damn cheetah, that was smooth photoshoping. you couldnt have done that on a low res monitor. like you couldnt play the ps3 correctly on an sdtv.
Funny cost advice: First VCR: $1,200 First CD player: $600 First Cell Phone:$4,000 First DVD player: $2,500 First computer with a mouse: $10,000 No offense, but obviously new technology becomes better and cheaper as the years go on. Hell, DLP might make LCD go the way of Betamax. In other words, if you don't need a new TV, and you purchase an HDTV, you are borderline r****ded, or you have no idea how to refrain from impulse purchasing, which means your investment skills are severely lacking. Do me a favor, folks. If you don't need a new TV, don't buy one. If you do, go to a pawn shop and buy a used one. This new technology will right itself in 5 years, just like it always does.
$1000 tables and fancy cars usually do not depreciate as fast as HDTV's, especially when you can do so little with them.
Fatty that woudl be sage advice if this were 1998, but you're about 8 years behind the times. When you said you couldn't notice the difference between HD & Standard it sort of shot your credibilty in this regard. (you're also show that your out of your depth when you compare DLP and plasma to betamax - the same standard setting issues are not present, the two are not analogous). HDTV's have been on the market for something like 5-10 years and have become the industry standard. Not only is it hte industry standard, but there's actually not even a choice not to get one anymore. No top end companies even make old CRT's anymore. You don't even need an HD cable box to get HDTV, it's broadcast over the air by FCC mandate. Finally, and most importantly, FCC regulations require that, as of July 2006, all new sets 25 inches or larger for sale in the US are required to have built in digital tuners. I don't know the last time you priced HDTVs, I would imagine never, but in case you didn't notice, as they've become more common, the bottom has dropped out in price. My set two years ago would have cost 3500. I got it for 1800 in February. I'm sure it's dropped since. They're rapidly reaching the floor as it is, and even if mine drops further in the future - it was worth the extra $$ for me to have had HD for this year. So, once again, you have no idea what you're talking about, shockingly. So, you can wait for the technology to "right" itself, in the meantime you can go back to taking Amtrak from New York to San Francisco because the new 787 Dreamliner isn't out yet.....
LMFAO ****COMMODORE 64 BASIC V2**** 64K RAM 38911 BASIC BYTES FREE READY 10 PRINT "TINMAN IS TEH SUXXORZ" 20 GOTO 10
I'm not going to argue with technologies, but I will argue with history. If you have a good working TV, and it dies out in 3-5 years, chances are we will have a better working, cheaper TV than the idiots who purchased the "must-have" craze. I tire of you talking. You are obviously an inheritance boy. Your views don't count. Go back to travelling around the world that you haven't earned.
Fatty, this has been a telling few weeks on the BBS, I will leave you in peace, to drunk drive, bone rawdog, and watch standard def TV as you see fit....off to spend the rockefeller millions.
Oh, man. Why didn't I click on this thread sooner? The above post is the reason tinman owes me a new monitor. I expect only the best.
LCD is in direct competition with Plasma for what format you can hang on the wall. DLP is in competition with LCD rear projection, these are 'BIG' Screens that you put on a stand. none of the formats are going away soon.
i acknowledge the depreciation, but really, do you do less? how much time do you spend driving a day vs watching TV? you must do alot of driving. you can watch the big game on your table, but you can put some beer and chips and some magazines on it. the TV allows you to play video games, watch hundreds of channels, movies.
Fatty, I bought a top of the line Sony XBR in 1990. It cost what I considered to be a hell of a lot of money at the time, had an attached subwoofer you could remove, and speakers you could attach to the set, or separate for a wider soundstage. Like I said, it cost a lot. That puppy died this year. That's right, 16 years after I bought it. You get what you pay for, usually. I'm sure I would have paid more than I should have for an HDTV if the thing had cratered sooner, but I got a 1080p 42" HD for $1800 bucks, and they threw in a hundred dollar gift cerificate, and a free DVD recorder, to boot. Now, it's a Westinghouse (got a cheap extended warranty), and a monitor (ask my PC and 360 if they care, or my HD T/W cable box), so I need a good surround system still, but the sound is pretty decent. In other words, I waited for the prices to go down. And I hope I have many years to wait before I inherit any wealth from my surviving parent. Some of us just use good sense. Some of us can simply afford it, and buy what we want (I could have, and waited), and some will wait until it fits their budget, which makes a hell of a lot of sense. I don't get the ragging on either side on those either buying, or not buying, high technology. It's always fascinated me. My Dad was a department chair for 30 years, up to his ears in high technology. We had one of the first color TVs in Houston, one he brought home to "evaluate," the sneaky guy. Some folks here should either chill, or come up with better jokes. Just don't claim there is no difference in what you see... there sure as hell is.
I just provided the facts. BTW, what did a new color TV cost when they were brought out, circa 2006 money? And to those who notice a "fantastic" difference? Bully for you. It isn't discernable to me, frankly. Enjoy your new technology. IMO, there are better things to put your money into, such as investments.
fatty, you can say that about any thing, like ipods, extra furniture, new shoes. i applaud your monk like lifestyle..grasshopper!
