-fi, and a few other channels,
I'd tell them all to go to hell, and put up a real antenna and a
rotator, like I had as a kid. One of the few things I miss about the
apartments I moved out of- their own in-house cable, all analog,
including HBO and some others, for only 26 bucks a month. I do sort
of miss HBO, but not 15 bucks a month worth that adding it to Dish
would cost.
aem sends...

"Pop`" wrote in message
news:WFmgh.7390$bj5.1299@trnddc07...
http://www.eff.org/IP/pnp/?f=2000091...hdtv_rule.html


wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:37:04 -0500, mm
wrote:

He said that most cable companies will continue to transmit standard
signals for use by non-HD tvs.


I bet that is not going to be true. They rent set top boxes and when
they can, they will expand that market to obsolete every "cable
ready" TV they can. In my area Comcast is already moving a lot of
their content to digital signals, requiring a box to see it. For
(snip)
including HBO and some others, for only 26 bucks a month. I do sort
of miss HBO, but not 15 bucks a month worth that adding it to Dish
would cost.
aem sends...


What does the link you provided have to do with anything? Sure, I can buy my
own box, but that doesn't make the montly fee any cheaper. Nothing for the
box to recieve, if the serial number for the box isn't alloted access to the
signal. Or are you advocating pirating?

aem sends...