High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition News & Informative Articles Get the Latest High Definition News & Informative Articles Here! Please post newsworthy information here only! This forum is NOT for your first post. Thank you!

1080p DLP(TM) TV Technology in Volume Production and Shipment; Quantity 1080p Shipmen

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-29-2005, 02:44 AM   #16  
Crabtree's Bludgeon
 
maicaw's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,001
Default

One of the great innovator/engineer/inventors of our time gave a lecture this week at the local University. Part of his presentation demonstrated that maturing of most technologies occur over a 30 year (1 generation) period. Ther early adopters at the bottom knee of the curve (ten years) the general public over the next 10-15 years (the linear portion) then the holdouts buy in at the upper flattening. The internet is just entering the linear portion, Analog Color TV has matured (40 years ago I bought one of the first color sets available with a big round metal CRT) - commercial propeller aircraft (30 years) commercial jets (30 years) microprocessors (30yrs) Heck HDTV hasn't even begun the climb - it's less than 5 years old -

Last edited by maicaw; 04-29-2005 at 02:59 AM..
maicaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 06:30 AM   #17  
Mr. Wizard
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ferndale, Michigan
Age: 71
Posts: 5,981
Default

We've been working on the digital TV transition since 1996... that's NINE years...
RSawdey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 06:57 AM   #18  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 75
Default

and the ATSC standards were written in the mid-eighties.
MostlaRge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 07:20 AM   #19  
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maicaw
One of the great innovator/engineer/inventors of our time gave a lecture this week at the local University...
Does he purposely witholds his name?
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 11:53 AM   #20  
What is HD?
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontknowjack
I don't think HDTV will die. It will just take little more time. My biggest concern is about people who already bought the TVs. It is no doubt that now is the transition period and HDTV has nowhere to go but up. And now with 1080p TVs coming out and HD-DVD(or blue ray) being marketed as 1080p, I fear my expensive HDTV may become obsolete too soon. As history has shown us pioneers of anything may get sacrificed to make way for new things. These people who already bought HDTVs may be sacrificed to better technology. I can't believe they are already coming out with 1080p TVs when large percentage of people don't even have 1080i TVs. Sure it may be good for those people who waited but if all of us have waited, this HDTV would have never took off. It's a shame.
Your TV won't be obsolete. You'll still be able to watch Blu-Ray optimized for 1080p... just not in 1080p quality. It will be limited to how high of quality your TV is capable of displaying.
duerra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 12:05 PM   #21  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 949
Default 1080p TV.

Oh great. 1080p TVs! I just spent huge amount of money buying 1080i TV and now they are introducing 1080p TVs. Can't they just be happy with 1080i TVs and not screw those people who already jumped onto HDTV bandwagon? I mean if it wasn't for us pioneers who drove the HDTV industry on by purchasing HDTV when it is still new, they wouldn't even be talking about going the next step. I protest this move. I think we(those who already have HDTVs) should go on strike. What do rest of you think? Come on I need your support.
dontknowjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 01:13 PM   #22  
What is HD?
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2
Default

Last time I bought a PC, my machine was top-of-the-line. Two months later, Intel released a new P4 architecture that was not only faster GHz-wise, but also architecturally. Do I think that progress should stop being made in the computer industry, just because I purchased a new computer? Hell no.

Your TV isn't obsolete. It will still work. And if it bothers you that much, sell it and get the better one. You won't be out much. I completely support the improvement, as it's only that much better for the consumer.
duerra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 03:54 PM   #23  
Crabtree's Bludgeon
 
maicaw's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,001
Default

Quote:
One of the great innovator/engineer/inventors of our time gave a lecture this week at the local University.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borromini
Does he purposely witholds his name?
Response--happy to spread the word -- don't miss him if you get the chance to hear him speak -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burt_Rutan
Quote:
We've been working on the digital TV transition since 1996... that's NINE years...
and the ATSC standards were written in the mid-eighties.
And I suppose B/W TV was a hot item in the early 30s.after all thats when the first demos occurred -- get real - you couldn't buy a consumer priced HDTV before the year 2000 - and then how long before more than a dozen HDTV transmitters were on the air?
http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/re..._timeline.html

Quote:
July 1996 The first commercial digital television broadcasts take place at CBS affiliate WRAL in Raleigh, NC, and NBC affiliate WHD-TV in Washington, D.C.

