Half Empty or half full? Why 768x1024 is HD

TopperHarley · 02-22-2006, 12:04 PM

My HDMI Cable= $40
My Wallmount kit= $80
My 42PX50U= almost HD set $2500
Zed and Ward speechless= Priceless

techjunky · 02-22-2006, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopperHarley

My HDMI Cable= $40
My Wallmount kit= $80
My 42PX50U= almost HD set $2500
Zed and Ward speechless= Priceless

How about adding up the amount of positive input you have added to this forum. Thats right the sum= 0

TopperHarley · 02-22-2006, 01:16 PM

I think I have added plenty off positive input techmonkey. One example is the wealth of information I have painstakingly provided to show that there are in fact sets under 50" that are indeed True HD.
What would not be positive input, would be to say something like your mother should have used birth control. That would be negative, and I will not engage in such theatrics.

techjunky · 02-22-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopperHarley

I think I have added plenty off positive input techmonkey. One example is the wealth of information I have painstakingly provided to show that there are in fact sets under 50" that are indeed True HD.
What would not be positive input, would be to say something like your mother should have used birth control. That would be negative, and I will not engage in such theatrics.

She did use birth control and I am a miracle. Get a life Topper!

TopperHarley · 02-22-2006, 01:25 PM

ummmmm ok

zedd · 02-22-2006, 02:06 PM

Hey Topperloser, you are funny, i have come to realise no further comment is needed. PLEASE by all means continue your inacturate technobable and personal attacks so that all can see you are indeed a complete moron. No fact, mathamatical or otherwise could do a better job in proving this more then you. Im guessing your real name is Ed,
Special Ed who cant do math with a calculator.

ROFLMAO

TopperHarley · 02-22-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote "i have come to realise no further comment is needed."

If not needed then why this further comment?

zedd · 02-22-2006, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

My posts are generated by the frustration I have regarding the constant berating of other members that do not stand up to the bullies. You have people like Zedd and Ward that constantly bash other people’s purchases for what reason, other than to play out their god complex? Now I have to be referred to as some kind of loser because I enjoy playing strategy games once in a while in the comfort of my own home. I am a contributing member of society, a good father and a veteran. I do not appreciate being referred to as one of the underlying reasons for the increasing moral decay in our society! I have posted information to contradict some of the bashers. I get no response to the facts I present, only reverse name-calling or character attacks. The track these threads are on are much more proof of social decay than those who play a video game once in a while. I do not start the bashing. I just do my best to fight back and finish it.

If you actually read anything before you respond you would know time and time again i have stated that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the person who paid for the HDTV/EDTV-whatever 's opinon is the only one that matters. I have bullied no one yet if you continue to be ignorant i will gladly point it out!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

Now I have to be referred to as some kind of loser

You didnt have to proclaim it, anyone who reads anything your write knows it already!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

My posts are generated by the frustration

Its a computer bulliten board for god sakes..grow up!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

I just do my best to fight back and finish it.

Its a boardroom in some obscure portion of cyberspace, there is no fight therefore you can not win, only argue..forever if you wish, again...grow up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

I am a contributing member of society, a good father and a veteran

Thank you for your service to our country Sir, you were allowed to breed? Thats scary!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zedd

"i have come to realise no further comment is needed."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topperloser

If not needed then why this further comment?

I changed my mind!!!

Frustrated again??????????????

ROFLMAO

TopperHarley · 02-22-2006, 06:14 PM

roflmao

Way too much time on your hands. I allready said I am done with you. Get it?

zedd · 02-22-2006, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopperHarley

roflmao

Way too much time on your hands.

Yeah I do but im retired at 44 so byte me!!

Ward Cleaver · 02-22-2006, 10:14 PM

Let me just state once again for the record...

No plasma panel under 50" is true HD.

Regards,
-Ward

Ward Cleaver · 02-22-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Posted By TopperHarley - "...your previous idiotic statements about ALL SETS below 50" are not possible of displaying TRUE HD."

I have said that all plasma sets (not LCD) below 50" are not capable of displaying true HD.

I suggest that you look at the words more carefully in the sentences that you read. I believe that would help alleviate a lot of your confusion and frustration.

Regards,
-Ward

tanaka · 02-23-2006, 07:38 AM

And I would like to state once again for the record:

Repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true. Even "for the record"

And:

Providing zero proof for your arguement is not very convincing. Even if it's "for the record"

John C · 02-23-2006, 09:02 AM

I think I finally understand his word game. Ward did not say that a plasma under 50" is not an HDTV set, he said "No plasma panel under 50" is true HD" (emphasis mine not his). The key here, or so it appears to me, is that he has defined in his own mind that "true HD" means that the pixels must be square so that they pixels as well as the picture are true to the 16:9 requirement and that you must have at least as many pixels as are carried on the ATSC 720P signal (not sure why that one is the key but it seems to be). I think this would have been easier on everyone if he just explained what he meant by "true HD" from the start and it would be helpful to newbies if he acknowledged that this is his own yardstick and not an industry wide standard.

sl7vk · 02-23-2006, 10:00 AM

Ward is calling it true HD now. He used to call 42 inch plasma panels ED sets.

02-22-2006, 02:17 PM	#112
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	Quote "i have come to realise no further comment is needed." If not needed then why this further comment? Last edited by TopperHarley; 02-22-2006 at 02:19 PM.

02-22-2006, 06:14 PM	#114
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	roflmao Way too much time on your hands. I allready said I am done with you. Get it? Last edited by TopperHarley; 02-22-2006 at 06:24 PM.

02-22-2006, 10:14 PM	#116
Ward Cleaver 1024 x 768 Is Not True HD Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 263	Let me just state once again for the record... No plasma panel under 50" is true HD. Regards, -Ward __________________ The ATSC (the body whch sets the standards for HDTV) recognizes only two standards for HDTV...1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 www.atsc.org The ATSC standards for HDTV are recognized by the FCC.

02-23-2006, 10:00 AM	#120
sl7vk Panasonic Plasma Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 603	Ward is calling it true HD now. He used to call 42 inch plasma panels ED sets. __________________ "Their LCD tv's are also assembled in the Netherlands...Belgium to be exact." -Ward Cleaver

02-22-2006, 12:04 PM	#106
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	My HDMI Cable= $40 My Wallmount kit= $80 My 42PX50U= almost HD set $2500 Zed and Ward speechless= Priceless

02-22-2006, 01:16 PM	#108
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	I think I have added plenty off positive input techmonkey. One example is the wealth of information I have painstakingly provided to show that there are in fact sets under 50" that are indeed True HD. What would not be positive input, would be to say something like your mother should have used birth control. That would be negative, and I will not engage in such theatrics.

02-22-2006, 01:25 PM	#110
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	ummmmm ok

02-23-2006, 07:38 AM	#118
tanaka Paradigm Studios' Babey! Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 210	And I would like to state once again for the record: Repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true. Even "for the record" And: Providing zero proof for your arguement is not very convincing. Even if it's "for the record"

02-23-2006, 09:02 AM	#119
John C High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 111	I think I finally understand his word game. Ward did not say that a plasma under 50" is not an HDTV set, he said "No plasma panel under 50" is true HD" (emphasis mine not his). The key here, or so it appears to me, is that he has defined in his own mind that "true HD" means that the pixels must be square so that they pixels as well as the picture are true to the 16:9 requirement and that you must have at least as many pixels as are carried on the ATSC 720P signal (not sure why that one is the key but it seems to be). I think this would have been easier on everyone if he just explained what he meant by "true HD" from the start and it would be helpful to newbies if he acknowledged that this is his own yardstick and not an industry wide standard.