Slashdot Mirror
Low Cost HDTV Cards
Dozer writes
"TerraLogic's new Janus-based HDTV cards allows a PC
user to get some excellent HDTV without draining the
wallet. The cards will do line doubling and handle AC3
audio, all for less than 10% of the cost of an HDTV set..."
So I want that, Linux support, and then HDTV broadcasts of
every sci fi movie ever.
Do you sit six feet from your 20" monitor?
People will still want a small set on top of their dresser in their bedroom. Just because it's HDTV, doesn't mean 19 and 13 inch sets will just quit being made. And as long as all the pixels are there (even if smaller) the picture quality will still be better. How many TV sets are in YOUR home? Do you really plan to replace each one with a 60+ inch set?
Sony's 25" Wide screen GDM-900W would be an excellent choice but expensive still. Approx $1900 at buy.com
And this will happen again and again. The TV market is not the PC market. These people won't put up with the upgrade bullshit, not will they be willing to buy expensive sets or add on converters. They WILL scream loudly at the FCC, pickets, protests, lawsuits claiming class discrimination and the right of the people to watch TV regardless of income, etc. They will write to local politicians thus ensuring a long life for analog TV. Again: TVs are not PCs. Standard and expected PC consumer upgrade patterns *do* *not* apply. Anyone not expecting a backlash (if analog broadcasting ceases) of biblical proportions sufficient to grind the gov't to a halt is deluding themselves.
I think DVD is 720x480 (non-square pixels, you know), but I'm not totally sure...
The bit that you're ignoring is that consumers are evolving as well. By the time digital TV is everywhere, the people buying new those TVs will have become used to the whole idea of "upgrades".
I keep running into older people who have difficulty not thinking that their 5-year-old computer is fundementally different than their washer of the same vintage. I explain that they need to think of the PC as a banana. It may have been tasty when they bought it, but it's no use at all five years later.
The cheap MPEG2 capture cards are already here. An ATI Rage Fury can capture MPEG2 at 640x480 with full IBP frames. The card is $300 I think (close anyway). Does require a PIII-500, but still, it ain't bad. I didn't think we'd get to this point for years.
Compatible DVD writeables are not here yet because of the normal standards battles, grr. My feeling is you'll see products that can do this in early 2000, at least for ~5GB DVDs (single sided single layer).
Um... I could be wrong here, but I think surge supressors are a bit more complex than circuit breakers. I don't think a circuit breaker will react quickly enough to a lightning strike to save your equipment, and I'm also guessing that they're not rated for a million volts or whatever it is that'll be coming down the pipe. Correct me if I'm wrong. :-)
Hey, anybody know how I can contact terralogic? I would like to buy one of these. I live in Boston and PBS is broadcasting in HDTV here. I'd love to purchase one of these as soon as they come out.
1080i x 1920 in 16:9 aspect ratio.
But it's already happening. The home theater newsgroup is buzzing about a killer line doubler for $599. It's from PC techs, rather than a Japanese TV company.
So we keep pressuring nVidia to release full specs for their TNT/TNT2 cards that will also have the Janus chip integrated.
a ges.nsf/pages/pr040799A
Can you say sweet? HDTV, OpenGL, and line-doubling all in Linux.
Damn I hope this happens.
http://www.nvidia.com/Marketing/NewsAndEvents/P
Of the current crop of SDTV and HDTV-ready sets, nearly all have external tuners or HDTV decoders that attach through component video outputs. Most 32"+ TVs today have component video inputs, so there's some guarantee against obsolecence in that regard. You'll just buy a tuner/decoder, plug it in, and watch TV on your old set. Granted, it won't a whole let better than the TV signals today, but you'll still get use out of it. As for the TV sets without component inputs, who knows.
The FCC is mandating that all signals broadcast starting 2006 be digital only, which means either SDTV or HDTV signals. That's a good 6+ years from now. I don't think that anyone will much complain if they bought a TV this year (like I did) for a few hundred to a thousand dollars and then buy a new set in 2006 for (likely) the same price, but with full HDTV capabilities.