Fall 1999 Regular network HDTV broadcasts begin, including ABC's Monday Night Football, NBC's The Tonight Show, and CBS's complete prime time lineup except news and "reality" shows. (Of course, only a small percentage of the networks' local affiliate stations are equipped to broadcast in HDTV.)

Last edited by maicaw; 04-29-2005 at 04:15 PM..
maicaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2005, 12:27 AM   #24  
Miss-Ti, World's BEST Cat
 
CatManDoo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 1,827
Talking WADR, I don't agree completely

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontknowjack
Oh great. 1080p TVs! I just spent huge amount of money buying 1080i TV and now they are introducing 1080p TVs. Can't they just be happy with 1080i TVs and not screw those people who already jumped onto HDTV bandwagon? I mean if it wasn't for us pioneers who drove the HDTV industry on by purchasing HDTV when it is still new, they wouldn't even be talking about going the next step. I protest this move. I think we(those who already have HDTVs) should go on strike. What do rest of you think? Come on I need your support.
Actually, I think it's a good move. And unlike PC's which have constantly evolved in terms of speed and capacity, I believe this will become a new standard that will last for years to come. The main reason I like it is that it will end the debate about trade off between 1080i versus 720p. The 1080i crowd could argue that having over twice as many pixels (2,073,600 vs 921,600) gives a sharper image, wheras the 720p people have it better with fast moving images using progressive scan instead of interlaced. But with 1080p you have the best of both worlds! As for going beyond 1080p I don't see that happening anytime soon. There are already some people who swear you can't tell the difference between EDTV and HDTV (I'm not one of them) so it seems unlikely there will be any reason to push the envelope. It would be like audio equipment with frequency response of 5-50,000 Hz; Very few people can hear much beyond the normal range of 20-20,000 Hz so anything else is overkill. Most people will never see the difference between 1080p and anything higher. TV's would have to get extremely large to make it worthwhile.

IMHO....
CatManDoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2005, 01:04 PM   #25  
Mr. Wizard
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ferndale, Michigan
Age: 71
Posts: 5,981
Default

Lets hope they do get lots larger... and (of course) lots cheaper!

One use of the 60 Hz framerate of the progressive displays is for 3D TV... IMAX style glasses... I think there's stuff going on that will break pretty soon...
RSawdey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2005, 12:39 AM   #26  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 256
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbs1333
North America’s Future is SDTV not HDTV
Television is a mass medium whose revenue is derived from mass advertisers. In order to survive, networks must produce television shows that are designed to huge audiences.

In our first article we learned that by the end of 2007, analysts expect over 40% of Canadian homes will have digital televisions but only 1 in 40 homes will be capable of watching HD programming.

To date HD programming has been very limited due to its high cost for studio’s broadcasters and consumers.


HD programming costs studios more because they need to invest in new camera’s, new editing equipment, new sets and new copy protection schemes;
HD costs studio’s more because of the added bandwidth required to deliver HD signals. The rule of thumb is that six SDTV channels can be delivered using the same bandwidth required to deliver one HD channel.
HD programming is more expensive for consumers because they have to invest in an expensive HDTV but also an HD tuner and an HD programming package.

Realistically, it’s difficult to envision how or why networks would be able to make money on programming which is only available to 1 in 40 homes. It is true that HD programming can be down converted to an SD signal but this only adds additional costs to networks and broadcasters.

Standard Definition digital television (SDTV) on the other hand can be produced and delivered to consumers for far less money than HDTV.

To date, the only beneficiaries of HD television are the equipment manufacturers and the very small percentage of households (estimated at less than 1% of households) who can view the HD signals
Ummm.... sorry- wrong. Sounds like you're from Canada, but the number of US households that are getting HD is way more than 1%.

All the major networks know that sports in HD is going to be the driver that puts HD programming over the top. What's the most watched event in the USA year in, year out? The Super Bowl. Huge market. To see an NFL game in HD is to want to own a HD set. I don't watch my football in a vaccuum, and everyone I invite over says "I gotta get me one of those." Doubly so when I switch back to the SD simulcast, and show them what they're missing on a standard TV. DTV hasn't announced the 2005 NFL schedule, but I'll be shocked if less than 90% of the games aren't in HD. It will be 100% in 2006, for sure.

