50% of HDTV Owners Don't Use HD

Ant writes "Broadband Reports and Techdirt posted The Technology Liberation Front's article that said apparently half of all High Definition Television (HDTV) owners don't actually use the HD capabilities of their set, and nearly a quarter think they are watching high definition video when they actually haven't set it up correctly. Set-top box maker, Scientific Atlanta's survey, noted that HDTV sets will be in approximately 16 million homes across the country by the end of the year."

Comments

I believe it

[lewp]

I haven't RTFA (I really should be asleep...), but my experience with my parents backs up the headline. They recently bought one of the new Dell 50" Plasmas and had HD service installed. Their cable system places SD channels in their "normal" slots, and gives them HD versions of the same channels in the 600 range. My parents, being creatures of habit, and not traditionally technology-savvy pretty much can't tell the difference and seem to watch the SD versions of these channels 99% of the time.

It almost makes me want to cry, but I'm still glad they have it, if only for the week or two a year I visit them :). HD sporting events and Discovery HD Theater are so nice as to be almost completely different experiences from regular television.

Re:I believe it

[alnapp]

Never mix Parents and Tech
Unless you never want to leave "home" again ;-)

Re:I believe it

[TheStonepedo]

My grandparents bought a HD LCD and watch mostly 4x3 SD channels... in wide zoom mode "so the picture fills up the screen instead of being so small." The center area of the their television where a 4x3 picture would be displayed is nearly a foot bigger than my TV, but I suppose old folks need the biggest picture possible. Attempting to explain that they should watch 16x9 mode with letterboxing is futile. At least the digital sound on the HD channels is clearer than SD stereo.

If you think HD sports and HD Discovery channel are nice, you must not have seen HD PBS yet. "Viewers like you" do a fabulous job getting the latest tech into the hands of skilled TV producers, yielding amazing widescreen programs with remarkable sound.

Re:I believe it

[BenjyD]

Such is the life of the geek. I can't go round to anybody's parents' house without being asked to help with their TV/Computer/DVD/Phone/Broadband. And no matter how many times you explain it, next time you'll be back there again telling them how to do it all over again. My dad now religously records my advice in little lists and keeps them in a folder because I snapped at him after he asked me one too many times.

Re:I believe it

[Ford Prefect]

It almost makes me want to cry, but I'm still glad they have it, if only for the week or two a year I visit them :). HD sporting events and Discovery HD Theater are so nice as to be almost completely different experiences from regular television.

Does it still have the easily-peeled-off manufacturer's information labels on it? You know, the ones most people remove within ten seconds of unpacking the device, but which certain, erm, less technically able persons leave on for the entire lifetime of the product?

(I've seen them on kettles, heaters, tellies, toasters, radios, you name it. Offer to remove one, and the appliance's owner's eyes widen in horror, as if you just suggested stripping all the insulation off the cables and then fitting several kilograms of Semtex to said appliance. I wouldn't be surprised if many of these non-HD HDTVs have such labels present too...)

Re:I believe it

[pomo monster]

With you 100%. I peel the labels off everything I buy. Grandma's body was found facedown by the medicine cabinet.

Re:I believe it

[BushCheney08]

My dad now religously records my advice in little lists and keeps them in a folder because I snapped at him after he asked me one too many times.

Are you sure the folder isn't full of receipts and calculations on exactly how much it cost him to raise you for 18 years? I'd be worried about going over there. One of these days he may just present you with a hefty bill and say "Fix it or else..."

Re:I believe it

[TerminalInsanity]

If he didn't want to pay for it, he shouldn't have poked it.

Re:I believe it

[Anonymous Coward]

You misspelled local hardware store.

Re:I believe it

[kannibal_klown]

I proudly bought an HDVTV a few months ago and had Comcast come by to deliver/install an HD DVR box (I went all-out). They asked on the phone if I had an HD box and I said yes.

A few days go by and they deliver it. They hook it up with the old RCA cables (2-audio, 1 video). I say "But hthis is an High Def TV and that's a high-def box, why are you hooking up RCA cables?" He looked at me blankly and said "High Def doesn't require anything special." And before anyone mentions, no they weren't Component cable, just standard RCA.