Let's face it - most computers don't make it over 6 years, and they usually cost alot more than a TV, yet we never hear people asking the computer industry to slow down. I bought my computer in 1996. It's a pentium without MMX, no AGP, a 64MB memory limit, 17" monitor, etc. I paid $2700. While Linux runs great, it won't be long before my wife won't be able to run the latest-and-greatest MS Bloatware that her research group runs.
Technology gets dated, it's the way things are. If there were no benefits to HDTV, there would be a reason to complain. But I think once you see it, you'll be more than impressed and willing to get one of those new TVs once they hit that sub $1000 price mark in a few years.
You know, you can't just obsolete every TV set in the nation and tell people "Oh, you have to upgrade your set or not watch TV anymore." (at least until HDTV sets can be had for under $200). When color TV came out, the designers had to ensure that the new signal format was compatible with black and white sets. Will HDTV signals be viewable on a standard set? If not, where are they getting their spectrum space? Ya can't just replace existing channels.
Considering a new HDTV set costs anywhere from $5000-$10000, I'm sure you could put this $300 card in a low-cost PC and get a decent sized monitor and not even be 25% of the way to the cost of an HDTV.
The ATI card looks okay, but are DVD mpegs 640x480? Look at MPEG1. There are lot of capture devices that can capture MPEG1. But to make a whitebook compliant VCD, the MPEG1 file must have certain EXACT resolutions (352x240 for NTSC) and data rates (1.1 MB/sec) to be able to be played on stand alone VCD players.
As for a DVD-R format standards not being settled on yet? Who cares? I don't need a new standard. DVDs already exist. It already has a standardized format. Burn THAT format onto a DVD-R. The only compatibility issue should be the physical reflectiveness of the recordable media.
...is a 60" monitor. Seriously, though - do you really get much of a gain with HDTV on a 20" monitor? I suppose it wouldn't be too bad. :-)
- Multistandard: HDTV (Euro, US, and Jap), NTSC, PAL B, PAL N, SECAM
- PCI. At least info to make it work on Mac (Linux and MacOS X) and SGI.
Ain't nothin' better than connecting your beloved computer to an antenna. Lightning goes whap, cpu goes fry, fry. Big money goes down the drain.
From the demonstrations I've seen, no matter what size the HDTV is it's vastly improved over normal TV.
I've seen both a 60" widescreen Mitsubishi, a RPTV, and the direct-view 40" Wega from Sony. The 40" from Sony is wide-screen, so it's height is very close to that of a normal 19" TV. The picture is incredible, in my opinion. It's like looking out a window, so clear, bright and crisp. This one you could easily watch from across a small room (~10-15 ft).
The demo I saw was a prerecorded football game (I don't remember which, but I know it wasn't Bills-Jets). The TV cameras were on the sidelines and in the top of the stadium. You could read the numbers and names on the jersies from the top of the stadium, it was that detailed.
I really doubt anyone would be dissapointed by the 40" Sony, barring the price ($8K). Bring that down to Sony's current 32" and 36" Wegas (about $1.8K), and I can't imagine anyone passing up on it. Next to a HDTV, a stanard TV looks blurry, dull, and black in comparison. So, I don't think that HDTV benefits are limited to huge screens only.
Didn't they tell you that about your PC in the past ten years? Probably 3 times. And each time
you just got a new one...
At some point you just have to obsolete some
equipment to keep moving onwards. And when that
equipment is the average American NTSC TV set, I
see nothing wrong with that.
(but then, I live in Europe where we have PAL and SECAM...)
Rob
...and the cheap DVD writables that make discs compatible with all existing DVD players. I suspect some silly unfounded fear of hypothetical piracy that's holding this tech back.
Technically, there are 18 variants. The tragedy is that everyone in the consumer electronics industry is going for the bigger number, 1080i. The shame is that none of them can produce a set that can resolve that many lines, so it all winds up hugely overlapped, plus having interlace artifacts.