Right now the limiting factor is the cost of upgrading, and the networks are doing so as fast as they can. Right now I'm plunking down my extra $10 a month to subsidize ESPN upgrading the 80 trucks they have out covering sporting events on any given weekend.


Sheeze, all the major sport events are HD, ditto most of the prime-time programing. HD replacing analog SD is unstoppable as the tide coming in. I do sort of feel bad for my two eighty year old neighbors that have no cable, no satelite, and are still watching 5 channels on black and white tvs. They're just going to have to figure out that I can install a digital- analog converter on their sets, and nothing's going to change.
hoorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2005, 03:04 PM   #27  
My plasma is High Def.
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8
Default Discussion Reminiscent of the old FM versus AM debate

I've read this discussion about the viability of HDTV in the broadcasting market with great interest. It reminds one of a similar discussion regarding the upstart FM radio in a sea of AM stations back in the late 1940s and early 50s. In spite of the proven audio superiority of FM over AM radio, the detractors of FM weighed in with arguments that FM was limited by line-of-sight transmission; AM could bounce off the ionosphere to cover far greater distances. One radio executive even demanded that an FM signal generator be removed from the Empire State Building!
Who would buy an FM radio without any programming? And so the debate went on. Back in late 1940s and early 50s, I used to hear Cleveland, Ohio, radio stations ID themselves as AM and FM, but it meant nothing to a 12 year-old. I recall responding to "What station is it on?" with the FM numbers for what was really an AM station! A junior high school English and history teacher clarified the whole thing for us.
I was able to repair the FM section of an old RCA Victor console cabinet that our family owned. We marvelled at the quality of the sound.
Broadcasters often simulcasted their AM shows on their FM outlet as well, and many continued to do so until the early 1960s. Many of them had no idea what to do with FM. It's the same today: some TV stations simply port their standard video signal to their HDTV channel without any increase in video quality.
If the AM signal was broadcast with dynamic compression, and they almost always were, it meant the difference between soft and loud was reduced to minimal. Compression permitted stations to sound relatively loud to listeners tuning the radio dial. Furthermore, many broadcasters would additionally use limiters to avoid overmodulation, thereby avoiding interference with other stations or angering the FCC. Under such circumstances, FM often sounded as lo-fi as AM. With pop, country, and rhythm and blues, the stations didn't think the listening public cared about the quality of the sound. Perhaps they didn't. But the dynamic range of jazz and classical music was lost with compression. Yet even on rhythm and blues broadcasts, with any extended silence in the music, anyone could hear the hiss of that compressor hopelessly trying to equalize silence with 100 dB modulation!
Shortly thereafter FM (in the late 50s with stereo) came into its own relegating AM to much smaller presence.
Forgive the long discussion, but the current debate on the economic viability of HDTV vis-a-vis STV brings to mind what has gone on before. My wife and I are in our sixties and we have embraced HDTV with a 60-inch Hitachi LCD rear projector.
As HDTV matures and takes its place in more and more homes, it too, will be supplanted, not necessarily by greater numbers of resolution yielding diminishing returns to eyes unable to perceive such detail, but perhaps by three-dimensional holographic HDTV for which enitre walls may be needed to emerse us in the spectacle. And it will be wonderful.
rreid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2005, 03:57 PM   #28  
It' Acually Sneeky1
 
snekky1's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Chicago
Age: 50
Posts: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbs1333
why waste your time and money as reported in http://www.digitalhomecanada.com/ind...=292&Itemid=53

hdtv is dying soon to be on life support
manufacturers putting out 1080p support is simply a cash grab scam supports the report on DHC. Why buy a 1080p when there is no and never will be any 1080p programming.
We will need to rely on CRTC to save HD well good luck sucker.
Disappointing, SD is for the simpleton's of the world and there are just too many.

Anyone notice how this study was conducted in Canada and not North America?
snekky1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2005, 06:01 PM   #29  
Mr. Wizard
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ferndale, Michigan
Age: 71
Posts: 5,981
Default

And where do you think Canada is located? Land of Mu?
RSawdey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2005, 10:37 PM   #30  
'The Architect'
 
retorq's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mohave County
Age: 42
Posts: 567
Default

Quote:
Anyone notice how this study was conducted in Canada and not North America?
Ummmmm . . . I can not belive I just read that.
retorq is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:34 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands