Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Video Is It Time to Replace Your First HDTV? (Video) 418

Millions of Americans bought their first HDTVs between four and seven years ago, because that's when prices for 40" - 50" sets started dropping below $700. Those sets are obviously between four and seven years old now. Are new ones so much more wonderful that it's time to get a new HDTV? Not necessarily. Alfred Poor, long-time display technology expert and senior editor for aNewDomain, has some insight here, which he shares with us in today's video. There's obviously a lot more to discuss about TV technology advances (such as 3d) that we didn't get to today, so look forward to another discussion on this topic in two or three weeks.

Robin Miller: This is Dr. Alfred Poor known to most Slashdot readers as Alfred, and he is an expert on high-definition televisions and televisions in general. Today we’ve rounded him up to talk about televisions and high-definitions televisions. If you’re one of the many people who bought a high-definition television when they first got reasonably priced around five years ago, is it time to look at another TV. Alfred is it? Should we look at new TVs or just stick with what we have?

Alfred Poor: Well, the first thing is getting a lot of attention these days is the new higher definition sets that have come out.

Robin Miller: Right.

Alfred Poor: CES wants us to call them UHD for Ultra High Definition, but everybody is calling them 4K because that stands roughly for 4,000, which is roughly how many vertical lines of resolution they’ve got. In other words, they’re roughly 4,000 pixels across. And that compares to roughly the 2,000 that you have in a standard 1080p television that we have already.

So essentially, if you have a 50-inch 4K display, it’s the same as taking four 25-inch 1080p displays and gluing them together to make a bigger one. So it’s really just a question of having more pixels. There’s a bunch of problems with this; the most important one of all is that there is not all that much content available yet in 4K resolution. There’s tons in standard HD, the 1080p HD resolution.

The movie theaters are using 4K, a lot of stuff is being produced for the movies originally in 4K, but not that much of it is available to consumers. Sony has started by selling a little box that it has some movies in 4K installed in it and you hook it up to the Internet and they’ll be able to download or you’ll be able to buy and download more movies in that resolution, but that’s a pretty narrow stream of content.

The second big problem is as the Sony box demonstrates, there’s not a big infrastructure to deliver this. You can’t get 4K over any cable systems at this point, there may be some experiments going on with satellite, but again your standard channels are coming through in 1080 at best. A lot of cable systems end up compressing the signals so badly that you’re not even getting a good quality 1080 out of it, there’s no way they’re going to be able to send four times that number of pixels and get you a good image quality.

Robin Miller: Mine is giving me a 720p actually, that’s what I get from my cable provider.

Alfred Poor: But again, just like MP3, you can adjust the amount of compressions, and you can squeeze it so hard, you now limit the amount of bandwidth required that you start getting artifacts, and MP3 sounds bad, with some cable systems you actually can see visual artifacts as a result of all the compression.

Robin Miller: I actually can if I’m watching – I live in Tampa Bay Bucs territory, but if I’m watching a better football team that moves faster than Bucs.

Alfred Poor: So delivery of the content is a problem and also storage, I mean we’ve got Blu-ray which can do 1080p, but there’s no 4K Blu-ray definition systems available at this point. They’re in development, but we don’t have them yet. So to buy 4K in order to get the higher resolution and the better looking image while it’s going to be tough to find the source material, it’s going to show you the better image.

Now a lot of people talk about how good the up-scaling is on some of these sets, and that’s certainly true, but Robin when I can give you $2 and you can up-scale it and give me back $8, then I believe in up-scaling.

Robin Miller: And here is the thing though too and another thing, I’m old, I really am, I’m ancient, I get social security, but still, I’m not that old, I have a TV, I have a small living room, it’s not huge, I watch a 42 inch TV from about eight feet away, and I will tell you very bluntly that I cannot personally tell the difference between really high quality, well-shot 480 and 720, I can’t tell.

