Blue-Ray or HD-DVD - Page 8

720p has a horizontal resolution of 1280, not 1024 even though you werent comparing 720p and 1080p specifically just thought i'd let you know.
Dude... you are talking about PC resolutions vs HDTV resolutions. I was drawing the analogy between the two. Not much to be said besides that. But thanks for trying to call me out on a non-existent issue that we agree on. :?: :?: :?:

Sony sucks balls. BTW, speaking of the whole "I want Sony to have my kids!" thing, did you all hear about the fake PSP fan site? Sony hired an advertising company to create a fake blog that's pro-sony. Then, when caught, they acted like it was just a funny joke.

Link to THG article: http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/12/15/sony_fakes_fan_site/

lol take a chill man, i was just pointing out that you noted to VERY similiar resolutions to to high-def resolutions, was not trying to call you out was just making sure there was no confusion

Not everyone around here is trying to call you out, rather than just spread correct information...

I was spreading correct information. That's my point. If some idiot misinterprets my analogy into some sort of f'd up non-existent HD resolution, that's not my problem.

lol i was to lazy to go back to the one i wanted to reply to so i just hit the last poster in the list.

BTW still not a reply to you XD...

HDTVs that are capable of 1920x1080 with a refresh rate of 60hz are more than capable than being a computer screen. It works best when using a DVI/HDMI cable. I mean if a 500 or so dollar monitor can work i would hope some $1500 HDTV should work, wouldn't you

Dude... if you want me to take it easy, stop acting like a jerk. It wasn't a poor thought out analogy. That is a completely moronic statement, and the reason I'm not chill is because you keep saying stupid things like that. If you want me to chill, you need to chill and do one of 2 things:

1. Stop replying to me.
2. Reply to me but use logic to back your statements, or try just saying "yep, glad we can all agree, let's get on with the thread".

Ok i just looked at this thread and there is so much bad information about LCD and DLP tv's, 1080p vs 720p. I feel that I need to make a few posts.

First 1080p vs 720p, you will only get the full improvement from a 1080p tv if you are about 1.8 times the screen width. Your eyes would need to be 5.5 feet from a 42" tv. 7.8 feet from a 60". If you are 2.5 times the width of the TV you won't notice much if any difference. any farther back and you won't see any at all.

There are far more things that make a picture look good than just resolution. Constrast, brightness, color accuracy, saturation, black levels,... For most peole looking for a tv those are more important than resolution, as they arn't sitting close enough to the tv to notice much of a difference if any in resolution.

As for LCD vs DLP, nether has burn in, both are digital and can not burn it. There are two types of LCD, one being rear projection, other is flat pannel. The rear projection uses a blub just like a dlp tv. DLP generally gives you a better picture. Bulb life isn't much of an expense it should last atleast a couple years, bulbs today do work better than previously. Plus even if you have your bulb for a few years if it isn't too dark for you then you can keep it. It's still cheaper than your flat pannel LCD or Plasma.


Then there front projection which is my favorite. Now days you can get a good quality DLP projector with great contrast, color accuracy, brightness, and is 720p for under 1k. So if you have a room that can be darkened then you can have a 100" tv for under 1k, with an amazing picture. Much more of a wow factor than any tv that you would look at buying. Plus a ton cheaper than what people would expect if they were buying any other tv.

I thought there was something funny about somebody suggesting burn in on a DLP...

The biggest problem with a normal projection is that if your wall is coloured, so is your screen...

There is burn in with a CRT projection TV.

Whatever cheapest to own. Cheap media, player, writer and more compatible.

I would be happy if blu-ray won as then when I buy my PS3 I won't need anohter player. Atleast untill there are some quality players for under 200.

True. Still, I dont think burn in should be a big concern for people. With todays tech, all you need to be is a bit carefull.(dont keep the TV on the same channel, get moving pixels, etc)

I dont think Blu will win. Sony has tried to release too many standards. They should focus on quality, not quantity. If they didnt release UMD and focused on say Blu, they might've had a better chance...

Don't forget MD . I onder why it's so hard for Sony to admit defeat on stuff like format wars and DRM? Why don't they just say "meh... we're in financial trouble so let's do something different"?

Weird... a car MD player? My car came with a "MD Add-On Option" available.

