Make way for HDTV?

Extreme_Jesus · Post by **Extreme_Jesus** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:35 am

depends, im not sure, sky isnt analog, but then again i dont know if its HD or not

HDTV = High Definition TV

demonofaj · Post by **demonofaj** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:05 am

Ha, my uncle works at PC Richard and Son. And gave us an LCD-Projection TV, 50 in., HDTV ready. Too bad it cost 800 dollars

loup · Post by **loup** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:27 am

Unidentified Assilant wrote:I'm confused

What's HDTV? And when Analog TV is cut off, am I ok with Sky Digital? (Not Sky+)

HDTV refers to the number of pixels the tv can display, NTSC has a resolution of 640x480, PAL is 768x576, true HDTV is either 1024x720 or 1920x1080. There's a little more to the specification than that but it should give you the basic idea.

When analog is cut off you will need a tv that can recieve a digital signal or a set top box that can convert the digital signal to analog. You will not need an HDTV (but the broadcasts will look much better on an HDTV than it will on either an NTSC or PAL tv)

Unidentified Assilant · Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:35 pm

Thanks loup... I'm still slightly confused by all this, espically seeing as HDTV has no following here in Merry Old England, mine is a PAL TV, with Scart (Composite to you) plugs in the back and AV plugs in the front, and a RF Lead, is that Digital or Analog? and what signal looks better on a HDTV? Freeview? Sorry for being a complete n00b to this...

Post by **SpongeBuell** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:51 pm

First of all, SCART is not composite. Also, don't worry about this, UA. You living in England makes this have absolutely no effect on you whatsoever, since this is just for the US.

Unidentified Assilant · Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:55 pm

Huh... ok, wait... US only? WHAT?!

Man... that sucks, I seen an X-Box 360 Pod today up in Gamestation, it's running on a standard portable TV, but Rev for me

xxxeagle · Post by **xxxeagle** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 4:00 pm

I think my parents will get an HDTV soon. Our 32 in CRT is going (the picture keeps getting smaller and smaller and were getting a black border around the edges)

Off topic: Hey U.A. just wondering does anyone in england have an imported satelite dish's such as directv or dish so they can get American T.V.?

Post by **marshallh** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 4:03 pm

I doubt my family will get a new tv soon, heck the last time we turned it on was 2 weeks ago. Nobody watches TV in my family, maybe that contributes to my "productivity.", heh heh.

It's a puny 13" TV, because our nice big TV exploded on Sept. 11, yes, THAT sept. 11th. We turned it on to watch the towers come down and the tube imploded into fragments of glass like shrapnel. Luckily nobody was sitting in front of it

sniper_spike · Post by **sniper_spike** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:32 pm

Horrible luck.

I barely watch TV, except for Tuesdays when House M.D. is on

-"Television. What the heck is that?"

loup · Post by **loup** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:08 pm

Unidentified Assilant wrote:Huh... ok, wait... US only? WHAT?!

Yes, it's amazing I know, but the United States Federal Communications Commission has absolutely no control over what standards are used in another country, meaning that the switch over that we are talking about is US only. (and yes, the first part of this was just dripping with sarcasm.)

As far as what signal looks best in HD, well... An HD signal would look best on an HDTV (I know, now I'm just complicating things more.) The HD signal merely contains more information for the increased number of pixels, an HD signal can be sent either digitally or through analog. If I wanted to get even more comfusing I might mention that in reality, an analog signal can send a lot more data a lot faster than you can with digital (meaning that the format that the US is going to be transmitting in is actually less efficient than what it has been using for years,) but interference causes more problems with analog than it does with digital, it's easier to distort an analog signal than digital.

Sniper_spike,
I never would have guessed that you liked House M.D. That's a complete supprise to me. :p

Extreme_Jesus · Post by **Extreme_Jesus** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:15 am

In the UK i dont think the government has any plans for HDTV yet (or least maybe thats what they want us to think

) instead were moving from analog to digital, replacing the analog terrestial channels (BBC1, BBC2, ITV and Channel 4 and 5) with a free digital service called freeview which had got about 30 channels i think, ive got freeview but its not really all that good

G-force · Post by **G-force** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:55 pm

@marshallh: Freaky!

Our family always waits until we aboslutely HAVE to get new technology. We waited forever to get a DVD player. Up till then all we used was VHS.
I don't see my parents springing for a new TV anytime soon. maybe in 2-3 years.

daguuy · Post by **daguuy** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 1:44 pm

same here: i have an old B/W TV in my room and an old fashion front projection TV for games

dad really wants an HDTV so when he eventually gets one i'm getting the current one. the wierd thing is that even though he wants HDTV, he hates electricity so it might take a while

Post by **benheck** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 1:59 pm

You must remember the UK and a lot of Europe use PAL, which is superior to the US/Japan NTSC.

I mean, it's not as good as HDTV of course, but it's better than what we have.

Yes the big thing is to get rid of analog broadcast signals. It's because the digital ones are all compressed, so you can fit say 5 channels in the space of one old NTSC analog one.

Which kind of sucks because at some point all transmissions will be compressed.

There is only a certain amount of bandwidth available flying through the air. A lot of it is already reserved (military, FAA, etc) and the consumer areas aren't all that much. Combine this with the now insane number of cel phones in the world and you see the problem.

I hope the FCC comes in and kicks cable companies's asses. If we could just buy/schedule only the channels we want we could probably get them at good quality, rather than 200 compressed-up-the-ass-blockly-as-hell channels.

Seriously, how many different channels does a person watch? I watch maybe 3, TNT for Law & Order, History "The World War 2" Channel and sometimes ABC for Lost (though I think that show is gonna go south soon)

Even with my bargain basement "expanded basic" that leaves 72 some channels I don't need. But pay for. Cable better watch out - if people like Apple nail "digitial TV distribution" over computers cable is in trouble!

I can see paying $40 or $30 a month (whichever it is) for high-speed internet, but then $50 a month to watch 3 different shows PLUS their commericals? Come on!

loup · Post by **loup** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 2:08 pm

I agree with the a la carte cable idea. I think I only really watch 7 or 8 different cable TV stations, leaving a lot that I don't watch.

benheck.com Forums

Make way for HDTV?

How will you make the jump to HDTV?