Jump to content
TSM Forums
Sign in to follow this  
dpac

HDTV

Recommended Posts

Comcast only charged me a $25 set-up fee and $5 a month for HD.

 

Satellite suckas.

Too bad the non-HD channels look like total shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect.

 

That has to do with the HD set, as HD sets display analog more or less poorly depending on the size of the screen. If you live in an area with ADS then it's fine since it's digitally simulcast.

 

Plus the HD channels on cable look SOOO much better than Sat due to their compression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incorrect.

 

That has to do with the HD set, as HD sets display analog more or less poorly depending on the size of the screen. If you live in an area with ADS then it's fine since it's digitally simulcast.

That has nothing to do with having an HD set. It has to do with cable companies transmitting their cable signal in analog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X

Yeah see, I live in Miami, where it constantly rains and has pretty heavy winds... I've never had a problem with my cable going out, even through Hurricane Katrina it was fine. Wilma knocked out everyone, but my cable was back even before my power was.

 

Last thing I need is a satellite dish getting fucked up by the climate. I'm not quite so sure there's much if anything wrong with the COAX compared to what you dishies have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, I pay $9 for HD box "rental" and $5 for 15 channels, monthly.

 

Im paying $5.99 for the Directv HD Tivo service (and I spent $399 on the box itself) and $9.99 for the HD Pack which includes ESPN1/2 HD, Universal HD, TNTHD, Discovery HD Theatre, HD Net, HD Net Movies, CDUSA HD (part time music channel), NBCHD and FOXHD (both out of NY), plus I get CBS and ABC OTA in HD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect.

 

That has to do with the HD set, as HD sets display analog more or less poorly depending on the size of the screen. If you live in an area with ADS then it's fine since it's digitally simulcast.

That has nothing to do with having an HD set. It has to do with cable companies transmitting their cable signal in analog.

 

Umm.. most all channels transmit in analog. Pretty much the only thing DirecTV does is digitally compress everything as they have limited bandwidth.

 

Thanks for playing though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest StylesMark

I have a HP DLP HD projector. I have a 92 inch 16:9 theatre screen as well. The bulb lasts about 2000 hours, and is about 499.00. Max resolution is 1080i, it also does 720p.

 

I too, have Comcast HDTV DVR box. The HD with Comcast is simply amazing. Football season was great because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, I pay $9 for HD box "rental" and $5 for 15 channels, monthly.

 

Im paying $5.99 for the Directv HD Tivo service (and I spent $399 on the box itself) and $9.99 for the HD Pack which includes ESPN1/2 HD, Universal HD, TNTHD, Discovery HD Theatre, HD Net, HD Net Movies, CDUSA HD (part time music channel), NBCHD and FOXHD (both out of NY), plus I get CBS and ABC OTA in HD.

 

let's see for channels out here we have:

 

CBS

NBC

ABC

Fox

Universal

TNT

Discovery

ESPN (1 only)

INHD

INHD2

HBO 1

Showtime 1

NETV (pretty much PBS)

 

I'm pretty sure there are two more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest StylesMark
Is that the bulb for the projection screen or the DLP you're talking about? That's really expensive for 2000 hours.

 

It's a bulb for the projector itself.....the screen is nothing but a screen. I've had it for a year and half. Worth every cent in my opinion. It's not the "TV" is use for everything...only good HD stuff, like movies, any Yankees games and all of the NFL season...new DVD's as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, when the switch from NTSC analog finally happens, what about the peoplw with "rabbit ears" (no cable)? Will they be able to get anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X

Is that the bulb for the projection screen or the DLP you're talking about? That's really expensive for 2000 hours.

 

It's a bulb for the projector itself.....the screen is nothing but a screen. I've had it for a year and half. Worth every cent in my opinion. It's not the "TV" is use for everything...only good HD stuff, like movies, any Yankees games and all of the NFL season...new DVD's as well.

 

Hmm that's not too bad, but I'm curious, how much is each replacement bulb? I could easily see myself going through 2000 hours' worth of projection time just doing what you said (movies and sports especially).

 

EDIT: Just re-read the original post. Sooo $500 for a replacement bulb and how much for the projector then? If the bulb was cheaper, say around $50 or so, I would be all over that. But man $500 for only 2000 hours is kinda weak..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They will need a TV with a built in HD tuner and an HD antenna.

