posted
So we're finally getting an HDTV. We already ordered a new entertainment center with a tv opening big enough to accomodate a new tv and it will be here Thursday. We want to get the TV this week as well, so we can go ahead and get all the new stuff put together and installed by next weekend.
Okay, how do you decide what is the best thing to buy? We're looking at getting about a 42 inch. I want value for my money, this is a lot of money to be spending for me and I want something that will hold up.
Any suggestions first on what type of screen to get, and secondly brand names and thirdly where to get it? I want to pick it up, not have something shipped and have access to Sam's Club, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, and Circuit City near my home.
posted
More accurately, there will probably be around twelve 42" LCDs at that price. So show up early. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm, the $129 15" is kinda tempting to me. But then I'd have to get cable and all that crap, so probably not worth it.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
At 42", I think your main options are plasma or LCD on the non-projection side and DLP or LCD RP on the projection side. I did a lot of research into HDTVs earlier this year and looked at an awful lot of different displays. I ultimately settled on an LCD, but that doesn't mean it's right for your setup.
Quick clarification of terms:
DLP is digital light projection, and RP is rear projection. DLP and LCD RP both project the image onto a screen from the rear of the set.
LCD (non-RP) and plasma screens are physically composed of pixels that change colour themselves rather than having images projected onto them.
DLP and LCD RP sets are thicker than LCD and plasma sets, but they're still much thinner than the old CRT sets we all grew up watching.
The choice of set depends in a large part on the lighting conditions in the room where you're going to have the TV, and how far from the set you'll be sitting most of the time. For example, if the room is dim or you mostly watch at night in the dark, you'll really notice the relatively poor black levels of non-RP LCDs as compared to plasmas (I don't know about the black levels of RP LCDs; I haven't had a chance to see one in low-light conditions).
DLP and LCD RP sets have display quirks that you may or may not find noticeable enough to be irritating -- DLPs seem to have a gritty sheen, and LCD RPs exhibit a "grid" sort of effect. They aren't really that noticeable unless you're looking for them, but I found that they showed up enough at viewing distances equivalent to those of my living room (6-9') to rule out both types for me. Both DLP and LCD RP sets are cheaper than size-equivalent non-RP LCD and plasma sets.
Plasmas used to have problems with burn-in, where if you left an image on the screen for a long time it would get "stuck," but from what I've read those are pretty much resolved now. If I were buying a new set now, I'd most likely go with the biggest plasma I could afford, because I do find my LCD's black levels to be an issue occasionally when watching in darkness. That said, it's spectacularly bright.
posted
We got the 37" LCD from Vizio. They offer pretty good quality TVs with a much lower price tag. my tvPosts: 1287 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pay close attention to what you're comparing when making a decision. I was at Bestbuy this weekend and I noted that they have many TV's (mostly LCD's) that are labeled as HDTV but that are only 720p not full 1080i HD. 1080i HD is more expensive than 1080i. You may not be able to notice the diffence on some of the smaller sets between 720p and 1080i, but you won't be getting full HD.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The technology behind DLP intrigues me. And my father also works for Texas Instruments, so I'll have to voice a preference for that technology! Though be wary, the color wheels are the achillies heel for that technology (easy to replace at a moderate cost).
Posts: 1368 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
For a different take, I'd say HD isn't worth it yet to most people. You only get a few HD stations on your TV provider (and it costs extra), except for the few that broadcast HD over the air, To record TV at HD is also more expensive, the HD movie disc players are exorbinant, and so are the video game systems that are HD_enabled. If you are an early adopter-type, or play a lot of games and are getting an X-Box360 or PS3, or are dead set on getting the HD movie stuff, go for it. But it really isn't worth it for itself. Except for the size, I suppose.
posted
I have a tangental question - when you're talking about HD, how much of the picture quality is dependant on the signal, and how much is dependant on the TV?
I've noticed a huge difference on our RP TV (I'm not sure exactly what kind it is - but it's from the early-mid 90s so it's not new technology) between regular (digital) programming and the HD programming. I guess I've always wondering what improvement I'd see in quality if we had an HDTV, considering (at least as far as cable is concerned) we'd still have the same input signals.
Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Because I don't buy TV's often and do not intend to replace it any time soon. My current TV is over 8 years old. And, in 8 years (presuming this one does last that long) I think most programming will be broadcast in HD.
We love to watch college sports, and my brother has an HDTV and the football games in HD are awesome.
And yes, we are getting an XBox 360. My brother-in-law went back to work for Microsoft so it's Christmas gifts from the Microsoft store for us again. Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I know plasmas are the worst you can get, sure they are nice and then but their picture quality will fail as they get older. Also plasmas technology is nearing the end of what it can do.
Posts: 503 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At the moment, Hubby is leaning toward DLP. Just based on what research he's done.
*shrug* I dont' really care, just so long as it works and I can watch Battlestar Galactica on it.
Oh, and my LOTR DVD's.
With the new entertainment system, it will be necessary to have a new television, it has a panel in the back and isn't deep enough to accomodate our current tv. So the tv we have now will probably get donated to charity.
It'll be delivered Thursday, and we're spending the next couple days putting the finishing touches on a new coat of paint for the walls and carpet cleaning so the room should look nice when all's said and done. I'm excited. Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade, I asked my hubby if he had plans for the old TV and turns out he doesn't have one in his room at the fire station, so he's going to take it to work. Sorry.
Trust me, you don't want it anyway. I'm sure you could pick up a used tv locally for less money that shipping mine would cost - and it would be in better shape.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to last January's issue of Widescreen Review magazine, liquid crystal on silicon (LCOS) has surpassed CRT, LCD, plasma, and DLP in picture quality.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a DLP and really like it, but admit that I'm not very picky. It's a 42" screen, which was the largest we could get for the amount of space in our then-living room. We've since moved and have a much larger room, so I wish we'd gotten the 50" instead.
My brother has a HD projection system and it is really something. Talk about a place to go watch movies. But he had the room built for the system when they were building their house so I don't think that's really what you're looking for.
We got the DLP instead of plasma because of burn in concerns and because if the DLP has problems, it's repairable (there's a bulb to replace, and ours is about due now), whereas with the plasmas of the day (this was 3 years ago) if the plasma went, it was just plain toast.
If I were buying today, though, I'd probably get plasma. We've got a great place it could be mounted on the wall, where we really can't with the DLP.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ooooo, LCoS displays have come down since I was shopping last winter. That might be worth looking into as well, Belle.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It took me a good two minutes to figure out what "Black Friday" was. Now I know and I'm going to call it that from now on. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't wait until Black Friday. The furniture is being delivered tomorrow. And I can't go more than a week without a TV. Well, I could, but it's already been one week...and it's rivalry Saturday in football this week.
posted
I'm holding out for laser projection, but you the earliest you'd be able to get one of those is next Black Friday.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
eros, I can't even go Black Friday - my father and stepmom are in town and we have plans that day. So there won't be any Black Friday shopping for me.
So, no, I'll have to bite the bullet and pass on the savings and just get one tomorrow.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Belle, keep in mind that many of the big box retailers, like Circuit City and Best Buy, offer price guarantees. You'll have to inquire where you're making the purchase. At my old store, there was a 14 day, or 30 day, depending on the item, guarantee. Plus a 10% of the difference on top of the price match. A $100 sale would get you $100 back.
Downside...you'll have to go back to the store to claim the refund.
posted
It's almost too bad that you are buying so soon. Next year, 1080p DLP chips (for picture quality beyond the wobulated 720 DLP) ought to become commonly available, as well as LED lighting to eliminate the rainbow effect.
It will still probably be noticeably more expensive to purchase next year than what is now commonly available -- as far as I know, only Akai currently sells a 42inch LEDlit 1080pDLP television -- but sure to remain pleasing over the long run when you'll be comparing it to sets that others will be buying in the near-to-medium future. Usually, not feeling the desire to buy a "better replacement" for a long time is a savings in itself.
quote:Originally posted by twinky: they're still much thinner than the old CRT sets we all grew up watching.
Some of us still have CRTs.
And further, some of us still think our CRTs are fancy newfangled tvs.