America's ABC has it right: 720P is the way to go. It's within the ability of top sets, and arguably higher res than 1080i (see this link - don't avoid it because of the domain...Alvy Ray Smith is the former head of Pixar, and a graphics God).
I've been trying to warn my customers in the consumer electronics biz that the computer industry is poised to eat their lunch. This proves it. I had been torn between going to Comdex or NAB. Comdex, here I come.
On higher end. And HDTV is not the best resolution
either. On computer monitors (first ones were 21'' Sonys coming with Onyxes(1)). Digital video options let you route to other equipment.
There are many video cards for PC that offer better than HDTV resolution, eg. Millenium G200.
Or you want to use a TV as a monitor?
what i want to know is, can you use an HDTV as a rediculously large, hi-res monitor?
When this card is supported for Linux, I'm buying it post-haste. Now I know why I bought a 19" .25mm monitor!
Posted by Dean Townsley:
Several above posts follow the line of "but what good is HDTV if it's not on a 60" screen?" So what I want to know is: does anybody have any info on maximum angular resolution of the human eye with 20/20 vision? or maybe comfortable angular resolution? Surely there is some info on this somewhere. This is the same sort of analysis that led to CDs being 16-bit 44kHz and CRTs having three colors, because those specs pretty well match what humans can sense.
Without this info it seems clumsy to discuss whether or not HDTV on a small set is wasteful or not, as I certainly don't know the viwing distance intended for those 60" sets. -- Note the comfortable angular resolution would set the viewing distance for a given pixel size. Maybe this is actually a better statistic: some relation between comfortable viewing distance and dpi.
Just fishing for useful info I haven't had a change to look around for.
-Dean
Posted by Mike@ABC:
:)
I have a TV tuner card, and while I certainly use it quite a bit, the picture quality isn't all that great once you get it up to near full-screen size.
I've also seen HDTV programming -- the image quality is intense, especially on the big HTDV screen that I viewed. But once the screen is smaller, I personally feel the difference is less pronounced.
Now slap it on a 15" monitor...? I just don't see the benefit. Maybe I'm wrong, and someone out there is willing to enlighten me. Otherwise, I'll keep my ATI tuner card.
Besides, once everyone stops transmitting analog signals and goes strictly digital, the PC and TV will have converged anyway.
Does this mean that a PC with this card will be cheaper than a TV set?
And what about standards? Is there one standard for HDTV, or several competing standards?
For your first question, look at the ATI All-In-Wonder 128. I believe Sharky Extreme did a review of it, including its MPEG-2 capture abilities.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Think wall-filling, crisp beautiful display. Seriously, these are not that expensive these days, and they are certainly less than people are paying for those massive HDTV's (most of which are rear projection screens, and much cruddier in terms of display.
This is what I plan to do anyway. Not to mention the possibility of playing Descent on the thing... zowie!
I bow to your superior electronics knowledge
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Well, I'd suggest installing some sort of surge protector along any analog wire coming into your system. I'm from Florida, and I've seen tons of modems be reduced to pretty but worthless fiberglass boards.
So I'd say, install a circuit breaker along the line for the antanna.
BTW, other than for applications that are small in size or voltage, why use fuses? A conspiracy by the fuse companies? Breakers are so much better, in that they can be reset, rather than having to be replaced with nails
x_x
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
we have all this in France already, for years!
Canal + offers a lot of canals via satellite (there's not a lot of cable in France) in numeric 16/9, France 2 also have a FranceVision numeric 16/9 hdtv for years... the olympic games of Atlanta was the first events on FranceVision IIRC.
--
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
You're asking for too little.
Try 16:9 aspect ratio at 1900x1000 (ish)
Yes, I saw that today. Mitsubishi HD-1080 16:9 series... very _VERY_ crisp. Very very expensive. ($9000 + $1500 for HDTV input plus god knows what else... probably near 15k) But it's a nice 65" monitor.
--Dan
.... I want it for the AC3 digital out! And the line doubler... Dream system is to hook a system with that pup to a projector and have 100" of DVD fun....