 

Theres no such thing as an HD Antenna. Im picking up 2 HD channels (and all the other digital SD channels) OTA with a $3 antenna I got on sale at Kmart thats really just the old fashioned rabit ears style. Of course I live within 10 miles of both broadcast towers so the signals are pretty strong. I noticed that companies are selling "HD Antennas", however they cost upwards of $50 and are nothing more than their amplified versions (the ones that plug in) with a better design, when the amplified ones would work and cost around $20. If you live a bit further out (within like..20 miles) you should probably look into one of those. Outside of 25 miles, you are kind of stuck with having to put up a bigger antenna outside..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect.

 

That has to do with the HD set, as HD sets display analog more or less poorly depending on the size of the screen. If you live in an area with ADS then it's fine since it's digitally simulcast.

That has nothing to do with having an HD set. It has to do with cable companies transmitting their cable signal in analog.

 

Umm.. most all channels transmit in analog. Pretty much the only thing DirecTV does is digitally compress everything as they have limited bandwidth.

 

Thanks for playing though.

 

I love it when people think you're talking about something completely different and then try to correct you. A real mark of genius. That's the second time you've done it.

 

You see, I was referring to the way the cable operator transmits it to your house. Cable companies transit it to you house using analog via a coaxial cable (which degrades), satelitte companies transmit it to your house digitally (digital code which is descrambled by a satelitte receiver).

 

In other words, when I had cable, the picture wasn't as good as it is with satelitte.

 

By the way, next time you want to use a picture posted with my bandwidth as your avatar: ask, you fucking loser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They will need a TV with a built in HD tuner and an HD antenna.

 

Theres no such thing as an HD Antenna. Im picking up 2 HD channels (and all the other digital SD channels) OTA with a $3 antenna I got on sale at Kmart thats really just the old fashioned rabit ears style. Of course I live within 10 miles of both broadcast towers so the signals are pretty strong. I noticed that companies are selling "HD Antennas", however they cost upwards of $50 and are nothing more than their amplified versions (the ones that plug in) with a better design, when the amplified ones would work and cost around $20. If you live a bit further out (within like..20 miles) you should probably look into one of those. Outside of 25 miles, you are kind of stuck with having to put up a bigger antenna outside..

 

Some older antennas do not pick up the digital signal. And most HD antennas (ones capable of receiving them) can pull in signals from ~50 miles away. Such as the Silver Sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect.

 

That has to do with the HD set, as HD sets display analog more or less poorly depending on the size of the screen. If you live in an area with ADS then it's fine since it's digitally simulcast.

That has nothing to do with having an HD set. It has to do with cable companies transmitting their cable signal in analog.

 

Umm.. most all channels transmit in analog. Pretty much the only thing DirecTV does is digitally compress everything as they have limited bandwidth.

 

Thanks for playing though.

 

I love it when people think you're talking about something completely different and then try to correct you. A real mark of genius. That's the second time you've done it.

 

You see, I was referring to the way the cable operator transmits it to your house. Cable companies transit it to you house using analog via a coaxial cable (which degrades), satelitte companies transmit it to your house digitally (digital code which is descrambled by a satelitte receiver).

 

In other words, when I had cable, the picture wasn't as good as it is with satelitte.

 

By the way, next time you want to use a picture posted with my bandwidth as your avatar: ask, you fucking loser.

 

1. All signal degrades, even fiber though it's a longer distance.

2. Cable systems are hybrid fiber/coax which means that the analog signal is transmitted to the node via fiber, converted to analog, then sent onto your house via coaxial cable. We can easily transmit everything digitally and would rather do that but you have Ma and Pa who don't want to use a converter. Also we have do amp the signal along as it comes in and MOST (not all, most) signal problems are within the home.

 

Tsk tsk tsk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X

Yeah I don't think it'd wise to argue against Rant in this instance. The man DOES work for Comcast, so he should know what he's talking about when it comes to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest StylesMark

Is that the bulb for the projection screen or the DLP you're talking about? That's really expensive for 2000 hours.

 

It's a bulb for the projector itself.....the screen is nothing but a screen. I've had it for a year and half. Worth every cent in my opinion. It's not the "TV" is use for everything...only good HD stuff, like movies, any Yankees games and all of the NFL season...new DVD's as well.

 

Hmm that's not too bad, but I'm curious, how much is each replacement bulb? I could easily see myself going through 2000 hours' worth of projection time just doing what you said (movies and sports especially).

