OT: Paging the TV geeks

[Champ]

Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?

http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

It matches my requirements thus
- 37" (right size for my room)
- PC input
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')
- lots of inputs
- under 500 quid

So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

[Dr Zoidberg]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U
It matches my requirements thus
- 37" (right size for my room)
- PC input
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')
- lots of inputs
- under 500 quid
So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

Seems reasonable to me , but ask for them to demo it with something other
than "Monsters Inc" or "Ice Age" to see what the picture's like

[wessie]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

It's silver

[Des]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

i) it'll have been made with 'slave labour' in Taiwan by an
eleven-year-old boy forced to work 18 hours a day to buy a bowl of rice

ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

iii) you don't need it.

HTH.

D.

[Pip Luscher]

Post by Des

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

i) it'll have been made with 'slave labour' in Taiwan by an
eleven-year-old boy forced to work 18 hours a day to buy a bowl of rice

More likely in China by a fifteen year old girl who was moved from
another part of China, gets to live in a cramped dormitory, but who at
least gets to eat at a staff canteen. Still paid a pittance and may
well get scanned as she leaves the factory (I've even seen engineers
being scanned as they leave the production area).

Still not brilliant, I'll grant you, but possibly better than any
current alternative.

Post by Des
ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is. Dunno about the others.

[ginge]

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

[Pip Luscher]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:13:28 -0000, ginge

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

That's the puppy.

[Des]

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

That sounds like a date-rape drug ..

D.

[platypus]

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

[ginge]

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

No thanks, I just had some port.

[doetnietcomputeren]

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

Removal of hazardous substances, which along with the amusingly acronymd
WEEE regulations was a major pain in the arse for all electronics
manufacturers a few years back.

[platypus]

Post by doetnietcomputeren

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard,
though I forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

Removal of hazardous substances, which along with the amusingly
acronymd WEEE regulations was a major pain in the arse for all
electronics manufacturers a few years back.

Parisian airport?

[doetnietcomputeren]

Post by platypus

Post by doetnietcomputeren

Post by platypus

RoHS

Rohypnol?

Removal of hazardous substances, which along with the amusingly
acronymd WEEE regulations was a major pain in the arse for all
electronics manufacturers a few years back.

Parisian airport?

Almost, you're thinking of the smell at CDG.

[platypus]

Post by doetnietcomputeren

Post by platypus

Post by doetnietcomputeren

Post by platypus

RoHS

Rohypnol?

Removal of hazardous substances, which along with the amusingly
acronymd WEEE regulations was a major pain in the arse for all
electronics manufacturers a few years back.

Parisian airport?

Almost, you're thinking of the smell at CDG.

O rly?

[Cab]

Post by doetnietcomputeren

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard,
though I forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

Removal of hazardous substances, which along with the amusingly

^^^^^^^

Restriction, ITYF.

[Des]

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

D.

[Eiron]

Post by Des

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

[Des]

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by platypus

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

Rohypnol?

'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

D.

[ginge]

Post by Des

Post by Eiron
Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Popular guy.

[Eiron]

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

[Des]

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

D.

[Cane]

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

an i-IQ

[darsy]

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

--
d.

[Cane]

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

[ginge]

In article <64161b2a-4516-4e9f-8205-

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

Sorry about that. I borrowed it to jot down your mistakes on, as I'd
run out of note paper.

[Cane]

Post by ginge

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

Sorry about that. I borrowed it to jot down your mistakes on, as I'd
run out of note paper.

heh,

Actually, my Mum is a member of MENSA.

[darsy]

Post by Cane

Post by ginge

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

Sorry about that. I borrowed it to jot down your mistakes on, as I'd
run out of note paper.

heh,
Actually, my Mum is a member of MENSA.

and you can't even get into DENSA.

--
d.

[Cane]

Post by darsy

Post by Cane

Post by ginge

Post by Cane
It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

Sorry about that. I borrowed it to jot down your mistakes on, as I'd
run out of note paper.

heh,
Actually, my Mum is a member of MENSA.

and you can't even get into DENSA.

I'm on the board.

[Des]

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

<loud snoring noise from Paris ...>

D.

[darsy]

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

was Gower there at the same time?

--
d.

[Cane]

Post by darsy

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

was Gower there at the same time?

That's who nicked it!

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

Post by Cane

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

It's me ....but my certificate was taken from my desk when I was
consulting at CERN

<listens for distant boom>

Oh, right. Nasty things, black holes.

[ogden]

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

I scored 4 less. It was a long time ago though, and I've had a lot of
booze since.

[Des]

Post by ogden

Post by darsy

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

not me, for sure. Last time I had it tested, I scored 8 less than
that.

I scored 4 less. It was a long time ago though, and I've had a lot of
booze since.

LOL!!

Well, there's the proof: IQ has _fuck_all_ to do with intelligence.

D.

[steve auvache]

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few who
would be on that list as it goes.

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

Post by steve auvache

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few who
would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was _much_ younger.

