![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 25 Jan 2006 23:04:35 GMT, mike
wrote: Roly wrote What's the point of only stocking TVs that only receive analogue, when analogue is for the chop shortly ? So they can sell you a digital one then. Seriously, 5 or 6 years time, who knows what will happen, it's beyond what they hope will be the life of your new telly The general thought goes along the line that if you ever need to upgrade your Digital receiver then you won't have to throw away your TV as well. I don't think that I would consider buying an IDTV until at least they have moved to HDTV and MPeg4. Cardman http://www.cardman.org http://www.cardman.com http://www.cardman.co.uk |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article -
berlin.de, steve says... On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:00:44 +0000, Mike Henry wrote: And even then, only if it can display an interlaced signal (or I can afford a professional de-interlacer and scaler). Genuine q? What can one of them do a decent PC with DTT card cannot? A PC/DTT setup will certainly be your best bet for HDTV. Just as long as you stay away from LCD monitors. -- Conor Windows & Outlook/OE in particular, shipped with settings making them as open to entry as a starlet in a porno. Steve B |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
"steve" wrote in message news ![]() It would be nicer if you just ensured you got rid of your stuff responsibly whatever the law. If the powers that be are so unrealistic as to make waste disposal disproportionately expensive for dubious 'environmental' reasons then ordinary people will break the law and dump things in laybys. Fortunately this is an area where the public can easily ignore the law and thus expose the absurdity of some environmental policies. I live in a village and we are bedevilled by people dumping at the side of the road, but can you blame them when the local dumpit forbids vehicles except cars (discrimination against van drivers) and pedestrians (discrimination against non car owners)? It's all a con, basically. We have to pay an extra 50p when we get a new tyre to cover disposal of the old one, yet old tyres can be recycled in all sorts of ways. There's no real shortage of landfill in the UK. We have massive opencast coalmines despoiling the countryside, so why not do the same thing in reverse and use valleys as massive dumps? Topsoil off, dump, topsoil back on. Bill |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bill Wright wrote:
"steve" wrote in message news
It would be nicer if you just ensured you got rid of your stuff responsibly whatever the law. If the powers that be are so unrealistic as to make waste disposal disproportionately expensive for dubious 'environmental' reasons then ordinary people will break the law and dump things in laybys. Fortunately this is an area where the public can easily ignore the law and thus expose the absurdity of some environmental policies. I live in a village and we are bedevilled by people dumping at the side of the road, but can you blame them when the local dumpit forbids vehicles except cars (discrimination against van drivers) and pedestrians (discrimination against non car owners)? It's all a con, basically. We have to pay an extra 50p when we get a new tyre to cover disposal of the old one, yet old tyres can be recycled in all sorts of ways. There's no real shortage of landfill in the UK. We have massive opencast coalmines despoiling the countryside, so why not do the same thing in reverse and use valleys as massive dumps? Topsoil off, dump, topsoil back on. Then build on it, then ... ;-) Bill Well, I blame privatisation ;-) In fairness LB Newham's tip (private) allows anything FOC (except paint curiously, and probably weapons grade plutonium, and ...), and vans, but you have to take your driving license to prove you're a resident. Rob |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote: There's no real shortage of landfill in the UK. We have massive opencast coalmines despoiling the countryside, so why not do the same thing in reverse and use valleys as massive dumps? Topsoil off, dump, topsoil back on. there was the valley in mid-Wales used to dump car tyres, it caught fire. quite fun really. -- From KT24 - in "leafy" Surrey Using a RISC OS5 computer |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Rob wrote: [Snip] Well, I blame privatisation ;-) It is mainly due to ODPM witha bit of EU thrown in for good measure. -- From KT24 - in "leafy" Surrey Using a RISC OS5 computer |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
charles wrote:
In article , Bill Wright wrote: There's no real shortage of landfill in the UK. We have massive opencast coalmines despoiling the countryside, so why not do the same thing in reverse and use valleys as massive dumps? Topsoil off, dump, topsoil back on. there was the valley in mid-Wales used to dump car tyres, it caught fire. quite fun really. I lived in a house that had been built on the site of an old (legitimate) tyre dump. It had caught fire, and been destroyed. Along came Bryant Homes and built a housing estate. It was very difficult to get anything to grow, or even survive in the garden. |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think you should get up to date! Modern LCD screens are perfectly
viewable from at least +/- 45 deg. to head on. I have seen no evidence that LCD life span is an issue, and they will not Why should I pay 3,500 for an LCD screen when the lamp will burn out in 5 years while a CRT will last over 20 years. In fact since I normally leave the TV switched on to listen to it while I'm at the computer at my rate of usage the lamp would but out or be so dim as to make the TV unmatchable in less than a year. flare and de-focus with old age as CRTs do. Also LCD and plasma screens will always give inherently perfect geometry and colour registration with no problems of convergence or scanning linearity. What is this lamp you're talking about? We're not talking about projection. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Agamemnon wrote:
Dman useless MS spellchecker. [...] unmatchable = unmatchable. Ah, yes. Much better. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Malcolm H wrote:
What is this lamp you're talking about? We're not talking about projection. He means the backlight in an LCD panel. He seems to have a fairly pessimistic view of its lifespan. I believe MTBF figures are currently in the range 30,000 to 50,000 hours, which is comparable with a CRT. Not sure about the cost or difficulty of replacement - I suspect that for most people, by the time the backlight expires, technology will have moved on and they'll want a new display rather than fixing the old one. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Dixons DVR | Raoul | UK digital tv | 21 | December 22nd 05 04:57 PM |
| John Lewis V Dixons? | Colin Mckechnie | UK home cinema | 18 | December 6th 05 01:06 PM |
| Comet V Dixons | John | UK home cinema | 5 | November 23rd 04 08:16 PM |
| Thomson DHD4000 PVR available in Currys and Dixons from Monday | Jonathan Swift | UK digital tv | 11 | May 12th 04 08:00 PM |
| Is this true - or are Dixons head office completely wrong?? | Andrew Manuel-Warner | UK digital tv | 14 | September 29th 03 05:48 PM |