Alfred Poor: Right, at that distance you shouldn’t be able to, the minimum screen for a high definition – minimum size screen for high definition at about eight feet is it really needs to be 47 or 50 inches before anyone with good eyesight is going to be able to tell the difference. So if you’re not going to get a big enough screen, you’re not going to be able to tell the difference. So if you’re sitting more than five feet away, I mean eight feet away I’d say, and you want to get a 50 inch screen, well just physically you are probably not going to be able to tell the difference between a 4K screen and 1080p HD screen.

Robin Miller: And because of my room layout and the way it’s designed, there is no real room for – before I bought it, I measured it and I said, the maximum I can put here comfortably and look good is a 42 inch. So, you know what the real big difference I see or have with Blu-ray when I get a Blu-ray piece or good high def, sound.

Alfred Poor: Well, there is that, yeah

Robin Miller: I have a – now I don’t have a $1 billion sound set, I have a Logitech front and rear speaker and center, and sub woofer piece that I bought refurbed from Newegg for $40.

Alfred Poor: Wow.

Robin Miller: Yeah, and I have friends come over and say, wow, your home theater thing is wonderful, and the answer is, it’s real 7.1 because I hooked all the wires up and most people don’t.

Alfred Poor: Right, most people don’t. Now the other thing here is the problem with the 4K is again, the majority of people out there are watching DVDs on their HD televisions and think they look great.

Robin Miller: They do.

Alfred Poor: We forget that DVD is old fashion 480p standard definition, it looks so great because it’s digital and eliminates all that analog noise that we get with the VHS tapes, but the fact is that the average consumer is not screaming for more resolution. They’re very happy with the low-res DVDs that they’ve got.

Robin Miller: I’m right there with them, I mean, I’ve gone up, I have a Blu-ray player and I’ve gone up to the redbox thing and I’ve paid the extra for the Blu-ray and a couple of times I’ve gotten the same movie, Blu-ray and DVD, and I brought them and like I said I can’t tell the difference.

Alfred Poor: Yeah, well that – again, with your screen size and the viewing distance, it’s unlikely that you would be able to tell the difference. Now there are somethings about the new TVs that are available now, that weren’t around five years ago that might give you a reason to buy a new one. And one of that is the whole smart TV, Internet connected TV kind of thing.

Robin Miller: You mean like that little Google, little tiny device I have stuck on the back that cost me $40.

Alfred Poor: Right, so a lot of people are adding those functionalities to their existing television with the Chromecast or buying one of the local boxes or Western Digital has got them and lot of people offer these boxes that will add the Internet connectivity, but it gives you access to Netflix and Hulu Plus and Youtube and a whole bunch of kind of online sources that a lot of people want to watch. I know in our house we watch a lot of Netflix and Hulu Plus streamed right to our television.

Robin Miller: Yes, a long time ago a friend of mine in Boston said you don’t have a Wii, you need a Wii and he gave us one as a gift because he had gotten a bunch of those, and so he gave us a Wii, and that gave us Netflix.

Alfred Poor: Yeah, the Wii will do that, the Xbox also is a platform for streaming. It’s funny, some studies have shown that people spend as much time or more watching Netflix and other online streaming content on their Xboxes than they do playing video games.

Robin Miller: We do on our Wii.

Alfred Poor: Which is – well, the Wii is more of a family kind of device in the first place, but it’s

Robin Miller: Well, we’re a family people

Alfred Poor: Right, I know, but I’m thinking a lot of people think of the Xbox as being more of a hardcore gaming platform and yet people are using it to watch a lot of video content as well. So yeah, we do have the option of adding a low cost box to your existing television and getting a lot of that functionality at the same time.

Robin Miller: Well, the Chromecast thing, I’ll tell you and I’m going to do a review shortly for Slashdot of it, and here is a teaser for you folks. It’s nice but it hasn’t changed my life. It hasn’t done much that I couldn’t already do with the Blu-ray, the $85 on sale, whether we buy at Target or something because I don’t even remember Blu-ray little box.

Alfred Poor: Yeah, a lot of Blu-ray players also include the Internet connectivity, so that’s another way you can get it. But again, if you don’t have it through one of those channels, getting a new television is one way to get it. Another reason for getting a new television may well be, especially if you bought one five years ago, is you’ve probably bought one that was too small. And so now today the 47 inch models are from good brands are under $500. I saw a 60-inch set for $800 advertised today. So the really big ones have come down so far in price that if you bought one that’s too small for the viewing distance that you have, you might think about migrating the smaller ones to some place where the viewing distance would be more appropriate or doesn’t matter so much like a guest room and getting yourself a proper sized one for your viewing space.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is It Time to Replace Your First HDTV? (Video)

Comments Filter:
  • by c0d3g33k ( 102699 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @02:51PM (#44810817)

    When I read about the hackability of smart TV's with cameras, I have to escalate beyond Betteridge to "Hell no!". My present HD TV is just fine, thank you.

    • Re:Betteridge's law (Score:4, Interesting)

      by raydobbs ( 99133 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @02:57PM (#44810901) Homepage Journal

      If only they made a tape...opaque... [homedepot.com]that could be used to cover up the cameras - then we'd only have to worry about the microphone - which might befall an accidental exposure to superglue. Microphones don't work when the little inner bits don't vibrate anymore. :D

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:07PM (#44811053)

        I'm sure the NSA has a secret deal with electrical tape manufacturers and camera producers which allows them to see the image through the tape by simply enabling a secret camera function. ;-)

        • Re:Betteridge's law (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:52PM (#44811749)

          allows them to see the image through the tape

          You joke, but it's not all that far fetched.

          I've got a light-amplifying scope that my father-in-law gave me. One evening (not particularly dark out) I wondered why the image seemed dimmer than usual -- and then I realized I'd left the lens cap on. Yes, it could see through the lens cap. Some nominally black plastic is fairly transparent to near-red IR. Most digital or video cameras can see IR (test it by looking at an IR remote signal).

          I haven't tried it with electrical tape, though. Yet.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )

        It's totally irrelevant if you don't hook your TV up to the internet in the first place.

        Besides, any self-respecting slashdotter has their own HTPC hooked up to their essentially HD Monitor (TV) and has it whitelisted for certain outbound services only and no direct inbounds (upon request only). Solves a whole host of issues. Oh, and the HTPC doesn't have a camera nor mike attached, so until the TV can be hacked over HDMI in that scenario, It appears to be relatively safe for now.

      • by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:25PM (#44811339) Homepage Journal

        If only they made a tape...opaque... [homedepot.com]that could be used to cover up the cameras - then we'd only have to worry about the microphone - which might befall an accidental exposure to superglue. Microphones don't work when the little inner bits don't vibrate anymore. :D

        Yea, I dunno about you, but I don't like to pay a several-hundred-dollar premium for hardware I'm going to intentionally break as soon as I open the box. That just seems stupid.

        I'll take a dumb display for half the price any day of the week.

        • by raydobbs ( 99133 )

          Well, yeah - choose it without, but if you can get a wonderful deal on something that just happens to have a camera and microphone in it you will -never- use - why let a thing like a camera or microphone be a deal killer when there are such easy fixes for them.

          • Well, yeah - choose it without, but if you can get a wonderful deal on something that just happens to have a camera and microphone in it you will -never- use - why let a thing like a camera or microphone be a deal killer when there are such easy fixes for them.

            I see where you're coming from, but chances are if you can get a "wonderful deal" on a 'smart' tv with all that spy gear built in, you can also get a dumb display of competing size and resolution for much, much less.

            Hell, I don't even need speakers in mine, just some sort of audio-out so I can hook the display to my surround sound system.

            • by GNious ( 953874 )

              Screen without speakers costs a LOT more than screens with - reason: production quantities.

              Personally, I'd prefer a nice screen, with a single HDMI input, no speakers, no tuners, no internet ...