[Des]

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid

Post by steve auvache

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des

Post by Eiron

Post by Des
'and in other news, UKRM is still reeling as their 'most intelligent man'
is ginged by the _real_ holder of the title ...'

Where's your certificate from Mensa then Des?
You must present some evidence in order to claim the title.

By your logic, I don't have a BA either, as I no longer have the
certificate (it was stolen from my desk in 1997 when I worked at
Club-Internet).

Your logic lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
You also need to boost your IQ by at least thirty points to stand
any chance of being the most intelligenet gent here.

Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an accurate or
reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few who
would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was _much_ younger.

'Des starts a willy-waving subthread on UKRM!'

What a glorious end to 2007 ...

D.

[Simian]

Post by steve auvache

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an
accurate or reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker
here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few
who would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was much younger.

Heh, actually, that reminds me[2].

When I was quite young - too young to do the "what number comes next in
the sequence" type of question - I was given a series of kiddy IQ
tests. Things like reading ability and matching coloured blocks and
stuff like that. These gave me some surprisingly high IQ score.

Later, when I could take more normal looking but still child versions
of IQ tests, I got much lower scores, that are still much higher than
the scores I got when I moved on to the proper adult tests[1].

Either I've become much stupider over the years, or child IQ tests
are/were a bunch of arse that don't/didn't take into account different
developmental rates.

Or they could work on a different scale, I suppose.


[1] I spent a lot of time being tested at various schools as they tried
to work out what combination of stupid / dyslexic / lazy I was.

[2] New years eve sucks when you have to look after the baby.

[ginge]

In article <***@news.supernews.com>, ***@in_valid.semi-
evolved.org says...

Post by Simian
[1] I spent a lot of time being tested at various schools as they tried
to work out what combination of stupid / dyslexic / lazy I was.

Me too - with similar results.

I was the didn't want to learn their stuff as it wasn't interesting
combination, which stumped them a bit.. and me too, as I still struggle
to focus on anything that doesn't interest me.

[muddy cat]

Post by ginge
evolved.org says...

Post by Simian
[1] I spent a lot of time being tested at various schools as they tried
to work out what combination of stupid / dyslexic / lazy I was.

Me too - with similar results.
I was the didn't want to learn their stuff as it wasn't interesting
combination, which stumped them a bit.. and me too, as I still struggle
to focus on anything that doesn't interest me.

Ditto. I was crap in schools from age 5 to 17 and barely graduated. In
the military schools for blowing things up I was always at the top of
class.

[Tosspot]

Post by muddy cat

Post by ginge
evolved.org says...

Post by Simian
[1] I spent a lot of time being tested at various schools as they tried
to work out what combination of stupid / dyslexic / lazy I was.

Me too - with similar results.
I was the didn't want to learn their stuff as it wasn't interesting
combination, which stumped them a bit.. and me too, as I still struggle
to focus on anything that doesn't interest me.

Ditto. I was crap in schools from age 5 to 17 and barely graduated. In
the military schools for blowing things up I was always at the top of
class.

Why don't they offer that at state run schools? Would push up the
education figures I've no doubt.

[Beelzebub]

Post by Tosspot

Post by muddy cat
Ditto. I was crap in schools from age 5 to 17 and barely graduated. In
the military schools for blowing things up I was always at the top of
class.

Why don't they offer that at state run schools? Would push up the
education figures I've no doubt.

Ours did. It was called 'chemistry'.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

Post by Tosspot

Post by muddy cat
In
the military schools for blowing things up I was always at the top of
class.

Why don't they offer that at state run schools? Would push up the
education figures I've no doubt.

Would raise/raze the educational establishments too, I've no doubt.

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

Post by Simian

Post by steve auvache

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an
accurate or reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker
here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few
who would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was much younger.

Heh, actually, that reminds me[2].
When I was quite young - too young to do the "what number comes next in
the sequence" type of question - I was given a series of kiddy IQ
tests. Things like reading ability and matching coloured blocks and
stuff like that. These gave me some surprisingly high IQ score.
Later, when I could take more normal looking but still child versions
of IQ tests, I got much lower scores, that are still much higher than
the scores I got when I moved on to the proper adult tests[1].

Yes, in primary school where they used questions like "repeat these
numbers backwards" and so forth, they always ran off the end of their question
list without finding a limit.

Post by Simian
Either I've become much stupider over the years, or child IQ tests
are/were a bunch of arse that don't/didn't take into account different
developmental rates.
Or they could work on a different scale, I suppose.

AFAIR, they are supposed to be scaled from your age to, I think, 15
years old. Once you're over that age there's no scaling, WYSIWYG.

[steve auvache]

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid

Post by Simian

Post by steve auvache

Post by Des
Well leaving aside the fact that 'IQ' is not necessarily an
accurate or reasonable gauge of intelligence, tell me what fucker
here has an IQ =>182.

Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few
who would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was much younger.