The only good thing I can see about that is: you can keep your whole collection in your car because who the hell would steal a bunch of MDs?? It's sort of like MacOS's security through obscurity.

Yes is a module. Its a removable in dash option that is either a tape deck, or MD player.

How about a MP3 Player MAZDA... HELLO.

Haven't read through the all the posts (too long) but I have been following the format war fairly closely. Dark Horror is spot on on viewing distances from what I have read in numerous articles and personal experience ( I have a 42" 1080p monitor that accepts a 1080p signal). The only other 1080p has for me is that it seems to mantain that 3D look a lot better, but this is just my perception of it. Which technology is best I think can be a matter of personal preference. As a college student software engineer I stare at a computer screen for usually at least 8 hours a day which may be why I love LCD despite it's lack of deep blacks. I say whatever looks the best at your price range go get it with the exception of LCD in bright rooms due to best glare control and plasma or projection in a room that is going to be very dark all the time. A good strong 1080i vs 1080p signal isn't a huge difference to a 1080p monitor with a pretty good scaler. Key words being good and strong. Just look at Enhanced def sets, which look better than a 480i set being fed a 480i signal. The higher the resolution gets the harder it is going to be to perceive a difference without going to a bigger tv.

Onto the actual topic. For movies I prefer HD-DVD because of cost. Also, as Sony is part of the RIAA I would rather them not have control over my movies. I'm anti-RIAA. HD-DVD is not MS product as someone mention in one of the earlier pages but a standard they are supporting. I think digital distribution is what MS wants and the format war dragging on could be very good for them if this truly is their goal. My 2 cents.

MD = MiniDisc. I thought those things looked cool on the shelves, smaller than regular CDs! But I never got one, because it would have just been too much of a hassle for me to deal with another format. Sticking it out to see if it would become more mainstream worked out well for me, because I can't see the players anywhere anymore. Yet I can still find some MiniDiscs over at Best Buy, apparently for small data storage instead of audio playing doodads.

Say what? Contrast IS important.

Have you seen Sony's WEGA DLP / LCD tv's?

And remember, the picture, unless dedicated, will look crapier cause the signal is being split among many TV's.

Yes but maybe i was mistaken, contrast in regards to plasmas is irrelevant i thought,

most of the time its not even shown on the ad. Just because it's not important.

MD = MiniDisc. I thought those things looked cool on the shelves, smaller than regular CDs! But I never got one, because it would have just been too much of a hassle for me to deal with another format. Sticking it out to see if it would become more mainstream worked out well for me, because I can't see the players anywhere anymore. Yet I can still find some MiniDiscs over at Best Buy, apparently for small data storage instead of audio playing doodads.

sounds like UMD ver. 1.0

I would think contrast is still important. True, with the tech nowadays even low ends have OK contrast, but contrast will probably stay important for a while more...

LOL, anything would be better than my old CRT. Some blacks are green know...

Good point, but my argument is on the issue of capacity within HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. I wouldn't purchase a BR-Burner or an HD-DVD burner, I don't even have an internal optical drive. My intention was to burst the bubble that we don't need more than 16 gigs on a disc because no file is that big. The issue was that the person that I replied to has a limited perspective to how big files can be. I'm fine with my hard drives, I'll probably keep them, and I won't buy a next gen burner until it's really really cheap. I would go with your approach, but instead, wait until I run out of space and 750 gig drives are cheap .

MD = MiniDisc. I thought those things looked cool on the shelves, smaller than regular CDs! But I never got one, because it would have just been too much of a hassle for me to deal with another format. Sticking it out to see if it would become more mainstream worked out well for me, because I can't see the players anywhere anymore. Yet I can still find some MiniDiscs over at Best Buy, apparently for small data storage instead of audio playing doodads.

sounds like UMD ver. 1.0

I would think contrast is still important. True, with the tech nowadays even low ends have OK contrast, but contrast will probably stay important for a while more...

LOL, anything would be better than my old CRT. Some blacks are green know...
"UMD ver 1.0" is a very good observation, my friend. Sony pretty much revamped UMD (much like CD->DVD) to give it greater storage, redid the look, and voila! We can push a new proprietary format! Yay! Everybody* wins! *(as long as by "Everybody" you mean "sony)