              Good luck finding one of those :(

      • by sjames ( 1099 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:42PM (#44811577) Homepage Journal

        Why would I want to spend money on a new TV whose primary new feature will be disabled within minutes of setting it up? Why not skip the whole thing and use the old TV till it dies?

      • by sinij ( 911942 )
        Or you could not buy a product with extra features you don't want. My big screen does not spy on me, it simply does not have an input capability (well, technically it has IR remote and power on/off button).
    • I keep my smart TV directly on the public internet.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "Hell no" for me as well, but for a different reason -- WHY??? I'll get a new TV when the one I bought in 2002 dies. By then I can probably get a 100 inch TV for $300.

      I'm not going to just spend my damned money for the sake of spending it.

    • Sure my formerly present HD was just fine, but unlike the TV I've had since I was in 3rd grade (some 30 odd years ago), my HDTV simply stopped working 3 years after I bought it. $900 to fix apparently, or get a new one for $700.

      they don't make em like they used to...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @02:52PM (#44810827)

    You insensitive clod.

  • Much better (Score:5, Interesting)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @02:57PM (#44810891)

    My new 42" LED backlit screen consumes about 1/3rd the power (50-60W vs 140-150) of my first generation 1080p LCD, it also looks better. I probably wouldn't have upgraded if it hadn't been for a ghosting artifact caused by my HTPC menu getting burned in on the old one but now I couldn't imagine going back.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      My new 42" LED backlit screen consumes about 1/3rd the power (50-60W vs 140-150) of my first generation 1080p LCD, it also looks better. I probably wouldn't have upgraded if it hadn't been for a ghosting artifact caused by my HTPC menu getting burned in on the old one but now I couldn't imagine going back.

      With a delta of less than 100w it will take you a lot of TV watching to come close to a break even on cost from the efficiency gain (say, 30 _thousand_ hours if you spent $350 on your tv). Efficiency is a good thing, but it is important to know the context.

    • by vux984 ( 928602 )

      My new 42" LED backlit screen consumes about 1/3rd the power (50-60W vs 140-150) of my first generation 1080p LCD,

      What do you work out the payback of that to be?
      ~$30/year assuming you watch TV 8 hours a day, every day. I sure hope power consumption wasn't a major factor for you.

      I probably wouldn't have upgraded if it hadn't been for a ghosting artifact caused by my HTPC menu getting burned in

      So your old TV was basically broken. You'd probably have bought a new one fairly soon even if technology hadn't move

    • by mlts ( 1038732 ) *

      It doesn't make a financial sense, but having a new TV that is low power, especially one that runs off of 12 volts is a good thing to do when RV-ing, where when boondocking, one needs to save on every watt that comes from the battery bank.

      A 60 watt TV's energy use can be mostly compensated for by a decent 200-300 watt solar panel and a good charge controller. A TV that uses three times that will be pushing things unless one also charges with generator power.

      For home use, it doesn't matter that much. Howev

      • Why are you taking a TV camping? Seems like you're missing the point of camping.
        • by Richy_T ( 111409 )

          He started out saying "RV-ing". I think "camping" must have been a slip of the tongue (or fingers since typing with a tongue... ewww.)

  • by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @02:57PM (#44810897)
    Why replace perfectly fine 1080p HDTV? Newer ones often simply have more crap and more complicated UI with lots of "value-added" bloatware.

    Oh, and my _phone_ has the same resolution as these 50" panels. Why the fuck he's talking about "image quality"? Until we get 4k displays the quality differences are non-existent.
    • by dkleinsc ( 563838 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:02PM (#44810961) Homepage

      Why replace perfectly fine 1080p HDTV?

      Because we're in a recession and need to stimulate pointless consumer spending, that's why! Now, are you in favor of spending all your money on stuff that will not appreciably improve your life, or are you a Communist?