Heh, actually, that reminds me[2].
When I was quite young - too young to do the "what number comes next in
the sequence" type of question - I was given a series of kiddy IQ
tests. Things like reading ability and matching coloured blocks and
stuff like that. These gave me some surprisingly high IQ score.
Later, when I could take more normal looking but still child versions
of IQ tests, I got much lower scores, that are still much higher than
the scores I got when I moved on to the proper adult tests[1].

Yes, in primary school where they used questions like "repeat these
numbers backwards" and so forth, they always ran off the end of their question
list without finding a limit.

The fuckers put me up a year on the basis of my sums when I was 9. The
daft part is that subsequently the LA wouldn't hear their pleas and I
didn't get to go to Very Big School at 10 but repeated the last year of
juniors twice. That always struck me as fundamentally a bad thing to do
to a bright kid but they never saw it way and it was about then that it
was documented that I started having difficulties with authority.

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

Post by steve auvache

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid
Yes, in primary school where they used questions like "repeat these
numbers backwards" and so forth, they always ran off the end of their question
list without finding a limit.

The fuckers put me up a year on the basis of my sums when I was 9. The
daft part is that subsequently the LA wouldn't hear their pleas and I
didn't get to go to Very Big School at 10 but repeated the last year of
juniors twice. That always struck me as fundamentally a bad thing to do
to a bright kid but they never saw it way and it was about then that it
was documented that I started having difficulties with authority.

I got put up from Kindergarten to 1st Class when the teacher found
out I could read (my brother used to teach me what he'd learnt when he
came home the previous year). Me, brother, and another chap ended up
finishing the 6th Class curriculum while we were still officially in 5th
(school had gone from one teacher to two, then back to one in the meantime),
so we repeated the curriculum again the next year. Then we moved into
Byron Bay and they wouldn't let me go to high school in Mullumbimby because
I was too young (11y3mo instead of 11y5mo IIRC), so I did 6th Class again
in Byron Bay. That was about when my brother started having difficulties
with authority.

[steve auvache]

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid

Post by steve auvache

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid
Yes, in primary school where they used questions like "repeat these
numbers backwards" and so forth, they always ran off the end of their question
list without finding a limit.

The fuckers put me up a year on the basis of my sums when I was 9. The
daft part is that subsequently the LA wouldn't hear their pleas and I
didn't get to go to Very Big School at 10 but repeated the last year of
juniors twice. That always struck me as fundamentally a bad thing to do
to a bright kid but they never saw it way and it was about then that it
was documented that I started having difficulties with authority.

I got put up from Kindergarten to 1st Class when the teacher found
out I could read (my brother used to teach me what he'd learnt when he
came home the previous year). Me, brother, and another chap ended up
finishing the 6th Class curriculum while we were still officially in 5th
(school had gone from one teacher to two, then back to one in the meantime),
so we repeated the curriculum again the next year. Then we moved into
Byron Bay and they wouldn't let me go to high school in Mullumbimby because
I was too young (11y3mo instead of 11y5mo IIRC), so I did 6th Class again
in Byron Bay. That was about when my brother started having difficulties
with authority.

And the educational professionals still insist they are the best placed
to give what is right to our kids.

[b***@gmail.com]

The fuckers put me up a year on the basis of my sums when I was 9.  The
daft part is that subsequently the LA wouldn't hear their pleas and I
didn't get to go to Very Big School at 10 but repeated the last year of
juniors twice.

Same happened to me. Total shit.

 That always struck me as fundamentally a bad thing to do
to a bright kid but they never saw it way and it was about then that it
was documented that I started having difficulties with authority.

Funnily enough...

[ginge]

In article <af267630-14fe-421f-9395-206b1c688421
@v32g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, ***@gmail.com says...

Post by b***@gmail.com

The fuckers put me up a year on the basis of my sums when I was 9.  The
daft part is that subsequently the LA wouldn't hear their pleas and I
didn't get to go to Very Big School at 10 but repeated the last year of
juniors twice.

Same happened to me. Total shit.

Our school had the option of taking a couple of intermediate GSCE papers
a year early (allowing a maximum C grade), with a view that the
following year we'd all be good students and take the advanced version
of the paper to jump up to an A*, or whatever the deal was.

Backfire - I only needed C grades to get on chosen my course, so didn't
bother doing *any* revision for the exams I'd already got C's in.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Dr Ivan D. Reid"

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid

Post by steve auvache
Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few who
would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was _much_ younger.

I think that's often the case - youthful shallow raw intelligence
gradually gets augmented with experience and cunning, not replaced as
such.

[Simian]

Post by Grimly Curmudgeon
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Dr Ivan D. Reid"

Post by steve auvache
Those who have IQs 30 points better than me? I can think of a few

who >> would be on that list as it goes.

Not me; best I did was 181 when I was much younger.

I think that's often the case - youthful shallow raw intelligence
gradually gets augmented with experience and cunning, not replaced as
such.

At one point, I was fairly sure that as a child I used to be much
brighter than I am now, but the it occurred to me that as a child I was
surrounded by a simple random selection of children, and as an adult,
I'm surrounded by a set of adults carefully selected to be much
brighter than I am.