 

EDIT: Just re-read the original post. Sooo $500 for a replacement bulb and how much for the projector then? If the bulb was cheaper, say around $50 or so, I would be all over that. But man $500 for only 2000 hours is kinda weak..

 

The projector was 1700 dollars, brand new. It is/will be costly, but 92 inches is pretty damn big. Of course, they can go much larger than that, but it would have to be a ridiculously large room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I'm not looking forward to getting cable installed in our new house. There's only one cable outlet in the entire place (living room), so they'll have to run more wire, I guess. I'd go with satellite, since Charter is a crappy company to deal with, but I want high speed internet as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I don't think it'd wise to argue against Rant in this instance. The man DOES work for Comcast, so he should know what he's talking about when it comes to this.

 

1. Anyone who tries to tell me that analog cable picture is just as good as digital satelitte picture has been brainwashed with cable company propaganda. I told my cable company to fuck off because I was sick of paying for a below average product (granted, I am not talking HD service here, of which cable might actually do a better job of). Mr. Rant is just trying to defend his job the same way a mother cat tries to defend her sick baby kittens.

 

2. Mr. Rant's posts were arguing against different points than I was trying to make. Everything he said was technically correct, but had little bearing on what I was actually stating.

 

1. All signal degrades, even fiber though it's a longer distance.

2. Cable systems are hybrid fiber/coax which means that the analog signal is transmitted to the node via fiber, converted to analog, then sent onto your house via coaxial cable. We can easily transmit everything digitally and would rather do that but you have Ma and Pa who don't want to use a converter. Also we have do amp the signal along as it comes in and MOST (not all, most) signal problems are within the home.

 

1. A digital signal, which is essentially the transmission of numeric data, either arrives at its destination or not. If part of the data is missing, there's damage to part of the image, but most of the image appears exactly the way it should look. If an analog signal degrades, the entire picture loks fuzzy, snowy, or generally shitty.

 

2. That's a reasonable excuse, but that doesn't mean I (as a customer) want to pay for 71 shitty looking analog channels if I'm shelling out $50+ a month for "digital" cable. On a dish, every channel looks as good as the best channels (the ones you can access with a digital cable box) you get with digital cable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't think it'd wise to argue against Rant in this instance. The man DOES work for Comcast, so he should know what he's talking about when it comes to this.

 

1. Anyone who tries to tell me that analog cable picture is just as good as digital satelitte picture has been brainwashed with cable company propaganda. I told my cable company to fuck off because I was sick of paying for a below average product (granted, I am not talking HD service here, of which cable might actually do a better job of). Mr. Rant is just trying to defend his job the same way a mother cat tries to defend her sick baby kittens.

 

2. Mr. Rant's posts were arguing against different points than I was trying to make. Everything he said was technically correct, but had little bearing on what I was actually stating.

 

1. All signal degrades, even fiber though it's a longer distance.

2. Cable systems are hybrid fiber/coax which means that the analog signal is transmitted to the node via fiber, converted to analog, then sent onto your house via coaxial cable. We can easily transmit everything digitally and would rather do that but you have Ma and Pa who don't want to use a converter. Also we have do amp the signal along as it comes in and MOST (not all, most) signal problems are within the home.

 

1. A digital signal, which is essentially the transmission of numeric data, either arrives at its destination or not. If part of the data is missing, there's damage to part of the image, but most of the image appears exactly the way it should look. If an analog signal degrades, the entire picture loks fuzzy, snowy, or generally shitty.

 

2. That's a reasonable excuse, but that doesn't mean I (as a customer) want to pay for 71 shitty looking analog channels if I'm shelling out $50+ a month for "digital" cable. On a dish, every channel looks as good as the best channels (the ones you can access with a digital cable box) you get with digital cable.

 

Incorrect. When digital signal degrades, you end up getting pixeling (tiling) or audio/visual drop outs. Again, poor analog quality (on an HD set) is usually due to the higher resolution on the HD set and screen size as any imperfection either digital or analog is enlarged. Just the way it is. Also, no matter what the source, poor internal wiring is the cause of most issues, not all.

 

I don't necessarily defend our product over satellite though I think we are superior in MOST cases, I am telling you the technical reasons so you do not misguide people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've contradicted me without actually contradicting me. Everything you say is true, but nothing you're saying is disproving my point, either.

