Re: differences

Hdtv is teh new broadcast standard. Its so flexible its almost not a
standard, covering 480p up to 1080i or p, I forget which.
Plasma and LCD are types of display devices, they can be HDTV or not. If
they say "extended definition" they are not HDTV.
The extended def sets are cheaper, and should be since they are obsolete
straight out of the box. Some say the picture is good enough but I'll never
figure out why some buy a plasma or lcd for two grand when you can get a
true HDTV REAR projection set for a grand. A friend bought a samsung 47in
rear projection HDTV for a grand at Sams and loves it
"D D" <ddigenov@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:STFAd.48236$DQ3.14231@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> what is the difference between hdtv, plasma and lcd. i am interested in
> starting to look for a new one but am confused about the differences. if
> there is something i should look for, please advise
>
>
> any help would be appreciated.
>
> thanks
>
> --
>
>

[Rich Clark]

<steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:rBXEd.444$MP1.81@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Hdtv is teh new broadcast standard.

No, it isn't. Digital is the new broadcast standard, but only some forms of
digital are HDTV. *No* broadcasters are required to use HD, so it's hardly a
standard, now, is it?

> Its so flexible its almost not a
> standard, covering 480p up to 1080i or p, I forget which.

HDTV is *a* standard, but not the broadcast standard.

> Plasma and LCD are types of display devices, they can be HDTV or not. If
> they say "extended definition" they are not HDTV.

But ED is part of the broadcast standard.

There were reasons why many responders referred the OP to primers on the
'net instead of trying to answer his question here. Trying not to introduce
confusion the way you just did was one of them.

RichC

[Lucas Tam]

<steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:rBXEd.444$MP1.81
@bignews1.bellsouth.net:

> I'll never
> figure out why some buy a plasma or lcd for two grand when you can get a
> true HDTV REAR projection set for a grand.

Probably because LCD/Plasma TVs are cheap. A couple months ago I bought a
standard def Toshiba 20" LCD TV for the family room... because it's tiny. I
do have a HDTV Wega in the basement tho ; )

--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[Bob]

"Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:JqOdnQ6mBLoT13ncRVn-hg@comcast.com...
>
> <steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:rBXEd.444$MP1.81@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> > Hdtv is teh new broadcast standard.
>
> No, it isn't. Digital is the new broadcast standard, but only some forms
of
> digital are HDTV. *No* broadcasters are required to use HD, so it's hardly
a
> standard, now, is it?
>
> > Its so flexible its almost not a
> > standard, covering 480p up to 1080i or p, I forget which.
>
> HDTV is *a* standard, but not the broadcast standard.
>
> > Plasma and LCD are types of display devices, they can be HDTV or not. If
> > they say "extended definition" they are not HDTV.
>
> But ED is part of the broadcast standard.
>
> There were reasons why many responders referred the OP to primers on the
> 'net instead of trying to answer his question here. Trying not to
introduce
> confusion the way you just did was one of them.
>
> RichC
>
>


Rich,

As with many other newsgroups, there are a couple people here that feel the
need to answer as many questions as possible -- out of which most of these
questions' subjects they know little or nothing about.

What they don't realize is that they are misleading others and hurting their
own image. It reaffirms why we have two ears but only one mouth.

Bob

You are the one doing the "confusing", as you are wrong on several counts
The new broadcast standard IS hdtv, it emcompasses eighteen formats, ALL BUT
ONE (480p) is considered hd. Its splitting hairs to say its a "digital"
standard rather than an hdtv one, since for all pratical purposes its both
AND broadcasters ARE required to use this so yes it IS new standard. All of
the broadcasters in my area are HD and several had to be dragged kicking and
screaming but are now using this new "standard"
When they are required to give back their standard def channels thats ALL
they'll be broadcasting in.
Thats called a standard, numnutz
AND ed IS PART OF THE STANDARD , but that doesnt make it ED
ED is just a marketing gimmick anyway, all ED I have seen is 480p, are you
gonna sell your shiny new plasma bragging that its only as good as a DVD?
If anyone is introducing "confusion" its your inimformed ass, how about
getting your facts straight next time, and if you want to argue semantics
I'm sure theres a lot of newsgroups full of nimrods who will be more than
glad to accomodate you
"Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:JqOdnQ6mBLoT13ncRVn-hg@comcast.com...
>
> <steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:rBXEd.444$MP1.81@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> > Hdtv is teh new broadcast standard.
>
> No, it isn't. Digital is the new broadcast standard, but only some forms
of
> digital are HDTV. *No* broadcasters are required to use HD, so it's hardly
a
> standard, now, is it?
>
> > Its so flexible its almost not a
> > standard, covering 480p up to 1080i or p, I forget which.
>
> HDTV is *a* standard, but not the broadcast standard.
>
> > Plasma and LCD are types of display devices, they can be HDTV or not. If
> > they say "extended definition" they are not HDTV.
>
> But ED is part of the broadcast standard.
>
> There were reasons why many responders referred the OP to primers on the
> 'net instead of trying to answer his question here. Trying not to
introduce
> confusion the way you just did was one of them.
>
> RichC
>
>

