Lite HD

[dude2]

In looking at all the HD plasma and liquid crystal sets for sale at walmart, the specs on all of them say resolution is 1320 to 720p.
If that is the case why do those sets need 1920 by 1080i as they can;t use it anyway?
I must be missing something here or dish is right in not sending out 1920 by 1080 as the majority of HD sets are plasma or lcd.
Dave.

 

[VinceT3]

You're looking at bottom tier sets... most of the higher tier sets are 1080p

I have two my main tv in the living room is 62" 1080p my bed room has a 32" 720p .. just depends on how much you want to spend on what quality you're going to get.. the smaller the tv tell less important 1080p is.. but with 50+ 720p doesn't quite have the same look..

 

[Pepper]

I think Smith,P said it best in another thread. Did you also check the big screen TVs for sale at Goodwill?

 

[Smith P.]

hey, hey - I'm ready to pickup it ! what is the address ?!

 

[LASooner]

1080p is less important because there is no 1080p programming.

Currently 1080p sets have to deinterlace 1080i, most of them doing so by removing 1 field and doubling the remaining. That makes the resolution effectively 1920x540. Until there is 1080p programming (and there's no guarantee of that since it's not in the broadcast spec), you'll only see it's true quality on 1080p mastered BR or HDDVD discs or game systems that take advantage of it.

I also read an article that half the 1080p TVs can't even handle a 1080p signal.

I've said it before, if the worst they do is 1440x1080 that's still not too bad. The image sensors in most HD cameras only resolves 1440x1080. It's only within the last year that you're starting to see broadcast cameras with a full 1920x1080 image sensors. But even if it's captured progressively it gets laid to tape or disc in an interlaced format.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Did the answers we gave you in the HD forum last week not satisfy you in some way?

 

[VinceT3]

The correct 1080p TV's are supposed to take 2 images each of the 540 lines and merge them into one displaying it twice. It gives the appearance of a higher quality image. The cheepy 1080p TV's take a single image and double the 540 lines producing an altered image for each frame. Obviously it doesn't produce the same picture but they're generally close.

So even though there aren't any 1080p channels (and mind you there won't be any anytime soon) the picture is far better looking as the TV size increases.

As you'll probably see a difference between a 32" 480i vs. 720p, you should notice slightly less but still noticeable a difference between 62" 720p vs. 1080p

They do have higher resolutions than 1080p but they are relegated to movie theaters right now since you wouldn't notice a big change on your itty bitty TV's

 

[Smith P.]

Combining interleaving 1/30 sec odd+even 540 lines two frames to 1/60s sequence of full 1080 lines one frame process is pretty complicate, not too many TV manufacturers do it right.

 

[dude2]

You're looking at bottom tier sets... most of the higher tier sets are 1080p

I have two my main tv in the living room is 62" 1080p my bed room has a 32" 720p .. just depends on how much you want to spend on what quality you're going to get.. the smaller the tv tell less important 1080p is.. but with 50+ 720p doesn't quite have the same look..

I find this comment interesting as the sets that our walmart had were samsung, toshiba, phillips, etc and in the 2000 dollar range. If you consider them bottom of the line, what the heck do you buy the 80,000 dollar ripoffs.

 

[VinceT3]

I find this comment interesting as the sets that our walmart had were samsung, toshiba, phillips, etc and in the 2000 dollar range. If you consider them bottom of the line, what the heck do you buy the 80,000 dollar ripoffs.

The best buy/circuit city/sound advise/etc have tv's ranging from 500 all the way up to 10k (10k being the 60+" LCD)

My 32" LCD 720p I got a costco was around 1200 or so. My 62" DLP 1080p I got when it came out for 4000. But I've been in the walmart by me and I've seen what they offer, it's ok, but by no means top of the line.

I live in a snooty area so my sense of price is a bit skewed.

 

[YoMamasMan]

1080p is less important because there is no 1080p programming.

I've said it before, if the worst they do is 1440x1080 that's still not too bad. The image sensors in most HD cameras only resolves 1440x1080. It's only within the last year that you're starting to see broadcast cameras with a full 1920x1080 image sensors. But even if it's captured progressively it gets laid to tape or disc in an interlaced format.

Echostar cheats those of us that invest in buying the better quality, high performance video equipment. We will move-on to 1080p and Blu-Ray as Echostar downgrades its picture quality to a standard not defined by any US or international standard. HD-Lite is a result of Echostar wanting to offer more channels than DirectTV, but not having enough bandwidth to meet broadcast standards prescribed by the broadcast industry.

Seemingly, the array of HD channels that Echostar provides its customers indicates that management's idea of "compelling content" is very far-off from its customer's desire for content. The resent survey confirms that many HD channels are of low public interest. I imagine there's lots of profit generated by some of those HD channels, but realize those channels do not come close to making me as happy as TMC-HD, CineMAX-HD or the HD broadcast of my local PBS-HD station.

New technologies come along all the time! Higher resolution TV broadcast seems to be an evolving market. Looks like Echostar is not going to participate in the High Definition broadcast arena. Many of us will be compelled to find a new source for high resolution TV broadcast in order to enjoy the benefits from the investments we made buying new equipment. If you do not provide it, someone else will.

I guest Echostar will "continue to pick the low hanging fruit" until someone comes along and puts them out of business.

In the meantime, I am still going to complain about HD-Lite, because it is my money!