[ginge]

In article <***@news.supernews.com>, ***@in_valid.semi-
evolved.org says...

Post by Simian
At one point, I was fairly sure that as a child I used to be much
brighter than I am now, but the it occurred to me that as a child I was
surrounded by a simple random selection of children, and as an adult,
I'm surrounded by a set of adults carefully selected to be much
brighter than I am.

I'm finding the reverse, but maybe I've just spent too much time dealing
with idiots.

[muddy cat]

Post by ginge
evolved.org says...

Post by Simian
At one point, I was fairly sure that as a child I used to be much
brighter than I am now, but the it occurred to me that as a child I was
surrounded by a simple random selection of children, and as an adult,
I'm surrounded by a set of adults carefully selected to be much
brighter than I am.

I'm finding the reverse, but maybe I've just spent too much time dealing
with idiots.

I think simian was referring to friends and not co-workers.

[Rick]

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is.

RoHS

[geoff]

Post by Pip Luscher

Post by Des

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

i) it'll have been made with 'slave labour' in Taiwan by an
eleven-year-old boy forced to work 18 hours a day to buy a bowl of rice

More likely in China by a fifteen year old girl who was moved from
another part of China, gets to live in a cramped dormitory, but who at
least gets to eat at a staff canteen. Still paid a pittance and may
well get scanned as she leaves the factory (I've even seen engineers
being scanned as they leave the production area).
Still not brilliant, I'll grant you, but possibly better than any
current alternative.

Post by Des
ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is. Dunno about the others.

WEEE ?

[geoff]

In message <***@ntlworld.com>, geoff <***@kateda.org>
writes

Post by geoff

Post by Pip Luscher

Post by Des

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-

i) it'll have been made with 'slave labour' in Taiwan by an
eleven-year-old boy forced to work 18 hours a day to buy a bowl of rice

More likely in China by a fifteen year old girl who was moved from
another part of China, gets to live in a cramped dormitory, but who at
least gets to eat at a staff canteen. Still paid a pittance and may
well get scanned as she leaves the factory (I've even seen engineers
being scanned as they leave the production area).
Still not brilliant, I'll grant you, but possibly better than any
current alternative.

Post by Des
ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is. Dunno about the others.

WEEE ?

I read that as euro-standard ...

[ogden]

Post by geoff

Post by Pip Luscher
Lead is used less often these days: there's an eco-standard, though I
forget what the abbreviation is. Dunno about the others.

WEEE ?

That's disposal, not manufacturing. Restriction of Hazardous Substances
is, as Pip has observed, the puppy.

[Domènec]

Post by Des

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

In Dagoland as of this year all sort of appliances pay a tax of a few euros
for their future recycling. Sellers of such appliances and recycling
companies have stablished some ways of cooperation, as it is good business
for all.

Post by Des
iii) you don't need it.

This can apply to 90% of the features in a Mac.

[Des]

Post by Domènec

Post by Des

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

ii) it's made of components that when you get bored in a few years and go
looking for a newer toy, will find their way into some landpit somewhere
and go on leaking lead, cadmium and selenium (<fx: crosses fingers>) into
the earth for the next five hundred years.

In Dagoland as of this year all sort of appliances pay a tax of a few euros
for their future recycling. Sellers of such appliances and recycling
companies have stablished some ways of cooperation, as it is good business
for all.

Yeah, we have that too. Something like a few centimes per hundred euros or
something similar.

Post by Domènec

Post by Des
iii) you don't need it.

This can apply to 90% of the features in a Mac.

'They'll take my Mac from me when they pry it from ...' etc.

D.

[Simian]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L
37V01U

Nonewhatsoever.

Go and have a play with in store, and if you like it, it'll be fine.

As with all LCDs, you'll have to play with the settings to get it to
display a nice picture, because it won't out of the box.


<anti-sweller>

It's a credit to capitalism that prices for that quality of set have
dropped 60% in the last 18 months.

</>

[Domènec]

Post by Simian
It's a credit to capitalism that prices for that quality of set have
dropped 60% in the last 18 months.

After buying a 700 EUR 1.3 megapixel camera in '99 and a 1400 EUR 5.0
megapixel camera in '01 I decided to buy whatever could be afforded at less
than 250 EUR, and happy I am. Same applies to home cinema, 1200 EUR spent in
'02 and DVD player part was replaced by a 44 EUR pikey player that *does*
play all sort of modern formats.

[Simian]

Post by Domènec

Post by Simian
It's a credit to capitalism that prices for that quality of set have
dropped 60% in the last 18 months.

After buying a 700 EUR 1.3 megapixel camera in '99 and a 1400 EUR 5.0
megapixel camera in '01 I decided to buy whatever could be afforded
at less than 250 EUR, and happy I am. Same applies to home cinema,
1200 EUR spent in '02 and DVD player part was replaced by a 44 EUR
pikey player that does play all sort of modern formats.