      • by Cyberax ( 705495 )
        Nah, I'm happy to spend my money to buy new crap if it has some new and and interesting features. But why buy something that isn't any better?
    • Why the fuck he's talking about "image quality"? Until we get 4k displays the quality differences are non-existent.

      There have been big advances in LCD technology. 7 years ago I would not even have considered LCD, but today I'm hard pressed to justify the heat and power draw of plasmas since the LCDs have improved so much.

    • by AdamHaun ( 43173 )

      Why the fuck he's talking about "image quality"? Until we get 4k displays the quality differences are non-existent.

      Resolution is far from the only thing that matters for image quality. Contrast, black levels, ghosting, viewing angle, color reproduction, and even input lag (for lip sync) can make a big difference. For an extreme example, compare LCD vs. plasma at the same resolution.

    • Until we get 4k content the quality differences are non-existent.


    • Even having a 4k tv won't mean shit until they start producing shows at that resolution. Although I'd love to have a 50" 4k monitor for my PC.
      • by jedidiah ( 1196 )

        I already know that most of Hollywood has scary looking skin. Don't really need an extra boost in clarity.

    • Why replace perfectly fine 1080p HDTV?

      Because Joe Consumer just discovered his neighbour has a fifty-inch TV, and his is only forty-inches.

  • not as good as my father in law's LG LED TV, but its mostly because his has a better CPU to decode the image

    i have a 3d blu ray player and an apple TV connected to mine for all the smart TV crap. 3d blu ray players can be had for $99 at best buy with vudu, amazon, cinemanow, porn, pandora, tunein and lots of other services

  • but it is a 36" Proton CRT with native 720p and 1080i. Lovely picture but it weighs around 250 lbs and wedged so thoroughly into the entertainment center that I might need to cut it out.

  • We had an old HD TV (4-5 years), that I could have taken to my apartment. It was bulky, and had green and purple bars that would roll across the screen (picture wasn't bad though and the bars were light). The problem was it was so heavy that we needed a dolly to move it. When I moved in, I went and bought a new, bigger HD TV that was light enough I could carry it by myself. If you are moving or have limited space, then a newer TV makes sense with the lighter weight and the smaller form factor of the tv a
    • It's a lot cheaper to hire somebody to help carry the TV once in a while than it is to buy a whole new TV.

  • Got myself a 50" 1080p DLP TV in 2005. I've replaced the bulb twice so far, and told my wife that the next time it needs replacing we'll give it to anyone that's willing to take it. (It runs a little warm and the fan makes it less than quiet for about a half hour after I turn it off. Also the newer TVs are likely much more energy efficient.)

    The TV has good picture quality, but the HDMI ports don't work particularly well. Truthfully, I didn't try an HDMI source until about 2-3 years ago. It works fine wi

  • I don't use my TV's features. I use my media players features through my TV. The media player has much more functionality and is upgradable with just software updates.

  • 720p is still 1280×720 and 1080i(p) is still 920×1080. While older sets are most likely limited to 720p, in the most widely sold 42"-46" tv's, the difference between the 2 is hardly noticeable. If you want internet connectivity a cheap roku functions better than the hideous, never-updated software on most tv's. Finally that leaves us with gimmicks such as 3D which even the industry is moving away from.
  • Easy answer... NO! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by funky49 ( 182835 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:03PM (#44810979) Homepage

    Five years ago I invested in a Samsung television. It's been great and I don't want to replace it. It has the features (120hz) and size (52") I want plus looks nice on the wall. I made sure to get LCD versus plasma to help keep electricity costs down. I held off on buying a DLP because I knew I would grow tired of the volume it would take up in the living room. Research showed that the LCD panel was from a Samsung/Sony plant in South Korea with units having a 3% failure rate versus 5% for its competition. Who looks for an excuse to replace their main television frequently? Not me. If you bought something with the intention of replacing or demoting it after a few years of ownership, by all means spend your money.