I went out and bought a DVI->HDMI cable and hooked it up myself, then had to go to non-obvious menu to turn on the High Def support.

So, if my cable guy was any indicator, a lot of people are probably not getting Hi Def that ordered it.

Re:I believe it

[elrous0]

One of these days he may just present you with a hefty bill and say "Fix it or else..."

Yeah, and that's the day he's gonna get transfered to the nursing home that's under investigation by the state.

-Eric

Re:I believe it

[Anonymous Coward]

Kind of a similar story with those labels..
My mother-in-law had a refrigerator deilvered to her house. A few days later, the display screen above the ice maker had developed some bubbles on the surface. She called, had a repair technician out and he said he needed to order a new ice maker panal. He called back in a few days and stated he could not get that part and would get her either a new door or a new frig. Two weeks later, a brand new frig was brought in and swapped out. Two weeks later, the same thing, the same small bubbles in the display. I show up for Thanksgiving dinner and while I am getting some crushed ice, I notice the same bubbles and without even thinking about it, I pull off the plastic protective cover over the clear plastic display and go about me business. While eating she brings up this story to the entire family about having her frig swapped for a defective display and the new one is bad as well. I stated that i was just looking at it and it looked fine. Turns out, she and the "tech" and who knows how many other people she spoke with did not realize that bubbling was the protective cover that was supposed to be removed after initial setup.

Re:I believe it

[Golias]

But oddly, it looks a little bit like a stereoscope where you have one eye closed. Or a 3-D Viewmaster (remember that little thing you put up to your eye and pull the lever to change the picture that came on the disk).

That's not the fault of PBS.

What you are most likely seeing is the "rainbow effect" of a DLP system.

Unlike LCD, DLP difracts light through a color wheel to create the image. This generally allows the set to produce a much brighter image and higher contrast, but it does also tend to create the effect you are describing.

Some people are very sensitive to DLP rainbows, while other people can't even see them. If you are one of the lucky people who doesn't notice them, then a DLP set is often a good way to go. I've been told that some of the newer DLP sets do a better job of avoiding this problem, but as I'm currently very happy with the projector I have (a Panasonic LCD-based system), I haven't really been shopping around lately.

Re:I believe it

[Golias]

Wide-screen HD just might save televised hockey.

Hockey and soccer are, by far, the worst sports to watch on TV, especially hockey.

In hockey, all the action you really need to see to follow the game is happening away from the puck. If you can't see pretty much the whole rink at once, it just looks like a bunch of guys randomly skating into each other. On a 4:3 standard def broadcast, they need to stay zoomed in relatively close, or the puck simply disapears from view. (They experimented with digitally highlighting it a few years ago, but most people agreed that it looks pretty stupid.) Once you are zoomed in on two or three players, you can't see much of anything else, even where they are relative to the goal.

On HD, you can back up. This, along with the wider screen shape, allows you to show about 2/3 of the rink most of the time. It makes a huge difference. It's still not as good as being at the game (unlike football, where watching the TV broadcast can actually be a better experience than being there), but it's a big step up from what it used to be like.

HD for dummies

[sethwoodworth]

My parents are convinced that they are watching HD in their very rural home town. But then again these are the people who were equally convinced that letterbox cuts off the top and bottom of the picture.

Re:HD for dummies

[iamjoltman]

What he says is true, but note he says more of the negative is shown, not necessarily more of the movie. When some movies are filmed, they are intended to be widescreen, but they do in fact shoot 4:3 and then trim it to widescreen for release. So, while technically there is more image in the negative, the fact remains that the widescreen version is what the director wants you to see.
When a movie shot like this gets released on DVD as fullscreen, they actually show you the whole negative (tho I don't know if that's how it's always done, some may be left and right cropped) but sometimes you'll see things you aren't supposed to, like boom mics and such, because in the proper format, widescreen, they aren't seen. This is when a full screen release is referred to as Open Matte rather than Pan and Scan.