And one of us thinks that programming went down the tubes when color replaced black&white.
Has anyone else compared the black&white years of the Avengers , Andy Griffith Show , I Love Lucy , Bewitched , Bonanza , Gunsmoke , Beverly Hillbillies , Perry Mason , etc to the color versions? I even think* that watching the black&white versions on a black&white television is superior to watching them on a color tv.
Yes, there have been and are comparably decent (or perhaps even better) shows in color. But those are the rare exceptions; especially when one considers that the black&white era was only ten-years or less (if one includes just the time when television ownership was commonplace) as compared to the 40years of color broadcasting since then.
* Yep, I bought a small Chinese-made black&white tv specificly to test my theory. Somewhat like audiophiles using equipment having technology similar to that contemporaneous with the year in which a recording was first made, though a LOT cheaper.
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: Interesting to see the PS3 bucking the historical trend of generally lower prices, when looking at inflation-adjusted prices?
No console with an inflation-adjusted MSRP over US$500 has been a huge commercial success. Something like this graph is probably why MS went with the $300-$400 price points, because they straddle the adjusted prices of hugely successful consoles like the SNES, PS1, and PS2. They know people are willing to pay that kind of money for a console in droves. I'll be very curious to see how their sales are this Christmas season.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu: Black friday sales are almost always exempted from price guarantees
Of course. That isn't an issue.
Because she said this:
quote:eros, I can't even go Black Friday - my father and stepmom are in town and we have plans that day. So there won't be any Black Friday shopping for me.
I knew she wouldn't be able to take advantage of black friday sales anyway.
However, during the holiday season, there are other sales BESIDES those on black friday. It's hopeful that perhaps she could take advantage of one of those holiday sales to get a good deal.
Belle, the price matching guarantee I'm referring to applies to the weekly sales, not extremely special sales.
Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Interesting to see the PS3 bucking the historical trend of generally lower prices, when looking at inflation-adjusted prices?"
The PS3 is also a BluRay HDTV video-disc player, which costs more if bought separately from the PS3. So Sony is paying people to have the gameplay feature.
Or looked at from the opposite direction, Sony is selling its BluRay HDTV video-disc player to gameplaying customers for the cost of a cheap current-technology video-disc player.
Or looked at from the viewpoint of a technophile, the PS3 is the hottest home computer now available. Intel's quad-core Tukwila, scheduled to be released in 2008 if the usual delays don't crop up, will run at 40gigaflops. IBM's currently available Cell has a theoretical maximum approaching 128gigaflops. In the PS3, the Cell runs at a practical maximum of 100gigaflops. eg The scientists at ProteinFolding are drooling at the prospect of putting together a virtual/distributed petaflop supercomputer equivalent to the dedicated MDGRAPE-3 by borrowing unused time from 10thousand PS3 owners. Which they estimate will solve problems as fast or faster than 250thousand of the fastest home computers that are already networked into their system. Heck, spending 6to10million dollars on PS3s and peripherals to set up their own dedicated petaflop supercomputer center would be dirt cheap compared to the cost of eg IBM's BlueGene/L.
As far as Sony profits, the PS3 launch is a STRONG attempt to push into market dominance through next-generation video-disk sales to gameplayers and through next-generation home-games sales to video lovers. Plus PS3 is an opportunity to reassert former market dominance in pay-to-play MassivelyMultiplayerOnlineRolePlayingGames. As a start, expect an upgraded EverQuest farther beyond the current WoW than 2006's World of Warquest is beyond 1999's EverQuest. Anyone up for some Metaverseing?
posted
Oh, I understand why Sony is trying to do what they are doing, but given real practical issues like production problems (both the Cell and components of the Blu-Ray laser have had substantial yield problems), leading to a super-tiny launch (80k in Japan, ~400k [maybe less if the fact that EB/GameStop has had to reneg on some pre-orders!] in North America, nothing in Europe until March of '07, heck, only 500 in Taiwan!) may blunt it's desires. Even if it is as attractive to videophiles (who currently have to decide whether blu-ray or HD-DVD will win) or ganers (who can get motion-sensitve quirky games with the Wii, and full HD with the XBox360 for nearly the same price (the 360 even does 1080 now), the slow production, depending on how long the issues last could get people looking for alternatives.
posted
aspectre, are you saying that any of those things -- insofar as I'm willing to grant that they're true, which I'll only do for the sake of argument -- are going to have any influence on people's buying decisions?