And maybe HDTV would be nice someday...
The long awaited integration of TV sets and computers is coming. However, it won't be all the new features you'll get that will drive the change. It will be cost.
Have any of you looked at the cost of HDTV tuners? In addition to an HDTV-capable TV set, you have to buy a ~$1500 converter! Well, now you'll be able to get it for under $300. And a line doubler, to boot! Stand-alone line doublers cost $2000 by themselves.
Now, if only they'd start making 60" monitors with 1280x1024 resolution (or maybe 1600x1024 for movies!), I'd be happy. Of course, this is coming, too. Just wait until it's cheaper to put 8 million transistors into an LCD than it is to grind optics for a TV. Yes, cheap, large screens integrated to computers are on their way!
--Be human.
All I need now is to find out which BBC programs are broadcast in HD!
Just let them run 'An Unearthly Child' in that format, and move on from there... At least those PAL lines won't be chopped anymore as in NTSC. Only problem is, video is still a monster to compress. Maybe one 25-minute episode could be MPEGed onto a $1.50 CD, but at even $30 per 2.2 GB Orb and a limited xfer rate of 12 MB/s, that won't due. Panisonic L-101U (?) still cost the same per media, but are at least 5.2GB, double-sided and optical. How about Sony/Philips DVD-RW? Still not a full-capicity DVD writer though. And Goddess only knows how much an MPEG-4 encoder card/software would go for! I mean, even if we're not Film Pirates (We're not, right! :), writable DVDs would be great for home movies and such. I guess it's just a matter of time...
Time Lord, Dark Horse: The Techno Mage of Gallifrey
Their website is at http://www.teralogic-inc.com.
I looked quickly and couldn't find a release date, but it's probably there somewhere.
Search first, ask questions later.
Naah, I have a DVD player hooked to my computer, and even as it features line-doubling and the picture is _very_ sharp and clear when I look those movies in the monitor, it is just too small and I always watch movies via TV, even as the quality is worse. Oh yeah, I have only a 19 inch monitor, and at work my fellow got that 24" wide-screen monitor - it is still too small, though that's quite neat already. I wouldn't get one even if it cost only $50 as long as my monitor is smaller than 32" wide-screen. FWIW, I'd wait 2.35 to 1 aspect-ratio TV:s, buy one and hook my DVD player to that. Or, if you have the dough, just get a good data projector (those which you can get at no less than $15 000)...
# amo, ergo sum
There's a huge difference between NTSC and a digital signal. NTSC is a kludge, pure and simple. It was never designed to be a color signal, but they graft a separate color signal over the orignal black and white. It's amazing it works at all, but the quality varies wildly. "Never Twice the Same Color."
Expect much better color fidelity out of HDTV, especially coming off of a screen that isn't a picture tube.
Jon
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
The FCC has given each broadcast station an extra channel for broadcasting digital (either DTV or HDTV--their choice). Broadcasts will be carried on both the analog channel and the digital channel for the next seven to ten years (It was supposed to go to 2006, but broadcasters want it pushed back a few years.) Then all analog broadcasts will stop, and the FCC will reclaim the spectrum allocated for regular TV broadcasts.
In other words, they can and will make every TV obsolete within the next ten years.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who don't.
Actually, I run the exact same configuration, except with a $3 antenna, and the picture is really damn good.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
NTSC broadcasted over the airways will be obsolete, but your TV set will not be. You'll be able to buy and inexpensive HDTV tuner box and hook it up, much like people do with cable boxes now.
Note that most "High Definition" TV broadcast will actually be at the same resolution as normal NTSC, there'll just be more (free) channels over the airwaves.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
As I recall, that 1920x1120 (or some such weird number) for "native" HDTV broadcasts.
A *lot* of pixels.
If you've ever seen a movie running at 1380x1154 (strange res, I now!) in 16-bit color you would realise how truly beautiful it is. I once viewd a demo prog that did this. It was simply marvelous, and far beyond any T.V. set. (This was on a 14" inch display.) A smaller display increases the sharpness; the image felt photographic.