Yeah, I bought A. a TOTR compact digital camera 3 years ago - yesterday
I bought her mum (who's painting our house) a smaller, faster, more
featureful, and all round better mid-range camera (ixus 70) for less
than half the price.


However, the 'credit to capitalism' comment was sort of a joke on
sweller's stated belief in The End Of The Capitalist System Due To Lack
Of Near Slave Labour Economies. There's probably a snappier name.

[Domènec]

Post by Simian
However, the 'credit to capitalism' comment was sort of a joke on
sweller's stated belief in The End Of The Capitalist System Due To Lack
Of Near Slave Labour Economies. There's probably a snappier name.

Sounds interesting.

[Ferger]

Post by Champ
So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=675582

Might be worth keeping an eye on. But strikes me as a very good price, I'd
want to see it with fast moving action from a 1080P source though -
particularly sport.

I also think you can get hung up on 720P or 1080P/I - they all look pretty
fantastic. But I went the plasma route - and I'm still not personally
convinced that LCDs can provide the quality of image of a decent plasma at
these kind of sizes. I've seen a few branded LCDs this year that really
don't compare...

[ogden]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U

Get thee behind me, satan!

[Pip]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U
It matches my requirements thus
- 37" (right size for my room)
- PC input
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')
- lots of inputs
- under 500 quid
So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

You can't really go wrong for that price.

There's the full complement of inputs and it is capable of the highest
of HD picture.

I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel ('cos the black bezel on ours 'disappears' when we're watching
in the evenings, so there's no intrusion on the periphery) - oh, and
it isn't a plasma. I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

For that money, it's hard to resist. You might want to buy something
that'll give you a full HD output, though - MM2 from the new Blu-Ray
remaster looks *fucking stunning* played on the PS3, for example.

[Ferger]

Post by Pip
There's the full complement of inputs and it is capable of the highest
of HD picture.

I'm beginning to think that 2 HDMIs is a bare minimum, rather than full
complement...

Post by Pip
I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

*ding* Ginge, even :-)

[Pip]

Post by Ferger

Post by Pip
There's the full complement of inputs and it is capable of the highest
of HD picture.

I'm beginning to think that 2 HDMIs is a bare minimum, rather than full
complement...

One reason I went another ~300 quid on mine was the provision of a
third HDMI input - even though, at time of purchase I didn't have
anything with an HDMI output on it. Two are now occupied (PS£ (that's
a typo worth leaving in ;-)) and V+ cable box). Problem is, my amp
only has two usable digital inputs, so that's going to be another
grand at some point.

Post by Ferger

Post by Pip
I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

*ding* Ginge, even :-)

I was condoning your point of view, not reiterating your wibble, man.
I did look askance at the first TV shop-employed spotty geeky yoof
that put forward the pro-plasma POV, but by the third shop I had to
admit he was right. And yes, the boys in John Lewis, for one, had
fiddled with the out-of-the-box settings on the LCD sets.

LCD for monitors, plasma for tellies.

[Ferger]

Post by Pip
LCD for monitors, plasma for tellies.

That's much where I am.

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

Post by Ferger

Post by Pip
LCD for monitors, plasma for tellies.

That's much where I am.

This'll be why people like Fujitsu are ceasing plasma production, then?

[Ferger]

Post by Dr Ivan D. Reid

Post by Ferger

Post by Pip
LCD for monitors, plasma for tellies.

That's much where I am.

This'll be why people like Fujitsu are ceasing plasma production, then?

Lots of manufacturers have ceased plasma production. This doesn't offer
any evidence to contradict my beliefs about the picture quality,
particularly at large sizes. It's well acknowledged that Betamax was a
better technology than VHS....

[Champ]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:39:30 +0000, Pip

Post by Pip
You can't really go wrong for that price.

Well, that's what I was thinking. I was buggered if I was going to
spend a grand or even two on a telly while the technology was still
fluctuating so much, but 500 is much easier to wear. You have to jump
sooner or later.

Post by Pip
I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel ('cos the black bezel on ours 'disappears' when we're watching
in the evenings, so there's no intrusion on the periphery) - oh, and
it isn't a plasma. I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines. But I hear what you're saying about plasma - some viewing
reqd, perhaps. Maybe I should consider this one:
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-42PD8700

[Colin Irvine]

Post by Champ
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:39:30 +0000, Pip

Post by Pip
You can't really go wrong for that price.

Well, that's what I was thinking. I was buggered if I was going to
spend a grand or even two on a telly while the technology was still
fluctuating so much, but 500 is much easier to wear. You have to jump
sooner or later.

Post by Pip
I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel ('cos the black bezel on ours 'disappears' when we're watching
in the evenings, so there's no intrusion on the periphery) - oh, and
it isn't a plasma. I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines. But I hear what you're saying about plasma - some viewing
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-42PD8700

Would you not be looking for 1920x1080?

[ginge]

Post by Champ
Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines.

My sofa is 8 feet from my 40" sony, and I reckon that it's pretty much
the ideal size.

[Simian]

Post by Champ
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:39:30 +0000, Pip

Post by Pip
I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel

Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines.