If so, I think you're wrong. In my view, the only two things that matter about the PS3 are the fact that it carries the PlayStation brand and its price tag. If the latter offsets the credibility that the former has with consumers, the PS3 won't be a hit on the order of the PS1 and the PS2. If the PlayStation brand proves stronger than the price tag, then it will have a chance of getting there.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Belle: BlackBlade, I asked my hubby if he had plans for the old TV and turns out he doesn't have one in his room at the fire station, so he's going to take it to work. Sorry.
Trust me, you don't want it anyway. I'm sure you could pick up a used tv locally for less money that shipping mine would cost - and it would be in better shape.
Thanks for at least looking for me.
Dagonee: Too bad that article does not list cost at all, leads me to believes its more or as expensive as the higher end TV's on the market.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I certainly agree that the production problems are a setback for Sony's plans, Bokonon. But holding back the machines that they do have would do nothing to fix those production problems. And the quasi"advance sale" of a small number to "select customers" -- ie fanatics and the avant-garde-at-all-costs -- might generate good buzz far stronger than advertizing money can buy.
And my contention, twinky, is that the price differential in itself isn't great enough to cause a mass defection to less expensive machines. The lack of enough PS3's might cause people to decide "to heck with waiting" as far as Christmas/holiday shopping this season, but not the price alone. It's not as if the the machines themselves are directly comparable as far as pricing. The question is closer to: Wouldja rather buy a KiaRio (XBox/etc) for $11thousand or a LexusSC (PS3) for $15thousand? eg With proper interfaces and software, a low-end 2006 home computer and PS3 could be combined into a fairly decent CGI workstation. Then watch YouTube/etc rocket toward the Spike, at least as far as traditional media is concerned. As I said before, the PS3 could attract a lot of customers who really have no current interest in gaming. And many of those non-gamers could easily decide "As long as I have the hardware, I might as well buy a few games to check out if I've been missing something."
Though the difference is not nearly the same, the same type of comparison can be made between HD-DVD and BluRay. But there the contest will be more about quantity than quality. Will people be willing to pay a bit more for the ease of handling one disc when using BluRay, or will they decide that the (somewhat) lower prices for HD-DVD is worth the effort of handling two discs for the same amount of content.
The real fight will be in getting fuel / desirable software&content to those machines. Which is where Microsoft/etc and its partners are currently way ahead. If Sony and its partners fail to put in a HUGE effort in getting out a comparable range of software&content soon, PS3 and BluRay are gonna come up short in the competition between machines.
quote:With proper interfaces and software, a low-end 2006 home computer and PS3 could be combined into a fairly decent CGI workstation.
*laugh* How many PS3 purchasers do you expect to be ripping the console apart to take advantage of its raw power? Besides the Chinese military, I mean, which appears to be the single largest purchaser of the units acquired by the yakuza last week?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: And my contention, twinky, is that the price differential in itself isn't great enough to cause a mass defection to less expensive machines.
Yes, that's true. As I said, the question is whether the strength of the PlayStation branding will be sufficient to offset the sticker shock. There's some evidence to suggest that it may not, but the proof will be in the pudding. We'll probably have a clearer idea this time next year.
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: It's not as if the the machines themselves are directly comparable as far as pricing. The question is closer to: Wouldja rather buy a KiaRio (XBox/etc) for $11thousand or a LexusSC (PS3) for $15thousand?
This comparison would only hold if the Rio and Lexus had comparable engines in terms of horsepower. I think you're significantly overrating the Cell and RSX as compared to the Xenon and Xenos. Flops are great for people writing highly focused, small-footprint programs, but games are neither.