  • If you don't have ghosting and don't have light bleeding from the edges then there's really nothing on offer that would provide a compelling case for an upgrade. The "smart" part is normally solved by your much less expensive to upgrade Blu-ray player, 3D is pointless, and who the hell wants a hackable camera for NSA/GCHQ types to enjoy?
  • Didn't we just have an article about how all the TV's will have a new HDMI standard with new features?

    I'll wait for CEC to improve.

  • His information is a bit out of date. He said 4K Blu-Ray was still in development. However, you can already buy 4K Blu-Ray players. You can also buy a very limited selection of 4K Blu-Ray discs like Ghost Busters. That being said, the prices for all the equipment required is still going to be overpriced for at least a couple more years and there still won't be a whole lot of content available for a couple more years. So wait a couple years before buying into 4K.
    • Re:Out of Date Info (Score:5, Informative)

      by MrNiCeGUi ( 302919 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:30PM (#44811399)
      Those are not real 4k Blu-ray players - they only upscale standard Blu-ray discs to 4k. When the 4k standard will be ratified, even if it will still use Blu-ray discs, those discs won't play in these players because the standard will almost certainly use new codecs.

      Also those 4k discs you can buy are really only standard 1080p discs. They are "4k mastered", meaning they are encoded from a 4k source, but downscaled to 1080p, and are usually using a much higher bitrate than ordinary Blu-ray discs in order to preserve as much of the quality of the picture as possible, since they most likely will be used in those upscaling players. Upscaling magnifies encoding artefacts.

      Those 4k mastered discs also play in normal Blu-ray players, since they are really only 1080p. At the moment they are probably the highest quality video source available for consumer purchase.
  • Anyone else here remember quad stereo? 3D TV will go the same way. Just because some is good doesn't mean more is better.
  • Why would I buy seven year old technology when in a couple of years, perhaps even less, I can afford a 4K Ultra High Definition TV technology with 3840 x 2160 pixels (8 megapixels) -- four times that of 1080p televisions, which only offers 2 megapixels of resolution. TCL has already announced it will sell a 4K resolution, 50-in. Ultra High Definition (UHD) TV starting this fall for $999. And Samsung and Sony just announced they're slashing their prices. For 65-inch 4K TVs, Samsung's asking price recently f
  • My first flat panel is actually a monitor. No tuner. It made sense because, by 2007, it wasn't like anyone tuned TV directly on their displays. They hooked up to a cable/satellite box or HD Tivo. I've never missed having a tuner on that panel.

    Unfortunately, after years of double-duty as a computer monitor and TV, it started to suffer from image persistence. I moved it to video-only duty and it mostly cleared up but now it has a slight, curved shadow around the top edge like the outline of a curved CRT.

  • This is plainly news for the people who don't care to learn about display technologies, which granted, is clearly the majority. Watching this interview through that lens the content makes sense. But news for nerds, oh hell no!. It is fucking laughable how bad it is.

  • I replaced my old 60" rear projection set with a newer 70" set last year.

    It was a significant improvement to get a larger size and direct view. It also uses a lot less energy.

    So I'd say if you are going up 10" in size or swapping some kind of rear projection technology for a direct view it's likely to give an appreciable improvement.

    Otherwise I'd hold out for OLED.

  • by coastal984 ( 847795 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:16PM (#44811183) Journal
    9 years ago, we shelled out 4-figures for a 43" Pioneer Plasma. Today, I swing through a Best Buy and HH Gregg once every month or so, and glance at the TV's, and simply put, the LCD's on the market that can match it's picture. (I couldn't care less about 3D). It's the perfect size for our den (sure, it could take a 48", or even a 52", but the 43" doesn't leave me wanting for any more picture).

    Got what we paid for: Awesomeness and longevity.

    I'm going to go knock on some wood now.
  • Long answer. Most of my TV channels, even the HD channels, still show well over 50% of only SD quality shows. There is no compelling reason to update perfectly good hardware if it will be years before the content will take advantage of it. It may be a chicken and egg thing, but at this point it looks to me that the smart thing to do would be to wait a hardware generation or two before spending any more money on TVs.
  • Replace my HDTV? (Score:5, Informative)

    by gallondr00nk ( 868673 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:18PM (#44811219)

    Christ, I havn't even replaced the CRT yet.

