$3000 for a HDTV?

[MOVIEGEEK]

Any middle class person buying these overpriced sets?
Here in the states we go digital in 5 years(unless the FCC gives local stations a reprieve).
I guess I better start saving now or I'll have to take out a second mortgage on the house.

[SteveDVD]

I though we went digital in 2006 which is in pretty much 3 years.

[sterno]

I don't know anybody who has one. Not even the videophile who spent considerably more than that on his home-theater setup.

I think the theory is that in 5 years they'll be only slightly more expensive than standard sets are today. Of course, any time companies see that they have a guaranteed profit they usually go for it....

[tgpo]

drool.........



I want one!

[Conquest10]

i thought they changed it to 2007?

[pacmania_2001]

For Australia the mandatory change to digital is 2008

[fmctm1sw]

Looks like I'll be going back to the radio!

[LeeBear]

There are numerous affordable HDTV well at least HDTV ready TV's out today. The difference between one that's HDTV ready and one that's a true HDTV is the latter comes with a build in HDTV tuner. Which in my opinion isn't necessary at all since when HDTV becomes mainstream the cable companies/sattelite people will probably require you to use one of there receivers/tuners to get the channels anyways. Anyways a friend of mine recently bought a 34" HDTV ready Toshiba Widescreen 16:9 tv. I know it's not the biggest TV but it's a direct view one oppose to a projection type. Direct view TV's give you better picture (brighter picture, more contrast, better colour, etc). Also when watching widescreen movies a 34" 16:9 TV is about the size of a 38-40" 4:3 TV since the 4:3 TV has to add (more) of the black borders. Anyways the set only cost him $2700 CDN which is less then $1800 US, so HDTV are definitely affordable now.

-LeeBear

[zzyzzx]

I get cable. Even if broadcast is HDTV, I bet I'll still be able to get a regular analog TV signal for many years after that via my cable line. I certainly don't ecpect my actual cable signal to go exclusively digital between now and then. Plus the piss poor quality of the stuff (I'm talking picture quality) of the stuff they show on a lot of the stations make me wonder if they will be delivering the same grainy signal digitally instead (like they do with digital cable).

[LeeBear]

I totally agree with you zzyzzx. The TV signals they are sending with there digital cable (and satelitte systems) is piss poor, worse then a good analogue feed. Luckily the problem isn't with digital technology itself it's with the cheap providers, they're over compressing the channels so they can provide more channels. Where I live (in Canada), I've heard that the satelitte provider (the one I use) is sending 6 times more channels then there transmitters are design for, obvious this just means crappy bitrates for each channel and you often notice macro blocks and stuttering. Even with the crappiness of digital broadcasting now there's still a good use for HDTV... watching DVD's of course. At first I didn't think it'll make much of a difference but you really do notice details that you miss watching on a normal TV... well at least I did when switching over.

-LeeBear

[IremainAMisterE]

I bought a 36' Samsung HDTV ready a few months ago, and it was about $1500. You can't even really tell the difference too much between standard T.V's. The only time i see differences is when i use component cables on my Gamecube and DVD player. LoL
Where i live(NYC), the cable companies are now getting ready to switch to digital cable. It sounds pretty cool: Watching any show you want playing that month at any given time, including cable stations.(imagine missing the Soprano's and being able to press a button and watch it whenever?)
You can rewind and fast foward. There's digital music channels with all types of music. I already called the cable company to ask them when digital cable will finally be released and the guy told me late fall-early winter. He said the techs are already out changing the lines outside.
Anyways, they're claiming to have better picture and sound and you don't even need to buy a new T.V.(so they claim) All of this and only $10 more a month on your bill.

I've even noticed with some of the newer movies that premiere on cable....That during the ratings, it says, "HDTV where available".

I dunno, either way, i can't wait for the technology to come out, to take advantage of my HDTV!