I sit about 6 feet from my 37" screen, and I reckon that's about
perfect. At your 11'6" from the screen, you'd need a 60" set for the
same effect (though that would tend to dominate the room).

I'd go for 42" if I were you.

[Mr. Fantastic]

Post by Champ
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:39:30 +0000, Pip

Post by Pip
I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel ('cos the black bezel on ours 'disappears' when we're watching
in the evenings, so there's no intrusion on the periphery) - oh, and
it isn't a plasma.  I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines.  But I hear what you're saying about plasma - some viewing
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-...

Ah, I see you've found the slippery slope.

;-)

--
Mr. Fantastic
R1

[Ferger]

Post by Champ
My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines.

<Gets out measuring tape in interests of science>

3.8m from eye to screen. 42" is more than OK, often wonder whether I
should have gone for 50"

37" will look tiny, and you'll hate yourself.

[Pip]

Post by Ferger

Post by Champ
My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines.

<Gets out measuring tape in interests of science>
3.8m from eye to screen. 42" is more than OK, often wonder whether I
should have gone for 50"

I was looking at a 46" LCD to start with, on a bang-per-buck basis.
Once we started looking, I realised that plasma was capable of better
pictures, and Elly convinced me that size matters. So, 50" it was.

With the rather odd room/sofa constraints, min distance is 2.5m, max
~4m eye to screen. Halfway down the sofa you'd find the sweet spot
for the audio accompaniment at about 3m. The screen fills the vision
just about perfectly and absorption is guaranteed - even with chick
flicks, ffs.

Post by Ferger
37" will look tiny, and you'll hate yourself.

I hate to agree with you again ... but one does get used to things
quickly. I remember my old 28" looked big, once. Then the 32" wide -
well, it was big for its time. The 50" dominated the room for the
first couple of days, but once I'd watched it from the patio (when out
for a fag) a couple fo times it sort of shrank.

Nothing to compare with it for the wow factor for visitors, though.
Elly had the girls round for wine and crap films one night and it was
difficult to shift the buggers.

[ogden]

Post by Champ
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:39:30 +0000, Pip

Post by Pip
You can't really go wrong for that price.

Well, that's what I was thinking. I was buggered if I was going to
spend a grand or even two on a telly while the technology was still
fluctuating so much, but 500 is much easier to wear. You have to jump
sooner or later.

Post by Pip
I'd say that it isn't big enough and that it really needs a black
bezel ('cos the black bezel on ours 'disappears' when we're watching
in the evenings, so there's no intrusion on the periphery) - oh, and
it isn't a plasma. I'm still convinced, after a good deal of hands-on
research, that plasma screens have a warmer and more natural picture.

Uh huh. My sofa is really no more than 3.5m from the telly, so 37" is
about the right size, thi I guess 42" might just squeeze into the
guidelines. But I hear what you're saying about plasma - some viewing
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-42PD8700

It's just a means to display moving pictures. The only people who care
are AV-geeks or people who value the quality of picture over content.

Think Citizen Kane is going to look any better in HD? The French
Connection? Seventh Seal?

Look at cream of the AFI's top 100 movies:

Citizen Kane (1941)
Casablanca (1942)
The Godfather (1972)
Gone with the Wind (1939)
Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
The Graduate (1967)
On the Waterfront (1954)
Schindler's List (1993)
Singin' in the Rain (1952)

Mostly shot on donkeys-years old film stock and wouldn't look much
worse if you had advanced cataracts but who cares? If the pin-sharp
quality of the video matters that much to you, you're watching the
wrong movie.

Pick up a decent 32" CRT off Ebay for 50 quid, job done. Spend the
rest on look-faster bits for the race bike. The only people likely to
care about the difference are blokes, and when was the last time you
tried to fuck one of them?

[Ferger]

Post by ogden
Mostly shot on donkeys-years old film stock and wouldn't look much
worse if you had advanced cataracts but who cares?

Film stock lasts years longer than any of your examples if handled
properly, and a good digital remaster for HD will look infinitely better
than the current crop of SD DVDs. Given the significance of the films,
it's quite inevitable that a good remaster will exist in the very near
future, if it doesn't already. 35 or 70mm film is shot at a much higher
effective resolution than 1080 - or, at least, it will be resampled to
match an HD output. And this says nothing of framerate - which will be
lower than the native fps of your TV (and that's a generalisation, since
the two don't equate in a direct way), throwing further mud in the water.

There is already a highly lauded HD remaster of Citizen Cane. Probably all
the others in your list too. The relationship between celluloid / format /
pulldown and digital resolution - distant though it is - is far too complex
to dismiss in this way. You don't need to be an AV geek to appreciate the
benefits of good HD presentation, although you might to understand why.

And, of course, much modern TV and film is shot in a digital format in the
first place - where the benefits are much clearer in any case.

[Mark Olson]

Post by Ferger
There is already a highly lauded HD remaster of Citizen Cane. Probably all

Who knew Crystal Palace would have such a following?