--jon. Postel is dead. May we all mourn his, and our, loss.
I've been saying for years that HDTV compatable tvcards would be the "killer app" that brings on the real merging of TV and computer. ...and for exactly this reason. HDTV costs a lot because the screens need to be high res. Computers already have screens that match HDTV resolutions, the problem is even the big computer screens are small for TV, but for those who want HDTV just to be the first on the block a 25" computer monitor and a TV card are the cheapest way to go, especially if you consider the fact that the monitor will get use as a computer monitor as well as a TV. Further, I think that when "real" HDTVs get to be cheap people will start to use them as computer monitors. I mean who wouldn't want a 40"monitor to play quake on? (that doesn't do "free anti-aliasing" :)
+++In case you didn't know, the Creative DVD kits that run about $200 include line doubling software and composite and S-video outs. Oh AC-3 audio too. +++ But that only works for the DVD because it doesn't have S-video or Composite INPUT! The HDTV card can line double your VCRs' output, your cable TV, your satelite dish, your external DVD, LD...
Sometime in the middle of the next decade, broadcasters will stop using non-digital formats and will go all HDTV (at least that's the FCC requirement; they're doing pretty slow, so no telling what the requirement will actually end up as). After that, you'll have to buy a converter to see broadcast tv on your non-digital set.
That's right, circuit breakers (and fuses) are worthless for surges. Before they pop, they let through way to much juice. Pop! goes the circuit behind them. On the other hand a good surge supressor clamps down alot faster, but instead of interupting the current spike it shunts it off in a different direction. A common method is to shunt the spike to ground, and hold the difference between the line the spike comes in on and ground to a reasonable voltage difference. Note: in a surge condition a spike can and will raise the ground's voltage significantly, however the circuit is spared because the voltage between it's ground and the line with the spike are held within reason. Problems do arise when you have many different devices interconnected, each with its' own ground. If a surge comes in and the circuitry can't get all the devices to agree on a ground, then devices may be dammaged where the grounds don't match. To get around this one tries to place all linked devices on the same electrical circuit. Failing that, one then goes to isolation circuits.
I use a 14" Commodore 1702 monitor attached to an old VCR with no antenna. It pulls in UHF with no problem and the VHF is viewable but slightly snowy. I figure the quality of my hardware doesn't need to be better than the quality of the information it displays :)
In case you didn't know, the Creative DVD kits that run about $200 include line doubling software and composite and S-video outs. Oh AC-3 audio too.
I'm about to get one, to have video out to my TV, but I think it only runs on Win98.
http://www.soundblaster.com/mmuk/dvdrom -6x/
If I recall correctly, the average human eye can resolve about 300 lines/inch at a range of 10 inches. (This may be where they came up with the resolution numbers for printers).
Assuming a 60" (diagonal) screen is 50" wide (to simplify the math), that'd be 15000 lines at 10", or 750 lines at 200" (about 16.5 feet) viewing distance. 750 lines equates to 1500 pixels (alternating light/dark), so a 60" HDTV viewed at ten or 12 feet probably is pushing eye resolution limits. About the same as a 15" monitor viewed at two to three feet.
-- Alastair
Can a driver be incorporated into the Video for Linux project?
Will these companies reveal the workings of their cards?
I want to use it with X and Linux.
A "yes" to the first question depends on a "yes" to the second.
Forget about the HDTV tuner in this thing, I can live without that for another few years, I'm going to have to buy one of these for that line doubler. A stand alone line doubler costs over $2000 right now!
Now I'll be able to hook my PC up to that video projection system, and get a 120" TV that is watchable. Sweet.
One of these cards + 30 GB removables = some pretty snazzy AVIs that I could make.
No sig.
maybe it's just me, but people still use things like 19" TV's. Ive never particularly cared for TV (unless I'm bored), so anything bigger than 19" is kinda unnecassary. But DVD looks pretty nice on my 17" monitor, so when I get tempted to watch something I'd do it on my computer.