[rdclark]

steve99@bellsouth.net wrote:
> You are the one doing the "confusing", as you are wrong on several
counts
> The new broadcast standard IS hdtv, it emcompasses eighteen formats,
ALL BUT
> ONE (480p) is considered hd. Its splitting hairs to say its a
"digital"
> standard rather than an hdtv one, since for all pratical purposes its
both
> AND broadcasters ARE required to use this so yes it IS new standard.
All of
> the broadcasters in my area are HD and several had to be dragged
kicking and
> screaming but are now using this new "standard"
> When they are required to give back their standard def channels thats
ALL
> they'll be broadcasting in.
> Thats called a standard, numnutz
> AND ed IS PART OF THE STANDARD , but that doesnt make it ED
> ED is just a marketing gimmick anyway, all ED I have seen is 480p,
are you
> gonna sell your shiny new plasma bragging that its only as good as a
DVD?
> If anyone is introducing "confusion" its your inimformed ass, how
about
> getting your facts straight next time, and if you want to argue
semantics
> I'm sure theres a lot of newsgroups full of nimrods who will be more
than
> glad to accomodate you

I suppose that to someone who is barely literate in English, such as
yourself, precision in labeling is of little importance.

And to someone who responds to six-week old posts, such as yourself,
the idea that a standard is what you say it is, rather than what the
regulating government body that promulgated the standard says it is,
might seem credible.

To the rest of us, you're a drooling lunatic and I, for one, am done
with you.

::plonk::

RichC

[severian]

"rdclark" <rdclark2@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1109207470.022166.310900@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
> steve99@bellsouth.net wrote:
> > You are the one doing the "confusing", as you are wrong on several
> counts
> > The new broadcast standard IS hdtv, it emcompasses eighteen formats,
> ALL BUT
> > ONE (480p) is considered hd. Its splitting hairs to say its a
> "digital"
> > standard rather than an hdtv one, since for all pratical purposes its
> both
> > AND broadcasters ARE required to use this so yes it IS new standard.
> All of
> > the broadcasters in my area are HD and several had to be dragged
> kicking and
> > screaming but are now using this new "standard"
> > When they are required to give back their standard def channels thats
> ALL
> > they'll be broadcasting in.
> > Thats called a standard, numnutz
> > AND ed IS PART OF THE STANDARD , but that doesnt make it ED
> > ED is just a marketing gimmick anyway, all ED I have seen is 480p,
> are you
> > gonna sell your shiny new plasma bragging that its only as good as a
> DVD?
> > If anyone is introducing "confusion" its your inimformed ass, how
> about
> > getting your facts straight next time, and if you want to argue
> semantics
> > I'm sure theres a lot of newsgroups full of nimrods who will be more
> than
> > glad to accomodate you
>
> I suppose that to someone who is barely literate in English, such as
> yourself, precision in labeling is of little importance.
>
> And to someone who responds to six-week old posts, such as yourself,
> the idea that a standard is what you say it is, rather than what the
> regulating government body that promulgated the standard says it is,
> might seem credible.
>
> To the rest of us, you're a drooling lunatic and I, for one, am done
> with you.
>
> ::plonk::
>

What does it mean when steve's drooling out of both sides of his mouth? The
ground is level!

"Lucas Tam" <REMOVEnntp@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95DBB32013C57nntprogerscom@140.99.99.130.. .
> <steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:rBXEd.444$MP1.81
> @bignews1.bellsouth.net:
>
> > I'll never
> > figure out why some buy a plasma or lcd for two grand when you can get a
> > true HDTV REAR projection set for a grand.
>
> Probably because LCD/Plasma TVs are cheap. A couple months ago I bought a
> standard def Toshiba 20" LCD TV for the family room... because it's tiny.
I
> do have a HDTV Wega in the basement tho ; )

Whatever floats your boat, but I just dont see the value.
My 17in comp monitor was 200$ after rebates, so why are some lcd tvs' of
similar size selling for up to 800 for a high-def(which my monitor is)?
Is the tuner built with alien tech or something? :-)
>
> --
> Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
> Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
> http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[Lucas Tam]

<steve99@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:vjnYd.14860$c72.14510
@bignews3.bellsouth.net:

> Whatever floats your boat, but I just dont see the value.
> My 17in comp monitor was 200$ after rebates, so why are some lcd tvs' of
> similar size selling for up to 800 for a high-def(which my monitor is)?
> Is the tuner built with alien tech or something? :-)

There's a tuner + remote... A tuner costs 30 - 50, a remote another 20. Add
the manufacturer markup + retail marketup, you might have your $300 - $400
price difference.

Maybe computer monitor makers should get into the LCD business : )

--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/