[Ferger]

Post by Mark Olson

Post by Ferger
There is already a highly lauded HD remaster of Citizen Cane.
Probably all

Who knew Crystal Palace would have such a following?

Heh. Typo caused by some complex psychological interaction with members of
UKRM

[Gyp]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-L37V01U
It matches my requirements thus
- 37" (right size for my room)
- PC input
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')
- lots of inputs
- under 500 quid
So, who's going to be first to complete baffle me with technical
bullshit>

The one rule I've got from buying LCD screens, is look at it lying on
the floor.

Up and down viewing angles are often poor, and the TV may be unwatchable
if you're a child.

[Ferger]

Post by Gyp
Up and down viewing angles are often poor, and the TV may be unwatchable
if you're a child.

This doesn't matter in my house: The decent TV is in the decent room with
the decent AV equipment, decent furniture and decent child-free ambience.
The kids can watch telly in the playroom on their perfectly adequate 32"
CRT and NEVER, EVER TOUCH MY FUCKING PLASMA.

[ogden]

Post by Ferger

Post by Gyp
Up and down viewing angles are often poor, and the TV may be unwatchable
if you're a child.

This doesn't matter in my house: The decent TV is in the decent room with
the decent AV equipment, decent furniture and decent child-free ambience.
The kids can watch telly in the playroom on their perfectly adequate 32"
CRT and NEVER, EVER TOUCH MY FUCKING PLASMA.

Christ, I bet you're a barrel of laugh at parties.

[wessie]

Post by ogden

Post by Ferger

Post by Gyp
Up and down viewing angles are often poor, and the TV may be
unwatchable if you're a child.

This doesn't matter in my house: The decent TV is in the decent room
with the decent AV equipment, decent furniture and decent child-free
ambience. The kids can watch telly in the playroom on their perfectly
adequate 32" CRT and NEVER, EVER TOUCH MY FUCKING PLASMA.

Christ, I bet you're a barrel of laugh at parties.

His idea of a party is him, the plasma and a case of Laithwaites'.

I'm having something similar now, except I've invited some brie

[ogden]

Post by ogden

Post by Ferger
This doesn't matter in my house: The decent TV is in the decent room
with the decent AV equipment, decent furniture and decent child-free
ambience. The kids can watch telly in the playroom on their perfectly
adequate 32" CRT and NEVER, EVER TOUCH MY FUCKING PLASMA.

Christ, I bet you're a barrel of laugh at parties.

His idea of a party is him, the plasma and a case of Liquid Silk
I'm having something similar now, except I've invited some brie

Kinky time.

[Ferger]

Post by wessie
His idea of a party is him, the plasma and a case of Laithwaites'.

Well, no...

Post by wessie
I'm having something similar now, except I've invited some brie

Oh. As you were.

[Ferger]

Post by ogden

Post by Ferger
This doesn't matter in my house: The decent TV is in the decent room
with the decent AV equipment, decent furniture and decent child-free
ambience. The kids can watch telly in the playroom on their perfectly
adequate 32" CRT and NEVER, EVER TOUCH MY FUCKING PLASMA.

Christ, I bet you're a barrel of laugh at parties.

Have you ever watched a child feed a pitta-bread into the DVD player? Or
wipe houmoussy fingers over the TV screen? Or trip over the cables at the
back of an amplifier whilst searching for the last flying fish that came
out of Wally the Whale, consigning you to three hours of recabling?

It's better this way, believe me: There are 10 rooms in this house - you
can do what you like in 9, the other is Mummy and Daddy's....

[darsy]

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?
http://www.richersounds.com/showproduct.php?cda=showproduct&pid=HITA-...

I'll only back up what most others have said: don't like the silver,
and it's only 37". Really, we sit around 3.5m from our 42" and I still
think we should have gone for the 47". Of course, I mostly watch
movies rather than TV shows, and so I am looking for that "big screen"
feel. If you mostly watch the news, a smaller screen will be fine.

Then again, I was in a "Sony Centre" yesterday and they had a 60"
Plasma. It really was offensively huge and imposing - at that sort of
size, I think you'd be better of considering a projector and screen.

As for LCD -v- Plasma, some people feel plasma is better because it's
"warmer", I am of the opinion that "warmer" is a euphemism for
"blurred but brighter". As long as you take the time to set up an LCD,
IMO, it'll look better, clearer, and just "nicer" than Plasma. As
Simian said though, it won't look right out-of-the-box, because a lot
of factors (room ambient lighting, viewing angle) make a difference.

Without wanting to upset Ferger, yes, a Plasma showing a blockbuster
action movie might look better than an incorrectly set up LCD, but
compare static content and you'll see that LCD is crisper.

--
d.

[Ferger]

Post by darsy
Without wanting to upset Ferger, yes, a Plasma showing a blockbuster
action movie might look better than an incorrectly set up LCD, but
compare static content and you'll see that LCD is crisper.