HDTV freaks me out -- it's too damn clean! looks kinda cheesy.
give me that filmic grainy look of a bad tv signal anyday!
--
Rare Window - free your photos
There is one and only one HDTV standard (which specifies several video formats). The Federal Communications Commission determines which signal formats are allowed to be transmitted over the air waves.
As long as Rob gets what he wants (described in that last line) I'd be happy too!
Sounds awesome!
The recommended minimum size display for HDTV is 60". I saw HDTV on a 33" display and it isn't worth it. Heah, you have a great picture, but you're missing the whole experience.
Also, as for the line doubler, there arn't very many line doublers out there that look good. Most of them introduce all kinds of artifacts from de-interlacing.
In the next couple of years, the price of HDTV projection displays should come down significantly. There's some new solid-state technology coming out, both TI's micro-mirror stuff (which some Japanese companies are copying) and reflective LCDs (very different than other LCD technology). Right now the reflective LCD technology sounds the most promising. As for the plasma wall screens, the color on them is too washed out and they put out too much heat (if you look carefully you'll find a bunch of fans in those displays).
I have a high-quality line-quadrupled AV system hooked up to a 19" CRT right now, running 1440x960 until I get my 33" monitor fixed. It is no comparison to a 33" TV for entertainment purposes. It's no fun watching a movie when you need to sit 12" away to see the detail.
It will be a couple of years until HDTV is ready for prime time. When it comes, nobody will want their old TV sets or converter boxes.
I pity those people walking out of Price Club with their brand-new 60" NTSC projection TVs.
Also, HDTV should be able to interact nicely with computers, since more than audio and video can be included in the signal. For example, you could click on an object and bring up more information or treat it like a URL.
-Aaron
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
The problem with a 19" or 13" HDTV is that it would be a total waste of money. For one thing, the CRT would not be able to take advantage of it
(an expensive 19" CRT might, but who sits that close to their TVs). For the smaller sets, DTV is more than adequate.
Yeah, a 32" HDTV set looks awesom compared to a 32" NTSC TV, but why bother with all the extra expense involved. In a year you'll be able to get a 33" HDTV set for a bit under 3K. The problem is that it is like scaling a 32" TV to a 13" TV. It just looks too small. It's the detail. With all that extra detail it's like looking at a movie from twice as far back as the back row of a theatre. You keep wanting to get closer. If I had an HDTV card I'd have my eyeballs about 6" from the monitor (and be dying of eye-strain) watching a movie. I know, I've been watching line-quadrupled TV & DVD on a 19" SGI monitor and I looked at a 33" HDTV set a start-up company is coming out with. Yeah, the picture looks incredible and very sharp, but I'd much rather have a good 32" TV any day. It's such a different experience to see HDTV on a big screen. HDTV on a 10' screen is breathtaking.
As for an HDTV card for the PC, how many monitors can handle 1920x1080? For most of us this exceeds the dot pitch by a fair amount. Even if it matched the dot pitch, I'd have to have my eyes 3" away to see the detail.
I guess if you just want to watch TV on your PC all day the card is fine. But for watching HDTV all the time on a PC monitor I just shudder.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
This is what I'm planning. There's some new technologies such as reflective LCD's and the micro-mirror stuff from TI that should make these projectors much cheaper. Right now reflective LCDs look the most promising. BTW, these are totally unrelated to active-matrix or your typical LCD technology.
I saw Descent on a 10' projection screen. All I can say is it's a totally different experience.
Think about it, you could sit back in that easy-chair and code away without having a CRT in your face. That will reduce a lot of eye-strain.
I expect that within a couple of years the price of these new generation projectors will fall to under $2K and possibly to around $1K.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Can a driver be incorporated into the Video for Linux project?
Will these companies reveal the workings of their cards?
I want to use it with X and Linux.
>You know, you can't just obsolete every TV set in the nation and tell people "Oh, you have to upgrade your set or not watch TV anymore."
