• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • TV and Home Entertainment Technology
1080p retail stitch up
<<
<
4 of 11
>>
>
GaryB
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by rwr:
“
Perhaps if we'd skipped the "HD Ready" stage and moved straight onto "Full HD" then we'd have saved this whole mess anyway, and just had the market standardised on one resolution that actually matched what was being broadcast, and available on BD... I really think the industry has shot itself in the foot to an extent by jumping the gun to get HD TVs out whilst 1080p panels were seen as too expensive.”

The only problem with that is that at the time that EICTA set the original HD standard, 1080 screens weren't available.
rwr
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by GaryB:
“The only problem with that is that at the time that EICTA set the original HD standard, 1080 screens weren't available.”

Although they did insist that devices had to be capable of accepting a 1080i input at least, and were surely aware of the resolutions that HD services and devices were likely to be operating at (I haven't checked the dates here, just presuming...) So maybe they'd have just been better holding off for a while.
Deacon1972
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by bobcar:
“I think this was maybe what Jethro was really getting at and in this respect I would agree with him. There seems to be a common misconception that full HD 1080p is "the best" and I think that is because resolution is such a simple concept and other factors are harder to grasp.”

I thought his point was Curry's and such like were pushing 1080 sets on to the customer because he assumed they were the most expensive sets in the store, and in addition to this not many customers would benefit from 1080p as there are no UK broadcasters that deliver this resolution, the only ones that would benefit would be those with Bluray.

My answer to that is - the TV it will still do the basics, it will deliver SD if this is all the individual is interested in. On the money side, yes there will be some that are parting with more money than needs be, but like so many of us they will be on a tight budget, so they will choose the model that represents value to them. If they come away with a TV that has 1080 resolution but they will only ever watch SD and they have only paid the price they are willing to pay then where have they been ripped off, a similar model with a lower resolution could have cost them more.
bobcar
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by Deacon1972:
“If they come away with a TV that has 1080 resolution but they will only ever watch SD and they have only paid the price they are willing to pay then where have they been ripped off, a similar model with a lower resolution could have cost them more.”

I don't think they have been ripped off, I was just agreeing that a 1080 line display was not always the best.

If a model with a lower resolution was more expensive it's likely to be a much better TV (with all else being equal which of course it isn't always).
Colin V
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by Deacon1972:
“Why assume you are being ripped off just because the TV that was being recommended was 1080. ”

The point I was trying to make was that after asking what my requirements were ie. not previously watching DVDs and therefore unlikely to watch Blu-ray he still tried to push me towards 1080p when 'HD ready' would have completely satisfied my stated requirement. I like to think I'm a bit savvy about this sort of thing but he was definately pushing my choice for a more expensive bit of kit.

I take the points about budget etc but that does not excuse trying to fleece the unaware. If you ask for advice and respond to counter questions which you then assume are in your interest it seems reasonable to expect that advice to be sound.

Whilst some poor old bloke may be happy to part with 7 or 8 hundred quid because he has been convinced that it is in his best interest, he would be even happier if he could have escaped with 200 less.

I didn't say in my original post that I also said I wanted it for Sky HD but that is beside the point.
bobcar
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by rwr:
“Although they did insist that devices had to be capable of accepting a 1080i input at least, and were surely aware of the resolutions that HD services and devices were likely to be operating at (I haven't checked the dates here, just presuming...) So maybe they'd have just been better holding off for a while.”

But then we would have had to wait longer for HD whilst the higher resolution panels were produced and that would be of zero benefit to the majority of us who would gain no advantage from a 1080 line panel.

Even now 1080 line panels are much more expensive than 768/720 line ones. Probably all TVs will become 1080 line in the future as panel costs of different resolutions migrate together but that is still some way off.
rwr
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by bobcar:
“But then we would have had to wait longer for HD whilst the higher resolution panels were produced and that would be of zero benefit to the majority of us who would gain no advantage from a 1080 line panel.

Even now 1080 line panels are much more expensive than 768/720 line ones. Probably all TVs will become 1080 line in the future as panel costs of different resolutions migrate together but that is still some way off.”

All absolutely true. We definitely wouldn't be where we are now (at least at this point in time) without things happening the way they did.

However, personally I still feel that (and its obviously easier to say in retrospect) that we just had one "HD" standard, rather than confusing the public with HD Ready and then quickly afterwards with the HD Ready 1080P logos. It would have certainly help simplify things when people are being transitioned from SD to HD, from SCART to HDMI, from DVD to BD etc. It wouldn't *really* have mattered (at least from a consumer point of view) if it had taken a wait of a couple more years to do it.

