Mailing List Archive: MythTV: Mythtvnz

Slightly OT - which new TV

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

nick.rout at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 2:07 PM

Post #1 of 26 (2114 views)
Permalink

Slightly OT - which new TV

EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
term).

I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
ethernet connectivity and DLNA.

So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
ever going to be worth it?

What other makes are any good?

Tips, hints welcomed. Cheers. (On topic as will be attached to mythtv
of course).

Nick.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

cheese643 at hotmail

Mar 25, 2011, 2:50 PM

Post #2 of 26 (2082 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

I am a big fan of the Panasonic products but then I am also a strong
advocate of plasma rather than LCD. The LCD vs plasma debate can really
stir people up so I will side step that. Panasonic is well regarded for
their plasma sets, people placing them a close second to the very
expensive and hard to get Pioneer kuros. Family members have Panasonic
LCDs as well and I have been impressed with all of them.

I had a Philips tv fail last year and as part of the process I had to
deal fairly closely with a tv repair man. He was of the opinion that
Panasonic was the brand he saw the least of. He also commented that when
he has had to deal with a faulty Panasonic unit the parts are often
sourced within NZ and that the support is local. He went on to make
racial slurs about the support from other vendors in particular LG and
Samsung. While that is another story all together I think it highlights
a potential problem.

Personally I think 3D is a gimmick at this stage. I have no doubt it
will grow, if you consider the amount of money being thrown at 3D movies
it almost has to grow as there has been too much investment. I just
don't really like the idea of having to have a stash of spare glasses
which aren't that cheap in case you have friends around. Not to mention
the reduced viewing angle if you want the effects to actually work
properly. I think of it as something thats cool for someone else to have
so you can see it but not have the hassles that it brings.

DLNA is a cool idea but you have to read the details about what the TV
is capable of playing. You can stream media which puts the workload onto
your PC or in some cases the TV can do the work but both often have
limited support for file formats. For me DLNA was a moot point as my
HTPC handles everything and more than DLNA was ever going to offer.

If you do decide to look at the Panasonic plasmas the U series is very
nice but if you can go to the V series you will not regret it. The V
actually has DLNA incidentally but it's the panel that will give you
wood :-) Oh yeah, you can turn overscan off on the U and V series too.

Hope this is useful

Damian

On 26/03/2011 10:07 a.m., Nick Rout wrote:
> EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
> floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
> term).
>
> I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
> 24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
> proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
> ethernet connectivity and DLNA.
>
> So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
> things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
> ever going to be worth it?
>
> What other makes are any good?
>
> Tips, hints welcomed. Cheers. (On topic as will be attached to mythtv
> of course).
>
> Nick.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtvnz mailing list
> mythtvnz [at] lists
> http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
> Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/
>
>

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

hads at nice

Mar 25, 2011, 3:55 PM

Post #3 of 26 (2076 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 10:07 +1300, Nick Rout wrote:
> Tips, hints welcomed. Cheers. (On topic as will be attached to mythtv
> of course).

We've got 40" and a 32" Sony LCDs, I like them. They use less power than
plasma which is a bonus for me.

The 40 is an older generation and the 32 is current. The 32 has USB and
things but I've not tried it out, just hooked it up to the PC and was
done with it.

One of the most important features to me was DPMS to turn the monitor
off when the PC went into standby. Until a while back when I got some of
those fancy power boards which cut power to all the other plugs when I
suspend the PC.

The 32 replaced a Panasonic which I never really liked, didn't do DPMS,
average sound, and got itself into a funny state a few times where it
needed to be powered off at the wall.

A friend has a Samsung which they seem happy with, it has USB and can
play all sorts of things including 720p MKV files which I though was
neat.

hads
--
http://nicegear.co.nz
New Zealand's Open Source Hardware Supplier

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

jonathan.hoskin at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 4:37 PM

Post #4 of 26 (2082 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/2011, at 10:50 AM, Damian <cheese643 [at] hotmail> wrote:

>
> If you do decide to look at the Panasonic plasmas the U series is very
> nice but if you can go to the V series you will not regret it. The V
> actually has DLNA incidentally but it's the panel that will give you
> wood :-) Oh yeah, you can turn overscan off on the U and V series too.

I got a V series 50" from Santa. Best TV panel IMO. Glare reduction coating is good too.

