How do people choose a new TV?

On Saturday, June 25th, 2011 at 11:32:37h +0100, Mark Carver wrote:

As far as the Wimbledon 3D broadcasts are concerned, they will be carried
on BBC HD, while BBC 1 HD shows the 2D-HD version, and BBC 1 SD the 2D-SD
version.

So what happens to the regional news program in regions of England which
have undergone the digital television transition?

Will they just send the crew home with full pay without making a program?

J G Miller wrote:
On Saturday, June 25th, 2011 at 11:32:37h +0100, Mark Carver wrote:

As far as the Wimbledon 3D broadcasts are concerned, they will be carried
on BBC HD, while BBC 1 HD shows the 2D-HD version, and BBC 1 SD the 2D-SD
version.

So what happens to the regional news program in regions of England which
have undergone the digital television transition?

Will they just send the crew home with full pay without making a program?

I don't understand the point you're making ?

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Andrew Hodgkinson
writes:
[]
Overscan can be disabled. I've used a DVI to HDMI converter to send a
computer display to the set and it does a 1:1 pixel mapping of the
1920x1080 pixel source - no scaling or unexpected offsets.
[]
Assuming you mean the same by overscan as I do, I thought the advent of
the pixel display (whether LCD or plasma) had finally dispelled this
evil. Do people still set their LCD/plasmas to overscan? (I mean for
pictures of the correct aspect ratio - I know people set to overscan,
and/or distort, when viewing 4:3 material on a 16:9 set.)

IMNSHO, overscanning should have gone years ago - at least with the
advent of rectangular (FST, Trinitron, etc.) tubes, and I never
understood why it remained the default, at least by the proportion it
did (I could understand a _slight_ amount to allow for drift in the scan
circuits).

I think almost all sets leave the factory set to overscan and imagine
most consumers leave it that way.

--
Adrian

In message , Jim Lesurf
writes:
In article , J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:


IMNSHO, overscanning should have gone years ago - at least with the
advent of rectangular (FST, Trinitron, etc.) tubes, and I never
understood why it remained the default, at least by the proportion it
did (I could understand a _slight_ amount to allow for drift in the scan
circuits).

My impression is that it remains simply for the old reason. To make the
picture look bigger in the shop, so give a sales edge. Remember that
consumer goods are made to be sold, but not necessarily to be used. :-)

Yes, but bigger and cropped?

Witness also grass strimmers with motors with a lifetime of a few hundred

Agreed, though also some of the problem there is people who buy a
_cheap_ strimmer and then use it as a lawnmower; when strimmers first
appeared, I understood they were only intended for trimming awkward bits
at the edges, round trees, and so on.

(Mention of the word lawnmower reminds me of an old spectrum analyser we
had - 141T I think the model number was, with 3552 and 3553 plugins, but
I might be wrong about those numbers - that had a control I always
thought of as the lawnmower control, for clipping the "grass" on the
display.)

hours. Vacuum cleaners where you have to bend forward to use them because
the pipes are short, and the pipes keep coming apart. etc etc...
[]
It surprises me that, since the Dyson patents leaked when the company
was in financial difficulties, you can still _get_ new vacuum cleaners
that use the old suck-through-a-bag principle.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... more doomed than a busload of ... enthusiasts on their way to a Private
Frazer convention on a bus whose brakes have just failed as it heads towards a
cliff. - Eddie Mair, Radio Times 20-26 November 2010

In message , Adrian
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Andrew Hodgkinson
writes:
[]
Overscan can be disabled. I've used a DVI to HDMI converter to send
a computer display to the set and it does a 1:1 pixel mapping of the
1920x1080 pixel source - no scaling or unexpected offsets.
[]
Assuming you mean the same by overscan as I do, I thought the advent
of the pixel display (whether LCD or plasma) had finally dispelled
this evil. Do people still set their LCD/plasmas to overscan? (I mean
for pictures of the correct aspect ratio - I know people set to
overscan, and/or distort, when viewing 4:3 material on a 16:9 set.)
IMNSHO, overscanning should have gone years ago - at least with the
advent of rectangular (FST, Trinitron, etc.) tubes, and I never
understood why it remained the default, at least by the proportion it
did (I could understand a _slight_ amount to allow for drift in the
scan circuits).