I also wonder how many people feel ripped off at having bought an "HD Ready" set, only to see what is effectively a "even more HD" appear logo not long afterwards. And that's before you through in proper handling of 24fps into the mix. I know that for a lot of people it really won't make that much visual difference, but I think it just gives a bad impression from the industry that they are shifting the goalposts for a purchase that for a lot of people represents a significant investment. at a pace more rapid than people expect.
Deacon1972
09-09-2008
Originally Posted by rwr:
“
I also wonder how many people feel ripped off at having bought an "HD Ready" set, only to see what is effectively a "even more HD" appear logo not long afterwards. And that's before you through in proper handling of 24fps into the mix. I know that for a lot of people it really won't make that much visual difference, but I think it just gives a bad impression from the industry that they are shifting the goalposts for a purchase that for a lot of people represents a significant investment. at a pace more rapid than people expect.”

Personally I don't feel ripped of.

I have had my 768 panel for nearly three years now, I have an old R1 DVD player (HDMI), Sky HD and PS3 all hooked up to it and it give as good a picture as some of these 1080 panels IMO. I have enjoyed HD for the past 2+ yrs.

I wouldn't have wanted to wait any longer.

I would have been peed off if I had bought a low res panel when they first came out.
Orbitalzone
09-09-2008
Yes, you can wait for ever... there's always something better and cheaper coming around the corner but what do you do in the meantime?

I still don't think there's any ripping off either... there's always been choices in the TV trade (as in all other retailing) ... 15 years ago you had the choice of budget CRTs, flatter squarer tubes, stereo, NICAM, teletext, fastext, mulitple input choices, dolby surround, glass front panels (yuk) wood effect cabinets, and prices from £100 to £5000 just like today.
thewhiterabbit
10-09-2008
I had a 32lcd 32HD panny and v+ yes the picture was good and hd was great (@720) but a few months ago I bought a new 42 plasma panasonic its Hd ready not full hd.
I dont have blu ray or anything that can play blu ray films but my tv says it can run 1080 @24 fps (its not full hd) and why didnt I spend a few hundred pounds more ? well i dont need it why should i pay for somthing i dont need or at this time want.
Yes when you go into currys or comet i have seen elderly people asking about a certain tv and the sales person explains to them if they want to be future proof best get a full hd tv and if you want a hd service almost free get free sat (as you pay for instalation of the dish) , or get cable or sky or use the freeview.

Now most elderly people just want a tv that has freeview and it does the job they want some want more and get full HD and some stay with a Hd ready tv (as this is cheaper ) ,
so in time yes all you will get is 1080 full hd tv's but as most peole on here know that 1080 is already out dated by 1480x1080 in japan ( might of got the res wrong ) but 1080 is a signal not a resolution and if your the type who wants it just because its there i dont know but stores only sell what people want and if some people want full hd or just hd ready tv's its there .
So wheres the problem

white rabbit
Nigel Goodwin
10-09-2008
Well I've just had to unload and stack 150 x 32 inch HD Ready Sony TV's - must be a figment of my imagination as you can't get them any more
David (2)
10-09-2008
Mountain out of mole hill. This really is only going to be an "issue" for about 1% of the buying public at the moment.

As indicated by a post above, there's little reason to just buy a set with 1080p support alone - you may as well make sure its got the extra vertical resulution, and the ability to handle 24fps correctly.

I am much more concerned about people being told they will be *forced* to subscribe to satellite or cable services over the next couple of years, where the public is unaware of free to air signals, or have been told that they will "never" get such a service and therefor must subscribe. Or people buying certain new digital recorders which require a digital DTT signal now, taking them home, plugging in, and.......no signal. Or low-cost DTT decoders with the words "works almost anywhere" written on the box, well - it aint going to work in many places around where I live - DTT coverage is most certainly not "almost anywhere" yet!

Dave
JethroUK
10-09-2008
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“Well I've just had to unload and stack 150 x 32 inch HD Ready Sony TV's - must be a figment of my imagination as you can't get them any more ”

100% of TV's available by Xmas will be 1080p

and what proportion of broadcasts will be 1080p? 0%
JethroUK
10-09-2008
Originally Posted by fixerman:
“I happened to be in a well known department store in Kingston (not John Lewis) and overheard a salesman telling a customer how much he would notice an improvement when he "upgraded" his 1080i tv to 1080p. The only source the customer was interested in was SKY.