  • If you were lucky enough to by a big flat panel TV before they were HDCP compatible then you got totally screwed.

  • Who still consumes the majority of content on televisions? At least the demographic that advertisers care about. And most people aren't upgrading their computers/notebooks let alone even thinking about upgrading their televisions.
  • Just because it is old, maybe 3 years, and newer ones are better doesn't mean it needs to be replaced.
    I don't just get an "ohh shiny" new tv because it is newer.
    When it breaks in maybe 5 years from now I might replace it.

  • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

    I was a late adopter of hdtv, but then I realized that it can go a week or two between the times I watch TV.

  • It seems that at least with HDMI, most TV manufacturers have finally figured out what 1:1 mode is (though it's not enabled by default, which is still stupid). However, most HDTVs I've seen still have at least 40ms input lag, which is pathetic. (For comparison, I've used a Dell 1701FP LCD from 2001 that had virtually no input lag, on VGA.)
  • I think the main attraction to newer sets is embedded support for common services such as netflix. It is an aesthetic choice that eliminates another box on your TV stand. (or the TV stand altogether if you're using a wall mount.)

    Power consumption and viewing angles have all improved with the advent of better LCD technology, eliminating the need for power guzzling plasma displays, which turned out to be more of a stop gap than anything.

    With the advent of chromecast, network enabled Blu Ray Players, roku e

  • by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @03:31PM (#44811419) Journal

    I kind of planned it that way. I just getting tired consuming so much crap cause I need another big fucking TV screen to see movies and shit for fuck sake. I love sounds and movies but I fucking hate advertisments inmyfuckingfaceallthefuckingtime telling me I need a new FUCKING SCREEN!!

    There! I said it.

  • Sure, it's only 720p, but a $90-ish Roku will add most of the features an $800+ Smart set would have (except for the 1080p), and I'm still getting better black and contrast than the new thin LCD/LED sets.

  • I had several tube 4:3 HDTVs which I purchased for a lot of money in 2000. I am slowly phasing these old 1080i beasts out of my life. One of them took 3 people to lift and carry out.
  • I would really like to replace my Westinghouse 37W1, since the backlight is separating, but there's nothing I can find like it. It does not have a tuner, since I have no use for one, but it has a more-then-complete set of discrete inputs (2 HDMI, 2 component, S-Video, Composite, and SVGA), so my receiver can switch between my sources and the monitor just handles the output. It's like speakers (converts electricity into sound), but for images.

  • by wcrowe ( 94389 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @04:03PM (#44811909)

    I hate my HDTV. It is a Vizio and was purchased about three years ago. It's like a throwback to the 60's when I was a kid. Back then you turned on your TV, and then you had to wait awhile for it to warm up before you could see a picture. Changing channels required getting up from the chair and walking across the living room. Which, beyond being a pain in the ass, was time-consuming. Now I can have the same 1960s convenience with my HDTV. When you turn it on it takes at least 20 seconds to do -- what?, I don't know, boot up? Then another few seconds for sound. Except for those times when the sound won't come on for some reason, which means starting the whole process over again. Changing the channel is equally annoying. I have a remote, so I don't have to get up, but it takes just as long. It's probably five seconds between channel changes. And sometimes it skips a couple of channels. Occasionally, it seems to get mixed up about what to do, and just shuts itself off. I really miss my old analog television. HD looks nice, but it's not worth the frustration.

  • Obligatory XKCD (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TeknoHog ( 164938 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2013 @04:05PM (#44811943) Homepage Journal

    http://xkcd.com/732/ [xkcd.com]

    Incidentally, my LCD monitor from 2004 is still great for HD video.

Where it is a duty to worship the sun it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat. -- Christopher Morley