[shochan]

Time warner is now sending actual hdtv signal throught ther digital cable here and it is so much better. I have this stupid neighbor that insists that he has never seen a differance and tat there isnt one until i flipped back and forth between the standard cbs and the hd cbs and even that dumb bastard was amazed. I have had my hdtv since feburary and it looks great when you watch hdtv (hd channels, xbox) but standard cable looks like ass most of the time. hell all of the actual hd channels look better than any dvds i have ever seen.

oh and my hdtv was very affordable it was like $1200usd and it is a hybrid dtv. it is 4x3 but can make any picture 16x9. it is a samsung it looks real nice but has this damn pincussion problem that my monitor had until i adjusted it. but this damn thing doesnt have an adjustment

just a note. dvds can never in there present form ever be high def. there is no way. their lame resolution is great for a old tv (720x480) but i want mine 1920x1080 baby! hd-dvd will be out soon and the players will cost an arm and a leg, but oh well im worth it.

[sterno]

My local cable company is trying to push people toward digital cable. In some parts of town new subscribers can only get digital, not analog. Unless they're having a special deal, they charge a lot more for digital cable service than for traditional analog. Of course, right now they're having a lot of special deals. I'm all in favor of better quality, video on demand, etc., but they're pushing people to upgrade when the cable company's infrastructure isn't ready for it yet. Some people who were forced to get digital cable have terrible (broadcast antenna level) quality, partly because of all the old cable lines and equipment in their area.

Because of all the pieces of their service area that were either bought from somebody else or upgraded piecemeal, they don't seem to even know what they have sometimes. One time a large, wealthy area lost cable modem service for 3 or 4 days because they did a cable equipment upgrade and then couldn't figure out what had gone wrong. Every time I drove through I'd see trucks digging up cables at every intersection trying to figure out where the problem was. And that wasn't even an isolated incident, just a worse-than-average one. About every quarter they rearrange the channel numbers, and in over two years I don't think they've ever charged exactly the same amount more than two months in a row (admittedly, sometimes it's because federal fees change or something similar, but often it's not).

And, ladies and gentlemen, these are the people who are going to bring me HDTV at some point in the future. Now, where'd I put that digital satellite information again....

[ktnwin]

I just bought one HDTV(-ready) 65" wide screen because I need a new TV. I did not buy the HDTV tuner because there are not too many channels providing HDTV. I will wait until there are more HDTV broadcasts before buying the tuner (which will be cheaper then).
Quality:
1) DVD: superb, much better than non HDTV
2) usual TV programs (regular antenna), same quality as non-HDTV, seem slightly better because I see no horizontal lines at all.
3) X/S/VCD: poorer quality than non HDTV, I guess because the screen is too big and makes every defective spots so visible. My X/S/VCD play with near DVD quality on non-HDTV.

One thing you got to watch out with HDTV, you need a progressive scan DVD player to take advantage of the HDTV progressive scan feature. With this feature, the picture look superb, no horizontal lines seen as on interlaced TV.

[SteveDVD]

Wow this post returned from death... Your a lifesaver

[#1Newbie]

I personally think for the price, the plasma tvs are better. 3.5 inches deep..they save space.

[BJ_M]

I personally think for the price, the plasma tvs are better. 3.5 inches deep..they save space.

.


i have a latest generation Fujitsu Plasmavision 42" and i think the picture looks like crap .. no contrast in those plasma and mine is supposed to be one of the best .. also you cant play games on them (non of them) -- they burn in REAL easy ....

i also have a NEC plasma w/ a cracked panel ... if you have kids who throw things -- plasma not for you either .. $10,000 down the drain .. or a $4000++ repair ..

but gosh -- they do look good hanging on the wall in the bedroom .. :P

[ChrisX]

The price for a HDTV is so prohibitive in Australia and as a result digital TV is very slow and failed to succeed.

DVD players are selling like hot cakes here, hundreds of thousands a year and so few purchased HDTV. Even the “digital box” to analog TV are miserable in sales. The Australian Government has imposed restrictions on HDTV as well and this isn’t helping.

HDTV is at the moment is just viewing it and nothing else. Widescreen is available with superior surround sound. In Australia, it is very limited in broadcast availability, no datacasting, no Internet and no interactive HDTV.

For Australia the mandatory change to digital is 2008 and this is likely to extend to much later due to poor marketing.

For me, there isn’t much point in buying one just yet until the restrictions are relaxed and affordable.

[msucoleman]

It is 2006 unless it gets changed.