Lack of product knowledge or miss-selling?”

On the basis that ignorance doesn't negate the law - it's miss-selling

That particular case sounds like a downright lie
mossy2103
11-09-2008
Originally Posted by JethroUK:
“100% of TV's available by Xmas will be 1080p”

Once again, you state that as a FACT, but choose NOT to support it with evidence.

Quite frankly, the evidence from shops and manufacturers (and people within the retail industry on this forum) indicates that your claim it 100% FALSE.
roddydogs
11-09-2008
Could someone explain the difference bewtween HD 1080p, and 1080p?,(latest Which magazine) its not at all clear. Ta
bobcar
11-09-2008
Originally Posted by roddydogs:
“Could someone explain the difference bewtween HD 1080p, and 1080p?,(latest Which magazine) its not at all clear. Ta”

There's nothing fully defined unlike HD ready but usually a "full HD 1080p TV" will have both a 1920x1080 panel and accept a 1080p input.

If someone describes a TV as 1080p it would more accurately mean a TV that will accept a 1080p input but many people use it to refer to a 1920x1080 panel which frankly is nonsense as they also talk about a 1080i TV none of which actually exist (in the mainstream) by the definition they are using.
Nigel Goodwin
11-09-2008
Originally Posted by JethroUK:
“100% of TV's available by Xmas will be 1080p
[/b]”

Complete bullsh*t - new HD Ready sets are still been released all the time, but what does it matter anyway? - manufacturers are required to provide sets that are reasonably 'future proof', and moving towards 1080P is an extra step in that direction, and does no harm in any respect.
davidweller
11-09-2008
Originally Posted by JethroUK:
“100% of TV's available by Xmas will be 1080p

and what proportion of broadcasts will be 1080p? 0%”

But you chose to forget that you can get 1080p from other sources - PS3 and Blu-ray.

My Blu-ray player outputs regular DVDs at 1080p,
Gary D
11-09-2008
3Gig is coming, that's 1080p to people outside the industry. I work for a company that makes interface equipment for the TV industry and we have just released our first 3GHz product. There are several large chip manufacturers producing chip set now, Gennum, National etc.

And here is the reason why in the UK we are tooling up for it. Put simply Sky has told the industry they want 3GHz.

And the reason why Sky want it, no not to give the customer a better tv experience, once broadcast it will only be marginally better than the current 1.5GHz, but because with the better compression possible with 3GHz Sky can get two broadcasts in the same bandwidth as the current 1.5GHz.

I'm sure you have all heard the old adage.

"Never mind the quality feel the width"
GaryB
11-09-2008
Originally Posted by JethroUK:
“100% of TV's available by Xmas will be 1080p”

Where are you getting this crap from? As I've already mentioned, the company I work for will have many non 1080p models available until well after Xmas - probably until well after Xmas 2009 too.

I'm sure all other manufacturers will be the same.
Gary D
11-09-2008
Just a correction to my previous post as I'm someone is bound to pull me up.

I should have said 3 Gbits not GHz.
jibberjabber2b
13-09-2008
Originally Posted by AlosondroAlegré:
“what an awesome thread. like a tramp shouting at traffic on the high street. you can see he's plainly disturbed and you shouldn't stare, yet it's too hypnotic to look away.”

Classic!

Bullseye Alosondro! Well done, couldn't have put it better myself!
zestfulmass
13-09-2008
Jethro, did you by any chance buy a flat screen 1080p tv and then get home to discover that it wasn't showing HD images from your freeview box or something???
maybe it's a good idea for furture proofing your equipment, because I would imagine 1080p will become the norm eventually. and then you'll either be well behind or stick with what you have been mis-sold.
either way technology moves on and it has to be sold because the people that manufacture it would probably go bump while having lots of produce lying around because some moaner voiced his concern a little too much.
Chill!
JethroUK
13-09-2008
Originally Posted by zestfulmass:
“.. it's a good idea for furture proofing your equipment..”

it's never a good idea to 'future proof'

you'll always be able to buy in the future - cheaper!

you'll learn - the hard way

Originally Posted by zestfulmass:
“....I would imagine 1080p will become the norm eventually.”

'eventually' being after replacing your current TV 3 - 4 times - by which time they will be stitching you up 10,800 p TV's

it's just so transparent

.
<<
<
4 of 11
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map