Oh, I think this is undoubtedly true - but I spent a lot of time doing
comparisons of moving pictures when I first though about going the flat
route, and found plasma in the larger screens generally gave a more
convincing image. And certainly better blacks than any LCD could muster at
the time, although this was over a year ago. 'Crispness' in static images
is not really a measure of what I spend my time looking at :-)

I'm not some plasma evangelist - I have two LCDs in this place as well.

[Bear]

In article Champ said ...

Post by Champ
Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't buy this?

Too small.

Too silver.

Too Hitachi [1]

[1] purely a personal dislike

[simonk]

Post by Champ
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')

Spend your money on a set that will display 720p well. Native 1080p is a
waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point. Unless you have a
1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse shit).

[Simian]

Post by simonk

Post by Champ
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')

Spend your money on a set that will display 720p well.

Most 1080p sets will display it just fine; a decent 1.5 up-convert is
relatively trivial.

Most 720p sets are 1366x768 and overscan like a bastard giving you a
'true' 700p displayed on 768p picture.

Post by simonk
Native 1080p
is a waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point. Unless
you have a 1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse
shit).

Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

[darsy]

Post by Simian

Post by simonk

Post by Champ
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')

Spend your money on a set that will display 720p well.

Most 1080p sets will display it just fine; a decent 1.5 up-convert is
relatively trivial.
Most 720p sets are 1366x768 and overscan like a bastard giving you a
'true' 700p displayed on 768p picture.

Post by simonk
Native 1080p
is a waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point.  Unless
you have a 1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse
shit).

Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

I'm sure there's a comment to be made here about grannies and sucking
eggs.

Oh wait, that remark of mine was based on Simon working "in the
industry", and so might know what he's talking about, but then I
remembered who he works for these days.

I take it back.

--
d.

[simonk]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:20:01 +0000, darsy wrote
(in article

Post by darsy

Post by Simian
Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

I'm sure there's a comment to be made here about grannies and sucking
eggs.
Oh wait, that remark of mine was based on Simon working "in the
industry", and so might know what he's talking about, but then I
remembered who he works for these days.

Heh.

Seriously though - there are supply constraints on delivery capacity and
probably will be for a good few years yet (ADSL; current state of cable
networks; satellite transponder space; capacity of delivery media). Content
providers are far more likely, IMHO, to use any additional capacity they can
get their hands on to include spangly DVD extras, add new channels, shorten
the start-times between pay per view events, rather than rolling out
bandwidth-hungry 1080p.

Even if they *did* want to simply up the quality of some of their HD
offerings, there's far more mileage to be had in making the compression less
severe - I have an HDDVD player and on a number of discs there's a small but
significant amount of compression noise.

Of course, 1080p is a marketeer's dream, so that's not to say that content
providers wouldn't go for it as a box-ticking exercise...

Within "the industry", the current received wisdom appears to be "do all your
shooting, editing and postproduction in 1080p, but deliver in 1080i or 720p"

In the specific context of Champ's TV purchase, I suspect he'd be in line for
another telly by the time 1080p is really ubiquitous ...

[darsy]

Post by simonk
(in article

Post by darsy
Oh wait, that remark of mine was based on Simon working "in the
industry", and so might know what he's talking about, but then I
remembered who he works for these days.

Heh.
Seriously though - there are supply constraints on delivery capacity and
probably will be for a good few years yet (ADSL; current state of cable
networks; satellite transponder space; capacity of delivery media). Content
providers are far more likely, IMHO, to use any additional capacity they can
get their hands on to include spangly DVD extras, add new channels, shorten
the start-times between pay per view events, rather than rolling out
bandwidth-hungry 1080p.

yes, I know. I was just having a cheap dig.

My TV does 1080i, and it's good enough for anything I've tried
watching on it.

--
d.

[Simian]

Post by darsy

Post by Simian

Post by simonk
Native 1080p
is a waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point.  Unless
you have a 1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse
shit).

Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

I'm sure there's a comment to be made here about grannies and sucking
eggs.

Yeah, but who cares about broadcast HD?

[darsy]

Post by Simian

Post by darsy

Post by Simian

Post by simonk
Native 1080p
is a waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point.  Unless
you have a 1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse
shit).

Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

I'm sure there's a comment to be made here about grannies and sucking
eggs.

Yeah, but who cares about broadcast HD?

stuck-in-the-last-decade-losers?

--
d.

[Dr Zoidberg]

Post by Simian

Post by simonk

Post by Champ
- 1080p (aka 'Full HD')

Spend your money on a set that will display 720p well.

Most 1080p sets will display it just fine; a decent 1.5 up-convert is
relatively trivial.
Most 720p sets are 1366x768 and overscan like a bastard giving you a
'true' 700p displayed on 768p picture.

Post by simonk
Native 1080p
is a waste of time at this, and arguably any, price point. Unless
you have a 1080p source (generally found next to the rocking-horse
shit).

Today maybe - maybe not in a couple of years time.

Games consoles run at 1080p , as do Blu-ray players.
It's broadcast 1080p that's scarce IIRC.

I'd also want the higher resolution for when I run a PC through it