Actually, that is the FCC plan. However, a converter box will make the TV useful again (and of course VCRs aren't going away that soon.) If PC converter cards are $300 now, the converters should be pretty cheap once they're mass-marketed. Even on a regular set, the digital picture should be an improvement over analog broadcasts.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Actually there are a half dozen formats being used for DTV and HDTV. All of the HDTV sets will support all of the formats, but the broadcasts will vary. Some of the networks will broadcast in 1024i (1024 lines, interlaced), but mostly just for football games and other high-profile events. Most of the broadcasts will be 640i or 640p. I haven't heard of anyone willing to use the necessary bandwidth to broadcast with the best resolution available (1024p).
And, oh by the way, the Japanese HDTV is entirely different. Theirs is actually analog.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who don't.
Here are some I found:
TeraLogic
Hauppauge Computer Works
BTTV page
--The more you know, the less you know.
While HDTV looks extremely clean, it's a total waste unless you have a 60" display, which is the recommended minimum size. HDTV projection displays will come down significantly in the next couple of years due to some new non-CRT technology coming down the pipe which are solid-state. The new technologies can easily reproduce the HDTV resolutions and beyond.
The other big advantage of HDTV (which a PC monitor will not take advantage of) is the 16:9 aspect ratio, which means that all HDTV broadcast and recorded movies will be wide-screen.
HDTV on a 19" CRT is not much comparison to even regular TV on a good 32" set from an entertainment perspective.
How can I claim this? I have a very good line-quadrupled DVD setup currently running 1440x960 through a 19" monitor (until I get my other monitor fixed). If I'm only a couple feet away it looks great, but that's no way to enjoy a movie. Of course, HDTV is a big improvement over the line-doubled/quadrupled NTSC. Also, for regular TV if the line doubling is not done properly there are all kinds of annoying artifacts that show up due to de-interlacing. Most de-interlacers I have seen have this problem to varying degrees, the exceptions being Snell and Wilcox ($30,000) and a Phillips unit (DVX8000 - $5K) and some units based on a chip from Genesis.
As for combining HDTV and a PC, they're a perfect match in many ways. The HDTV format allows for more than just plain audio and video to be transmitted. I.E. you could click on an object on the screen and get more information on it.
As for recording HDTV, the latest specs I've seen are 3 1/2 hours of HDTV on a VHS tape or 7 hours of DTV, and since it's digital there should be no quality degredation.
Now, instead of running HDTV on a PC monitor I'd love to be able to hook my PC up to an HDTV monitor and play Quake on a 60" screen at 1920x1080!
-Aaron
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
What does this mean?
- HDTV is digital, current broadcasts are analog. There is no compatability.
- The FCC has given up on the idea of 'backward compatibility' in this case.
- You will have to replace your TV, or purchase a receiver that'll feed an analog interpretation of the digital signal to your old TV
- Manufacturers can no longer use the unused portion of the TV channel spectrum for medical telemetry.
Standards do get replaced. We don't use spark-gap transmitters for obvious reasons. Television is about to evolve, hopefully for the better. I just hope that we won't be getting up-close-and-personal with Dan Rather's pores.This caused a problem in (Houston?) Texas when a HDTV broadcast test was performed. The local hospital's wireless medical telemetry equipment (heart monitors and the like) suddenly stopped functioning due to the obvious overwhelming interference!
Now, let's look at this from the cable company's point of view. Their carrying capacity is based on the currently used bandwidth, not the allocated bandwidth. When HDTV comes along, they're not going to be very enthusiastic about carrying these new, fatter signals. Remember, on one HDTV channel allocation, a station can transmit 3 'standard' (525 line) broadcasts or 1 'high-definition' broadcast. In Connecticut, TCI has their 'digital cable' offering. The channel numbers go all the way up to 800. Not by any stretch of the imagination are all of them used, but with HDTV clogging their pipes, the number of channels that they can offer will drop drastically. I don't think that TCI will be exactly happy to drop pay-per-view channels in order to transmit the 'new and improved' Public Broadcasting.
"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min