Audio isn't great compared to my old PV series which had subs in it, but noone puts good speakers in TVs anymore.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

nick.rout at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 4:45 PM

Post #5 of 26 (2080 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Jonathan Hoskin
<jonathan.hoskin [at] gmail> wrote:
> On 26/03/2011, at 10:50 AM, Damian <cheese643 [at] hotmail> wrote:
>
>>
>> If you do decide to look at the Panasonic plasmas the U series is very
>> nice but if you can go to the V series you will not regret it. The V
>> actually has DLNA incidentally but it's the panel that will give you
>> wood :-) Oh yeah, you can turn overscan off on the U and V series too.
>
> I got a V series 50" from Santa. Best TV panel IMO. Glare reduction coating is good too.
>
> Audio isn't great compared to my old PV series which had subs in it, but noone puts good speakers in TVs anymore.

I have a 5.1 sound system which I assume still works. It's sound is
much better than any TV speakers, so I am not too worried.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

stevehodge at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 4:50 PM

Post #6 of 26 (2082 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:45, Nick Rout <nick.rout [at] gmail> wrote:

> I have a 5.1 sound system which I assume still works. It's sound is
> much better than any TV speakers, so I am not too worried.
>

I've never come across a TV with speakers worth using (for the main TV).
When I bought our plasma 5-odd years ago it was actually a plus for me that
it didn't have any speakers at all.

Cheers,
Steve

stephen_agent at jsw

Mar 25, 2011, 4:53 PM

Post #7 of 26 (2087 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 10:07:38 +1300, you wrote:

>EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
>floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
>term).
>
>I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
>24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
>proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
>ethernet connectivity and DLNA.
>
>So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
>things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
>ever going to be worth it?
>
>What other makes are any good?
>
>Tips, hints welcomed. Cheers. (On topic as will be attached to mythtv
>of course).
>
>Nick.

My mother and I both have Sony KDL-32V5500 TVs and they have been
excellent so far. I moved from an older Panasonic "HD ready" model
that could not be persuaded not to do overscan and lied in its EDID
data, so I have a bias against Panasonic at the moment. The Sony has
excellent EDID.

My Sony's DLNA support is very much restricted - my TV only plays old
.MPG files and files that support Sony's special video camera format,
and nothing else. Maybe that is fixed in later models, but I suspect
not. Other DLNA TVs do much better. This is not a problem to me as
both my mother and I are really only using the TVs for MythTV, which
can play almost any video file format if I use a 32-bit version of
mplayer for the more esoteric formats.

I do not use the Sony's speakers, but Consumer rated them as barely
tolerable (and most of the other TVs from that year as even worse).
Quite a few of this year's TV models seem to have fixed that problem
somewhat, according to Consumer's latest tests. Again, as both my
mother and I are using external hifi systems for sound, this is not a
problem.

Display of digital photos on the Sony is very slow, when they come
from my digital camera. It looks like the TV has a slow
microprocessor and can not cope with the large files good cameras now
produce, like mine at 4023x3024. Again, MythTV does this better
anyway, so not a problem.

The only real annoyance I have with the Sony is that when it turns on,
it displays onscreen information for far too long when I want to see
the picture from MythTV. I have not found any settings to fix this,
so I normally push the "Options" button on the remote twice to clear
the onscreen data. This also happens to a lesser extent when MythTV
changes the screen mode eg to 1080p24 for a film.

The best thing to do when buying a new TV is to load up MythTV on your
laptop and take it and an HDMI cable with you to test the TV in the
shop. Presuming that you have a laptop and it will do accelerated
1080p output, of course.

What I would really like is for TVs to be available that do not bother
to have speakers, or even tuners, as both are really unnecessary when
you are using MythTV and I hate having to pay for them.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

criggie at criggie

Mar 25, 2011, 5:43 PM

Post #8 of 26 (2080 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/11 10:07, Nick Rout wrote:
> EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
> floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh term).

No opinion on the TV, but you should put ~$100 in for a wall bracket.
My TV didn't budge at any time.

Pedestal stands are too unstable, and after two events we should be
quake-proofing.

--
Criggie

http://criggie.dyndns.org/

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

criggie at criggie

Mar 25, 2011, 5:47 PM

Post #9 of 26 (2083 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/11 12:53, Stephen Worthington wrote:
> I do not use the Sony's speakers, but Consumer rated them as barely
> tolerable (and most of the other TVs from that year as even worse).

Always take Consumer reports with a big fat bag of salt. They're often
wrong on details, and they do come up with the weirdest sets of
priorities for evaluating items.

> What I would really like is for TVs to be available that do not bother
> to have speakers, or even tuners, as both are really unnecessary when
> you are using MythTV and I hate having to pay for them.