Here's a bit of useful reading on the Xenon and the Cell. Of particular relevance, from the conclusions in the first article:
quote:At any rate, Playstation 3 fanboys shouldn't get all flush over the idea that the Xenon will struggle on non-graphics code. However bad off Xenon will be in that department, the PS3's Cell will probably be worse. The Cell has only one PPE [PowerPC processing element -- the "main" core, which most closely resembles a traditional CPU] to the Xenon's three, which means that developers will have to cram all their game control, AI, and physics code into at most two threads that are sharing a very narrow execution core with no instruction window. (Don't bother suggesting that the PS3 can use its SPEs [synergistic processing elements -- mini-processors] for branch-intensive code, because the SPEs lack branch prediction entirely.) Furthermore, the PS3's L2 is only 512K, which is half the size of the Xenon's L2. So the PS3 doesn't get much help with branches in the cache department. In short, the PS3 may fare a bit worse than the Xenon on non-graphics code, but on the upside it will probably fare a bit better on graphics code because of the seven SPEs.
Also, only six of the seven SPEs are available to the developer; one SPE and 96MB of system memory are reserved by the OS at all times.
I'm not saying that the Cell isn't interesting, nor am I saying that it isn't powerful. Actually, what's really intriguing is that nVidia is taking a similar path with its now GeForce 8800 video card -- lots of small "mini-processors" linked together. Of course, the GeForce 8800 has 768MB of memory, more than either the PS3 (256MB system/256MB graphics) or the Xbox 360 (512MB unified).
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: eg With proper interfaces and software, a low-end 2006 home computer and PS3 could be combined into a fairly decent CGI workstation. Then watch YouTube/etc rocket toward the Spike, at least as far as traditional media is concerned.
Even if I grant the premise (which I don't, unless we mean very different things by "fairly decent CGI workstation"), "proper interfaces and software" is a huge obstacle. I don't see this translating into significant sales.
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: As I said before, the PS3 could attract a lot of customers who really have no current interest in gaming. And many of those non-gamers could easily decide "As long as I have the hardware, I might as well buy a few games to check out if I've been missing something."
I think the fact that it can run Linux -- one of the few conventional operating systems with a GUI that will fit into the PS3's 256MB of system memory -- might net it a few thousand more sales over the next couple of years, but I don't see it as the big selling point that you seem to. I'll concede the possibility, though, given the suprising success of Xbox Media Centre on the original Xbox.
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: Though the difference is not nearly the same, the same type of comparison can be made between HD-DVD and BluRay. But there the contest will be more about quantity than quality. Will people be willing to pay a bit more for the ease of handling one disc when using BluRay, or will they decide that the (somewhat) lower prices for HD-DVD is worth the effort of handling two discs for the same amount of content.
I think it'll be years before anyone wants to put more than 45GB of video on a single disc. For now, the only substantive difference between the two formats is which movie studios are backing them.
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: The real fight will be in getting fuel / desirable software&content to those machines. Which is where Microsoft/etc and its partners are currently way ahead. If Sony and its partners fail to put in a HUGE effort in getting out a comparable range of software&content soon, PS3 and BluRay are gonna come up short in the competition between machines.
I agree. Microsoft is way better at writing developer-friendly tools than Sony, has a year's head start, and from a gaming standpoint has comparable hardware. Sony has brand name recognition and is hoping people are interested in adopting high definition optical formats. I'll be very curious to see the software tie-in figures for the North American PS3 launch -- software tie-in for the Japanese launch was only 0.98, which means that most people only bought one game and some didn't buy any. However, the Japanese 360 launch also had low software tie-in, whereas the North American launch was better, so it might just be that software tie-in is usually lower in Japan.
The PS3 is on sale right now, so I guess we'll find out soon!
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"How many PS3 purchasers do you expect to be ripping the console apart to take advantage of its raw power?"
ProteinFolding ain't rippin' apart anybody's console to allow their general purpose computers to connect with and use the more specialized functions of PS3. What needs to occur for a home computer to do the same is for peripheral hard/firm/software manufacturers to do nearly the same to provide the linkages to home users interested in CGI work.
I could even see high-knowlege players in a MMORPG similar to SecondLife doing most of the work toward creating homeCGIworkstation software bundles to sell within or through the game to other players. A better Metaverse for some is a better Metaverse for all.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