Re:HD for dummies

[BushCheney08]

There was an article on here a year ago about MGM admitting that their widescreen versions of movies were the pan&scan versions with the tops and bottoms chopped off. Here is a blogcritics page detailing the settlement. I was also able to find this page to give some examples of what they're talking about. Can't seem to find the original slashdot article though.

Great news.

[reality-bytes]

This is great news.

With any luck, very few people will be disappointed when HDCP scales their backup copies to SD for them.

See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[gad_zuki!]

and other hilarious quotes from people with more money than common sense. The worst if it is that I can't go to a bar or a restaurant without seeing another HDTV flatscreen stretching out an NTSC signal so everyone looks short and chubby.

Re:See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[rosewood]

My salon does this and it drives me fucking batty. They have these very nice sony plasma displays hanging all over the place. They look like pure sex. They have COX HD programing and also have the hardware for OTA HD. However, the girls working constantly manage to fuck shit up. First time I went there I stopped between my massage and my manicure to fix their fucking TV so I could watch some baseball in HD.

Next time I went in ... yea, fucked up again.

If they didn't give me beer whilst I get my hair cut and my nails done, I wouldn't go there again.

Re:See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[Daverd]

They look like pure sex. They have COX

I don't even know where to begin making a joke about this.

Re:See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[Guppy06]

Heck, I would have started with the fact that he went into a salon myself...

Re:See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[thrillseeker]

My girlfriend's (no kidding) father ... is the very definition of more money than sense.

Marry her!

Re:See how wide it is? That's the HDTV working

[TheFlyingGoat]

http://slashdot.org/~rosewood/journal/8354

Right now Im dead tired but my skin is itchy, I feel too hot in my bed (with a multitude of fans), my balls itch, its too bright, etc. and I just CAN NOT FALL ASLEEP!

I sure hope it's a guy.

Not set up properly

[ReformedExCon]

This is one of those areas where OEMs and service providers are incredibly stupid.

The high definition should be enabled by default. The broadcasts should be in high definition by default.

It's not the customers' fault that they don't use these features, it's the technology and content providers' fault for not making those features seamless.

I've always felt the goal of technology was to become as unintrusive as possible. Making things that "just work" without fiddling or even minimal setup is one way to make technology invisible.

Re:Not set up properly

[ReformedExCon]

Why should it be more difficult than plugging in one wire from the wall to the television?

If a box is required to descramble the signal, why should it require more than one wire from the wall to the box and one more wire to the television?

These things should be simple that anyone can do it. Blaming confusing technology on the user is useless. The confusing technology is that way because the designers didn't find a way to make it any easier. That is the designers' fault.

Re:Not set up properly

[doublem]

I've always felt the goal of technology was to become as unintrusive as possible. Making things that "just work" without fiddling or even minimal setup is one way to make technology invisible.

MAC users, bleh

Re:Not set up properly

[drsquare]

They are too dumb to realize that in order to get HDTV you need to get digital cable and watch certain channels. A lot of them also fuck up their AV wiring and don't use the component or HDMI cables necessary to get things really working properly.

I don't know what the fuck any of that means, this whole article is a mystery to me. HDMI? DVI? WTF? No wonder no-one can set it up properly. I thought the whole point of technology was that it made things easier? All you TV geeks should learn some things about user friendliness from Apple/Google.

There's nothing easy about learning ten thousand acronyms and five hundred cables. If the people who made TVs made kettles you'd need twelve different cables and a degree in water-boiling technology just to make a cup of tea.

Seriously, this is the kind of shit we need to teach in schools that we aren't. Setting up standard A/V equipment is a skill people need to have, and only geeky people ever learn it properly.

Standard? I thought we were talking about HDTV? That's not standard by any stretch of the imagination. I don't see why you can't just plug the TV into the power socket, plug in the aerial and switch on. That should be it. It's not the users fault that the manufacturers insist in making things as convoluted as possible.

If you need schools to teach people how to set up TVs then they're clearly too complicated.