 

Compare:

A digital signal, which is essentially the transmission of numeric data, either arrives at its destination or not. If part of the data is missing, there's damage to part of the image, but most of the image appears exactly the way it should look. If an analog signal degrades, the entire picture loks fuzzy, snowy, or generally shitty.

 

and

When digital signal degrades, you end up getting pixeling (tiling) or audio/visual drop outs.

 

We're saying almost the exact same thing. Its just that you're trying to spin it to make my product sound worse than it is.

 

 

Again, poor analog quality (on an HD set) is usually due to the higher resolution on the HD set and screen size as any imperfection either digital or analog is enlarged.

 

I thought I made it clear I wasn't talking exclusively about HD sets.

 

 

I don't necessarily defend our product over satellite though I think we are superior in MOST cases, I am telling you the technical reasons so you do not misguide people.

 

Which is why you said...

 

Tsk tsk tsk.

 

and

 

Thanks for playing though.

 

...right? Because you wanted to make sure everyone was informed, and not because you wanted to make me (a satellite customer) look like I didn't know what I was talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X

You know what I hate about satellite?

 

How long it takes to switch channels. Man, such a basic fucking thing and it takes forever compared to cable. I mean, granted it's still within a reasonable time, but I'm a busy person.

 

Also, reading through the argument above, Y2Jerk is incorrect in stating that Rant didn't refute his argument. Case in point:

You've contradicted me without actually contradicting me. Everything you say is true, but nothing you're saying is disproving my point, either.

 

Compare:

A digital signal, which is essentially the transmission of numeric data, either arrives at its destination or not. If part of the data is missing, there's damage to part of the image, but most of the image appears exactly the way it should look. If an analog signal degrades, the entire picture loks fuzzy, snowy, or generally shitty.

 

and

When digital signal degrades, you end up getting pixeling (tiling) or audio/visual drop outs.

 

We're saying almost the exact same thing. Its just that you're trying to spin it to make my product sound worse than it is.

 

No, he's explaining that a digital signal can also degrade just as much as an analog signal. And he explained earlier in the thread that a. analog signals are amplified so they don't degrade and b. that they could transmit in digital but don't for ol' ma and pa who won't buy converters and then potentially lose customers, which is understandable.

 

Again, poor analog quality (on an HD set) is usually due to the higher resolution on the HD set and screen size as any imperfection either digital or analog is enlarged.

 

I thought I made it clear I wasn't talking exclusively about HD sets.

 

Umm.. what's the title of the thread topic again?!

 

At any rate, I could see Y2Jerk's reasoning behind why he may have switched, and hey that's fine and dandy. But the problem is is that he's still wrong in how traditional cable networks transmit their information- it's still analog, but compressed digitally. It doesn't make a difference. I'm a happy Comcast customer, even though I pay (slightly) more, but thankfully I also get cable internet through them (At 6MBps, too) so that's my main reason for staying with them, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, he's explaining that a digital signal can also degrade just as much as an analog signal. And he explained earlier in the thread that a. analog signals are amplified so they don't degrade and b. that they could transmit in digital but don't for ol' ma and pa who won't buy converters and then potentially lose customers, which is understandable.

 

Okay, we both explained that the difference in signal degradation between the two systems look different and takes different forms. I just pointed out when it happens to cable, the entire picture looks bad, whereas with a digital system most of the picture and sound stays intact.

 

 

At any rate, I could see Y2Jerk's reasoning behind why he may have switched, and hey that's fine and dandy. But the problem is is that he's still wrong in how traditional cable networks transmit their information- it's still analog, but compressed digitally. It doesn't make a difference. I'm a happy Comcast customer, even though I pay (slightly) more, but thankfully I also get cable internet through them (At 6MBps, too) so that's my main reason for staying with them, actually.

 

Yeah, and maybe its because I left cable 3 years ago and there have apparently been some stunning improvements in picture transmission technology since then. Of course, that doesn't explain why when I go to people's houses that have cable the picture looks worse the higher yuou go on the dial, even with a brand new TV. With satelitte, all of the channels are of the same high quality. Its beamed to my house via satelitte, and every channel looks great unless there's terrible weather (at which point you shouldn't be watching TV anyways due to power surges).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd get the JVC, but that's entirely based on my own personal experiences with both brands on non-HD televisions. Is $2699 the actual price for the RCA, or can you get it for less somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×