Nov 19 2010, 05:45 PM
QUOTE(neb @ Nov 19 2010, 03:45 PM)
plasma TVs have been cheap in recent years
you should check out Runco 
also defies logic.QUOTE(yonggoh @ Nov 14 2010, 08:38 PM)
mmm pretty blue colours 
labeled them individually myself... useful when i need to know what is what next time...
Wow... nice chord cables... Not read the entire thread and no offense but you guys know how far the signal has to travel for Astro? I mean signal from consoles or DVR is super clean relatively. 2m is not going to help for the noise over km.labeled them individually myself... useful when i need to know what is what next time...
Added on November 19, 2010, 6:11 pm
QUOTE(tvrosak @ Sep 15 2010, 12:38 PM)
Why so much of quarrel.
There are two types of data transfer format.
1) wired
2) wireless
Wired data transfer is always the best compared to wireless.
Wireless is the lowest reliability but still is in use for broadcasting, and now HD broadcasting.
Imagine how we received Astro B.yond signal, it is more than 2 HD signals were sent to Astro B.yond decoder (I'm not sure exact number of HD channels) through wireless communication. So why we need to spend for expensive HDMI cables, but we received signal from the lowest reliability communication form.
A cheapo HDMI cable is good enuf as long as it is working. Other than that, are all about marketing.
If we talk about technical/electrical technology. Yes, the expensive cable would have better specs. But we got to understand human limitation, how many colour or how many picture in second our brain can process.
Most of d time, these so-called new technology are useless or badly designed/implemented. Therefore, big companies/manufacturers are trying to create fuss to make their product stands out.
As a something to think about, before this there were 2 picture formats are known in common.
1) PAL 25fps
2) NTSC 29.997fps
recently 24fps. And now everybody wants to buy TV that has support of 24fps. Isn't it lower frame rate than the previous we had. But can we see the differences? (info:- most of people's brain can only process up to 16fps)
But why is the 24fps is a fuss right now? I'll let you guys think about it.....
(it is about technology limitation)
Wireless also sometimes go through wired backbone.There are two types of data transfer format.
1) wired
2) wireless
Wired data transfer is always the best compared to wireless.
Wireless is the lowest reliability but still is in use for broadcasting, and now HD broadcasting.
Imagine how we received Astro B.yond signal, it is more than 2 HD signals were sent to Astro B.yond decoder (I'm not sure exact number of HD channels) through wireless communication. So why we need to spend for expensive HDMI cables, but we received signal from the lowest reliability communication form.
A cheapo HDMI cable is good enuf as long as it is working. Other than that, are all about marketing.
If we talk about technical/electrical technology. Yes, the expensive cable would have better specs. But we got to understand human limitation, how many colour or how many picture in second our brain can process.
Most of d time, these so-called new technology are useless or badly designed/implemented. Therefore, big companies/manufacturers are trying to create fuss to make their product stands out.
As a something to think about, before this there were 2 picture formats are known in common.
1) PAL 25fps
2) NTSC 29.997fps
recently 24fps. And now everybody wants to buy TV that has support of 24fps. Isn't it lower frame rate than the previous we had. But can we see the differences? (info:- most of people's brain can only process up to 16fps)
But why is the 24fps is a fuss right now? I'll let you guys think about it.....
(it is about technology limitation)
Movies are usually made in 24fps, especially Hollywood. Hence less artifacts when you display in native. Sure there are technology limitations, but most of all is in terms of bandwidth which is why there are so many compression and techniques like interlacing.
I understand the theory behind digital signals hence the assumption HDMI cables are the same. But do note that even in digital PC world there is error correction or checking bit. Which means information is not lossless through the medium. But in TV there is no error correction simply because it is REAL TIME. There is no time to request for verification.
I agree human perception has limitations. BTW the brain can process MORE than 16fps but at >16fps the eye can be tricked into motion. PC gamers will know that fps need to be >60fps or ideally >75fps to be stutter and flicker free. But theoretically I think low quality HDMI and good ones have differences... but question is whether we can PERCEIVE them. Remember the screens are refreshing at 50/60Hz so data error stays on screen about 16ms...
This post has been edited by specuvestor: Nov 19 2010, 06:47 PM
Quote
0.0467sec
0.46
7 queries
GZIP Disabled