There was actually another study recently, don't know how good it was, that showed that people couldn't tell which TVs were HD and which ones were not. Someone should test that a bit more and see if it's because of bad eyesight or whatever.

Or maybe HDTV is just overrated by TV manufacturers who want to scam people out of thousands of pounds for unwanted technologies. My TV is 14", I doubt I'd get much of a better viewing experience with a slightly higher resolution. We're not all dot-com millionaires with 50" plasma screens on the walls of our penthouse apartments.

Re:Not set up properly

[bigman2003]

As a middle-aged geek (37) and programmer, I just have too much stuff in my head to pay attention to EVERYTHING that I come across.

My wife is in charge of switching all of the clocks in the house and car during daylight savings changes. "Is this the one where you hold the button for 5 seconds, or do I have to hit it twice real fast?" that's my question. Honestly, if it were up to me, I would just wait 6 months until the clock was right again- or I would just unplug it at exactly midnight.

The REAL geek solution is to have clocks that synchonize themselves. (Computers/cell phones)

On the other hand, my cable TV system is just too damn complicated. I've got a Moxie system (don't know who makes it...don't care it's a cable box and DVR in High-Def). It works well, but there are a lot of things that take too long to do. Not that it was designed poorly, but it just does A LOT of stuff. I let my daughter take care of that. She cares enough about it to actually make it work, so does my wife.

I'm the idiot who has to give up the remote control, because I fuck it up each time. There are so damn many buttons, that I can never find things like 'info' or 'back'. So I end up watching a lot of fashion, and decorating shows, or whatever my wife or daughter want to watch.

Oh well...if I really cared enough, I could figure this stuff out. But I spend my whole work day figuring technical stuff out, and by the time I come home I don't want to do it anymore.

And no, I NEVER read the manual, or any on-screen instructions. Not because I feel I am too smart, or just above such things. Just because I really don't care if I get to use every feature...

On the other hand though- I've got a fairly complex camera, and I know how to use every feature of that. I've memorized just about every menu. Because I want to use it. I've made my choices on what I find important, and what I'm willing to ignore. You have to do that in today's world when we are surrounded by so much tech.

So I can understand people who just don't want to learn new things. It isn't always stupidity...maybe they just have other stuff going on in their head.

Re:Not set up properly

[Carthag]

I completely agree. I was helping my dad set up his new surround sound/projector system and that shit is way too complicated for it's own good.

I told him that I couldn't wait until the next generation, or the one after that, when we could get something like ethernet on all the components, each one providing a number of services (audio, video), and each one being capable of receiving a number of services. Then you'd do some dragging and dropping of virtual wires, saying audio from this, goes to these speakers, and this video goes to that monitor/projector.

Jeez.

Where?

[KyrBe]

"16 million homes across the country by the end of the year"

Which country? Mongolia... Peru... Turkmenistan?

Let me guess

[ClippySay]

/ Your newly generated marketing word is: \
|                 HDTV.                   |
\ Want more?                              /
        \     ____
         \   / __ \
          \  O|  |O|
             ||  | |
             ||  | |
             ||    |
              |___/

Re:Let me guess

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Hey! It looks like you're trying to change the channel!
Hey! It looks like you're trying to change the channel!

Re:Let me guess

[dascandy]

You tried to switch to "ABC". That channel cannot be displayed on this television set. Would you try to switch to "MSNBC" instead?

It's because there's nothing on!

[pair-a-noyd]

There are not many channels either on satellite or cable that have TRUE HD content.

MOST of it is just stretched to fit and looks like crap.
I have a friend that has a HDTV and satellite and there's a demo channel that plays some very impressive demos, they blow your mind. When you switch from that to other "HD" channels you can tell that the content was not filmed in HD..

What's the point of having an HDTV?? There's just not enough content out there to warrant dropping the bucks on the bling. It's status and ego. As for usability, it's not very usable. Not yet anyway..

I plan to wait a few years and use what I have until it breaks beyond my ability to repair it. By then HD content may have taken off and the price of the sets will be much more affordable.