I think almost all sets leave the factory set to overscan and imagine
most consumers leave it that way.

Yes, but why, nowadays? OK in the days of the non-rectangular CRT
(though I thought the _amount_ of overscan was still excessive then),
but I can't see why consumers would want - and thus manufacturers pander
- to examine the presenter's nostril hairs without being able to see
much of the rest of their face, or what's behind them.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... more doomed than a busload of ... enthusiasts on their way to a Private
Frazer convention on a bus whose brakes have just failed as it heads towards a
cliff. - Eddie Mair, Radio Times 20-26 November 2010

On 25/06/2011 1:41 PM, J G Miller wrote:
On Saturday, June 25th, 2011 at 11:32:37h +0100, Mark Carver wrote:

As far as the Wimbledon 3D broadcasts are concerned, they will be carried
on BBC HD, while BBC 1 HD shows the 2D-HD version, and BBC 1 SD the 2D-SD
version.

So what happens to the regional news program in regions of England which
have undergone the digital television transition?

Will they just send the crew home with full pay without making a program?


??
if bbc1 hd is showing tennis then so is bbc1 SD - therfore the news will
be on whenever it's supposed to be.

--
Gareth.
That fly.... Is your magic wand.

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Java Jive
scribeth thus
I would expect such major signal blemishes to be more or less equally
visible on any type of TV - whether CRT, LCD, Plasma, or whatever -
and that's the point, isn't it? Blemishes in the signal cannot be
blamed on the type of TV.

My particular point was that, regardless of how caused, *small* signal
blemishes can be hidden by a CRT which has drifted slightly of
adjustment, for example if the beam is poorly focused, whereas, say,
an LCD, not having an equivalent setting to go wrong, would show such
artifacts more clearly.

But probably equally or more important is the fact that old CRTs tend
to be smaller than the TVs currently in the shops, with which the OP
states he comparing them, and a larger TV will show everything,
including blemishes in the signal, more clearly.


Very much so and something we very easily forget.

Was it PP Eckersly who once commented "the wider you open the window the
more the muck blows in" ;-?....


I heard Ray Dolby say it.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

It surprises me that, since the Dyson patents leaked when the company
was in financial difficulties, you can still _get_ new vacuum cleaners
that use the old suck-through-a-bag principle.

Patents don't leak, they *have* to be published ...

"Adrian" wrote in message
om...
IMNSHO, overscanning should have gone years ago - at least with the
advent of rectangular (FST, Trinitron, etc.) tubes, and I never
understood why it remained the default, at least by the proportion it did
(I could understand a _slight_ amount to allow for drift in the scan
circuits).

I think almost all sets leave the factory set to overscan and imagine most
consumers leave it that way.

My 10-year old Panasonic CRT TV seems to have overscan turned off. Left and
right it is clearly off when displaying 4:3 pictures *correctly* (ie not
stretched) because you can see the whole picture with large black bars on
the left and right on a 16:9 screen, and you can even see the slight
curvature in the scanning process which gives slight bowing on the
supposedly vertical edges of the frame.


On the 14:9 setting, the picture is stretched so the top and bottom just
crop the black borders at the top and bottom without cropping off any
picture.

On the 16:9 setting with a 16:9 source (eg from Freeview) a frozen frame
from an VHS recording matches the same frame of a recording on Windows Media
Centre. I presume WMC records the full frame and doesn't crop anything off
the edges of the frame...

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

I think almost all sets leave the factory set to overscan and imagine
most consumers leave it that way.

Yes, but why, nowadays? OK in the days of the non-rectangular CRT
(though I thought the _amount_ of overscan was still excessive then),
but I can't see why consumers would want - and thus manufacturers pander
- to examine the presenter's nostril hairs without being able to see
much of the rest of their face, or what's behind them.

ISTR reading, maybe on here, that a TV that overscans next to one the
same size that doesn't "looks bigger" and has a better chance of selling
in a shop.

My Panasonic plasma had a shop/home setting as one of the first choices
in the initial setup, though I didn't try it.

It has a 16/9 overscan option that does default to off, though you still
have to change aspect from auto to 16/9 to avoid overscan. It remembers
the setting for the inputs/modes.