What do you think of the new 3D tvs

[Misfire]

No worries KG, spend your money on what you want to. I was just stating that by the time you can fully use those TV's, the current models will make the old ones look bad. But that is the way I think, and as I said I work in the industry so my perspective will be a little more "pessimistic" for seeing things from inside that field. Though I will admit the concept is awesome!

[kg1961]

I agree but remeber im talking about 8-12 month from now to

Ps3 will have the update, thre will be more movie and the 3d tvs still have the best rating spec for 2d tv's they seem to be the bench mark for other tvs to become that clean
I do like all the differnt input for you and everyone else

[Misfire]

I agree completely. Plus, since I can only have so many hobbies before the wife shuts me down, I have to spend my "Allowance" as she calls it very thoughtfully! LOL

[smgreen20]

crap i wish I had someone like that
...

I do....
He's the store manager at the local H.H.Gregg. I can't complain at the deals I get. The $135.00 Toshiba A3 HD DVD player, out the door, cost me $91.00

[ttocs]

ya know lets talk a sec about HD as I am curious what everybody else thinks about it as well. I am curious why the switch to HD was rushed over all those years and why we just HAD to have it. It was obvious that the market was not ready for the change and that is why the dates had to be pushed back so many times but yet it just had to be done. IT seems the only ones that really benifited from it was everyone attached to that sales market as I could never believe that tv's got so expensive so fast because of two little letters. Part of me believes that it had to be the biggest piece of pork to ever go through the us and there had to be some polititions that filled their pockets somehow....

[Misfire]

Actually ttocs, it was a push to the digital format that I believe you are refering to. And in a way, no it was not a marketing tool. And it was a move on cable companies directly. The true reason for it was the concern for Air traffic radio frequencies. In a perfect world the older Analog signal would be contained within a cable systems cable, and let me tell you it only happens in a lab!. Since we operated anaolg signals from 55.25 mhz to 860.25 mhz, we also operated in the Air traffic radio frequencies in the 110 to 170 mhz ( might not have the actual perfect numbers, but I am close.) So if any cable system had a big enough leak near an airport, we could in theory effect the radio communications, which I might add could be a big problem. By going to the digital broadcast we could not effect the radio traffic any longer. As a side note, every cable company had a yearly fly over where they did look for leaks in that range. And you did not want to have your area on that fail list.

But I am in agreement with you. I am sure some people made a lot of money in the transaction somewhere.

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

Electro-magnetic radiation from cables was enough to mess with Air Traffic control analog radio? Are you sure you're not talking about TV broadcasts over the air from giant towers? I wasn't aware of anything to do with actual cabled transmission.

I was under the impression the switch to digital TV was to RECLAIM much of the bandwidth that was used for over-the-air analog TV broadcast for more channels and other (wireless data) purposes. One needs much wider bandwidth for analog video signals than digital video signals due to sophisticated encoding and multiplexing techniques and so by going digital, more data can transmitted over the same amount of bandwidth and with less interference.

[stipud]

I was under the impression the switch to digital TV was to RECLAIM much of the bandwidth that was used for over-the-air analog TV broadcast for more channels and other (wireless data) purposes. One needs much wider bandwidth for analog video signals than digital video signals due to sophisticated encoding and multiplexing techniques and so by going digital, more data can transmitted over the same amount of bandwidth and with less interference.

This.

In the amount of bandwidth that a single analog channel takes, they can run many more digital channels, or faster broadband internet, or better VOIP phone service.

[kg1961]

I thought the real reason for hd was better picture.I would guess it was japan leading this idea as 16 9 tv's came out there first ect.
I don't know how many us remeber the look of old tvs they suck. Even my 32" crt (4year old only 150 hours on it) for nintendo gaming sucks and 7-9 years ago it looked great with what else was out there..
I have had dvd since 1998 and rear project tvs since than
I really don't care about how thin they are now but i do care if it looks good playing games, watching movies, I don't care to much for the look of normal tv as i used to work for shaw cable and still am a little bitter with them and all the games they play with people.

[smgreen20]

Maybe this could help. I didn't read all of it.

http://forums.soundandvisionmag.com/sho ... p?t=611663

[kg1961]

that was long but i read the post front to back
Im still going to wait till other companies come out and see what brand will look the best

[Misfire]

Yes and no. And analog channel is 6 mhz wide, and would only have one video and its audio signal. Depending on your compression, you can get as many as 12 digital channels or up to 3 HD channels in the same space as 1 analog channel. That was one reason, the main reason for Comcast, the other was the interference that could effect the Air travel. But as I said, the leak would have to near an airport and would have to be a distribution feeder line leak.

Just letting you know from what I hear in the Cable world. A lot of crazy people and idea's, I can assure you of that.