But for now, I can go to Wally World and pick up a nice 27" CRT set with multiple inputs for $150 that will last me 10 years or more.

My recommendation is to wait a while before jumping onboard the HDTV bandwagon.
Save your bucks and let the tech improve and prices to come down.

Do many people *really* care about HDTV

[Viol8]

I'm not trolling , but does anyone really care enough about HDTV to
fork out huge wads of cash on a new set? Perhaps its different in
the USA with NTSC but here in the UK we have the PAL system which does
a nice 625 lines per picture and a good PAL set does an extremely
good picture. Sure , HDTV would be better , but $3000 worth better?
I'm not convinced and neither is my wallet.

Re:Do many people *really* care about HDTV

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

I'm not trolling , but does anyone really care enough about HDTV to
fork out huge wads of cash on a new set?

Personally, I would have to say no. I really don't care about HDTV.

Now I'm a classic geek. I like my tech. I like what works. I like what's practical. I don't like chrome and cruft, and I'm generally able to tell an overpriced, overhyped product from a reasonable, practical one.

This isn't an innate talent or state of being. I've been burned by the gaming industry too many times in my youth and as a result have developed a healty skepticism when it comes to flashy new tech.

I've seen HDTV. It looks better, but I really don't care very much. I might like the view better, but I'm not paying current prices for it. I'm still quite happy with my old CRT's resolution. That is, when I'm even watching it anymore.

For me, HDTV is a solution looking for a problem. A very expensive one at that.

Re:Do many people *really* care about HDTV

[DrXym]

It may have 625 lines but only 576 are visible and the picture is interlaced on top of that. Despite that, I think the picture quality is okay and certainly much better than NTSC. Of course it depends on what channel you're watching as well and what content. If you end up watching some crap US imported comedy on a crap highly compressed channel, the picture quality will be horrible. If you watch one of the main channels such as BBC, picture quality is just fine and widescreen already.

Still, HDTV is coming to the UK. Lots of TVs are tagging themselves as "HDTV Ready" though what that means is highly questionable. There are a lot of different HDTV resolutions and progressive & interlaced modes to choose from. The labelling is confusing as hell and I would be extremely wary of buying a TV now when there is nothing to test it against. I truly expect some chumps will buy their HDTV now and the warranty will have expired before they discover what the quality is truly like. On top of that Sky are touting some HDTV channels but where is the pricing for them? When is the service and the HDTV rolling out? How many channels are there? When will Sky+ go HDTV? I wouldn't put it past Sky to bend the early adopters over and rape them for every penny they have. The only other use for HDTV at present is the XBox 360 and next year the PS3. That hardly seems worth it either.

Better to wait a few years until there is a market and channels that actually justify the price of these things.

Re:No Surprise

[pjeremyh]

Yea, I once read that 50% of Americans are below average intelligence.

I don't doubt it..

[deep44]

I pushed my father (who likes watching television) to purchase an HDTV a couple years ago. He simply wanted a "big screen", but after reviewing the numerous benefits of high-def over and over again (at gunpoint), he finally gave in. I took care of ordering Comcast's HD service for him as well- so in my mind, he's living life in the fast lane for once!

Fast forward two years- I find out he's shopping for a DVR. He's sold on one that will let him record directly to DVDs, but in standard definition. I asked him why the hell he would want to waste a perfectly good DVD on crap like that, and he told me it's because his VCR is starting to flake out.

I say, "VCR? What VCR? (I run downstairs to find 50+ VCR tapes of recorded standard-def movies with commercials, meaning he taped them off network television) What the fu- ahh, nevermind. Yeah, get the DVR with a DVD burner. I'll grab you a 500-pack of blanks for Christmas."

Some folks just don't care enough to change how they enjoy life.. even when their asshole childen, like me, threaten them. Well... that means it's time to play hardball.

f'in DUH!

[ph4s3]

Who is supposed to be shocked at this? My family can't even figure out how to watch the TV in the correct aspect ratio on their widescreen non-HD TV. What's worse is that they don't even know that it is the WRONG aspect ratio, despite the short fat people on their screen that were previously tall and skinny. Oh wait. My dad knows. But he doesn't like the gray bars on the sides when it is in the correct aspect ratio. FFS. I swear.

Depending on consumers to do anything right is idiotic. It's why they're so easy to sell to in the first place.

Re:f'in DUH!

[Knuckles]

And on every f***g airport or whatever, -all- the screens (where they play CNN and stuff) have the wrong ratio. Drives me nuts. In a few years there will be no way to convince people they are too fat, after all everyone on TV looks like this.

Re:My HDTV was purchased for DVDs

[FireFury03]

My HDTV was purchased for DVDs

Except DVDs aren't HD - you could get identical quality out of your DVDs with a standard definition 16:9 screen...

The Blind Will Wait Many Years

[Ka D'Argo]

I dunno what it is, but stuff like HD or really "good" audio quality (we're talking the best there is) I cannot really tell a difference. It looks the same to me, visually. I'm sure on some level there is a technical aspect that is higher quality than the current standard but it's not "there" enough for the average person to see it unless you know what you're looking for.

The only reason I'd update to a HD tv set is if every channel in my digital cable package (400+) required HD to watch. As long as there is a large cable package that does not require HD I will use that. I refuse to go drop several hundred dollars, if not much more, for a HD set.

Remember when CD's first came out and having a cd player was the new rave? Yea well I was the guy still buying cassettes, and hunting them down as stores kept keeping their cassette isle smaller and smaller. Remember when DVD's went mainstream? I kept using VHS, it was cheaper and I already had my favorite stuff on VHS.

Oh and, I don't want to start a flame thing but this is my opinion, I dislike Wide Screen. I know WS shows more picture per screen and is a slightly higher quality, I know this is the current standard for filming shit and has been for a few years. I can take a screen shot from Lord of the Ring's comparisons and I hate how the heads are "cut off". Sure it's stretching the image to fit my screen, and in WS you gain more length wise than you do height but if I can see the full persons head and shit in the frame vs say, some extra scenery footage I'd take the full head shots any day.

The real radical opinion is, well, I paid for a 35 inch screen. Using WS I am "gaining" extra footage on the sides but at the same time I'm losing over 5+ inches from the top and bottom. That's like a rather large percentage of 35 being wasted by black blank space not being used. Maybe tv's grow on tree's for some people but not everyone can afford to drop $200-300 for a nice sized tv. (Not that it destroys the tv or anything but if I pay for 35 inch I want all 35 inches to be used).

Re:No Surprise

[Loconut1389]

The other 50% who do use HDTV must be the ones who are obese...

cuban says no bandwidth, no content

[agslashdot]

FRom Mark Cuban ( Owner HDNet ) blog:

"Over the past 5 years, bandwidth to the home has grown from 300k for broadband to 5mbs, and in some cases even 10mbs. But that bandwidth is not dedicated per user. That bandwidth is shared. The number of users sharing that bandwidth has increased even faster than the size of the pipe. Thats not going to change...the amount of bandwidth required to transmit an HDTV show vs the amount of bandwidth required to transmit a DVD quality show is about 8mbs to 1mbs...For broadcast it takes 2 to 3mbs to transmit a standard definition show, and 10mbs to transmit an HDTV, non sports program at quality that is equal to what is available from over the air HDTV broadcasters like CBS and NBC.

Which leads to point. Bandwidth to the home is not expanding as fast as the bandwidth required to transmit content.

What makes a program worthless in High Definition ? If it was shot or mastered on tape. Shows from the 1980s, 1990s, and even some shows today, are shot using standard definition tape. Why is it worthless ? Because standard definition video doesnt have enough resolution to look good in high definition. To up convert it to HD would be like upconverting music from mono to 5.1 Surround Sound. You can fake it and improve it a little, but when compared to music captured in Surround Sound or even stereo, its obviously inferior.

If you go through the schedules of many cable networks, some are made up completely or substantially of shows shot or mastered on tape. The networks that are full of music videos from the past 20 years. Networks with comedies from the 1980s and 90s. Science Fiction created for syndicated TV (Most primetime scifi was shot on Film and then HD). THere is nothing their owners or licensors can do to make them look good in HD. I dont think they will even try. "

Rest here

I'm suprised 50% actually have HD

[pavera]

I own 2 HDTV sets, and I don't have HD programming at all. I use them to watch movies (for the 16x9 more than the high def, as dvd's aren't high def). My parents have an HDTV and they have the HD package from DirecTV, my friend has the HD package from Comcast, and another friend has dish networks HD package... In short they all suck. I refuse to pay an extra $20-50/mo for 10 extra channels that say they are "HD" channels and only actually broadcast HD maybe 20% of the time.

The worst is ESPN HD, 90% of the stuff they show on that channel is standard def, and just to rub it in your face the fill up the rest of the 16x9 screen with banners proclaiming ESPN HD! It's such a rip off. On the DirecTV HD package only 2 channels broadcast in HD more than half the time, Discovery HD and HDNET, Unfortunately, I'd say 50% of Discovery HD's programming from what I've seen is pictures of birds and flowers, no actual content, just a glorified screen saver.

In short, I'm suprised 50% of HDTV owners are actually wasting their money for a few channels that once in a while broadcast HD shows. Bring the content to HD, and more people will subscribe... Of course the networks won't have that, cause they're afraid of piracy, so until all the TVs are locked down there won't be any content....

I still feel my TVs were worth the money just for watching movies, with a good DVD player, good surround sound, good cables everywhere, watching a movie in my basement is just as engaging as watching it at the theater.. and I don't have to worry about gum stuck to my shoes or the inevitable jerk in the row behind me that refuses to shut up (or that brought his 1 year old to a 10pm showing, and wonders why the kid won't stop screaming).

Re:No Surprise

[chris_eineke]

That's almost 55%!

My Cow-orker is queen of the hill

[MrBoombasticfantasti]

A collegue of mine has a 1600x1200 lcd monitor. A truly wonderful piece of engineering. And does she use it as it is supposed to be? No, she has her desktop at 1024x768, because she doesn't like the tiny letters in Windows. I showed her how to enlarge the fonts, but noooo.....

Get some glasses, cow!

it's the show that counts not the number of pixels

[MancunianMaskMan]

I remember watching many _good_ films as a kid on out old b&w telly (my parents upgraded to colour only in the mid-80's iirc). The lack of colour didn't really harm the experience. (only as a kid i thouight big bird was white). If the programme is good, it's worth watching whatever the image quality is, otherwise, HDTV soesn't make it any better. Get a grip. I know this is /. and all, and I'm biased because we live in a house that's so much more enjoyable to live in because it has no TV, but let's face it: HDTV is for wankers.

The sad reality

[DrYak]

The Geek : ...those news technologies that restrict users freedom and cripple the functionnality in name of copyrights shall be bannded !
(Goes signing pettitions on website no-one has heard about, writes article read only by other geeks, listens to speeches by well-known geeks in NerdCon.05 etc)

Joe Six Pack : Woah ! This new model is surely better ! There's a new thing written on it : HI-GH-DE-FA-NI-TI-ON. Shiny !
(Buys it. Even if he doesn't know what it means.)

The Industry : Money ! Here I come !
(new technology becomes new standart because everyone is buying it)

The Geek : you suck.
(Cannot use new media in his old linux-powered hybrid E-toaster-coffemachine)
The Geek : you really suck.
(eventually, manage to circumvent the protection scheme because it was designed by a 2 years old. Strangely, HE is the one who gets blamed - because of suputative piracy - and not the boss of the engeneering team - who employed children and even let them do underage drinking while designing the scheme).
The Geek : you really really really suck.

The Industry : Wait, I have more useless, stupid, freedom-crippling, ads-enforcing, shiny technologies to sell !

Re:Doesn't surprise me at all

[cornface]

Hot actresses just look that much hotter in HD. You can see each strand of hair and the threads on their clothes.

Wow, you're a creepy dude. Really, really creepy.