They exist - we call them monitors :)

--
Criggie

http://criggie.dyndns.org/

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

stevehodge at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 6:50 PM

Post #10 of 26 (2083 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 13:47, <criggie [at] criggie> wrote:

> On 26/03/11 12:53, Stephen Worthington wrote:
>
> What I would really like is for TVs to be available that do not bother
> > to have speakers, or even tuners, as both are really unnecessary when
> > you are using MythTV and I hate having to pay for them.
>
> They exist - we call them monitors :)
>

Unfortunately they don't come in 40+" varieties. And in many ways monitors
have been replaced by TVs on computers, which is not a good thing. There
aren't many monitors with resolutions above 1080p, those that exist are very
pricey. Pixel size seems to be stuck at no more than 110ppi - my phone has a
300ppi screen and I have a 12 year old CRT that's 120ppi. It's stuck because
TVs don't need higher resolutions. And I may be in the minority here, but I
much prefer 4:3 for monitors - I just don't see any benefit to the
widescreen format for anything but video and some games. For anything
involving reading vertical space is far more important than horiztonal space
yet 4:3 monitors are getting rare. All because the panel manufacturers want
to focus on TVs.

I guess things might improve when TV takes the next step up in resolution to
4K or 2540p or whatever. Which will probably happen in about 3-5 years once
3D has lost it's selling power.

Cheers,
Steve

tortise at paradise

Mar 25, 2011, 7:08 PM

Post #11 of 26 (2098 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/2011 10:07 a.m., Nick Rout wrote:
> So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
> things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
> ever going to be worth it?

I got a Samsung UA40C6200 amd UA46C6200 following returning the
Panasonic Plasmas I had originally bought. Panasonic never provided the
power use data they promised to justify their power consumption claims
they made, nor did they clarify (having undertaken to do these things)
why they quoted higher power use on their overseas web pages (that was
consistent with my testing and the max current recorded on the back of
the panel). The Panasonic Plasmas were generally nice, to get
acceptable bright images the dynamic (I think that was what it was
called) high power mode has to be selected, which it seems like the
duller economy modes are quoted in the NZ power use data. A simple test
for power use is sensing temperature with the back of the hand held in
front of the panel after some use. Buckets of heat come out of the
plasmas, which is a fair reflection of their impact on your power bill.

The choice is really made on the best package meeting your particular
preferences. (Somewhat like Politicians?) With an insurer behind you
price may be less an issue, however prices vary widely.... Brand weekend
specials seem to frequently offer good prices.

The Samsung's LED displays are visually nice too.

Some things (IMO) to consider:

Nothing less than full HD should be considered (if you are in any doubt!).

The plasmas screens when off are coloured grey whereas the Samsung's are
a deep black, something I noticed following having tried both. Black is
like a black hole in a rooms decor, whereas the plasma's grey is easier
on the eye.

LAN access is good for Firmware updates. (And who knows what else?
Will the firmware get hacked and morphed into something more, e.g. a
myth frontend? Cost and wide range of TV's makes this less likely but
there are sites exploring these things) I've had two firmware updates
so far, but cannot tell you the benefits of each... I've yet to find a
version file or equivalent...

DLNA to my limited testing is quite inferior to mythtv in usability
terms. DLNA playing might be OK if you want to watch something, and
maybe pause it, beyond that the Samsung's are not in the game compared
with the list subject.

The Samsung's connectivity is somewhat minimal, (compared to the Sony's
and Panasonics) for example the stereo audio out is via the 3.5mm
headphone socket but seems good stereo quality. (The manual does not
recognise that route at all) To get 5.1 out your only option from the
TV is optical.

From memory overscan on the Samsung's is managed more by it being off
on certain inputs, e.g. VGA. The PC/DVI input had issues for me, so I
did not persist with them as the VGA worked fine for me. This may be
fixed with a later firmware but I've not checked. The Panasonic's
switch worked better to me, although one had to do it.

The Sony TV remotes are nice in having more one touch to change screen
inputs, the Samsung is painful having to cycle all inputs is painful
switching between live TV and Mythtv. What remote(s) will you use?

3D? I'll look into it when I don't need to wear a headpiece....(and for
each viewer)

Some consideration has to be given to the whole system, the frontend CPU
power, what you want from it, how you plan to do the audio, what's going
to do the switching (if any - TV or AV Receiver or ? Be nice if Myth
could do it all) how much else you plan to integrate in to use the
display and what your mythtv frontend plans are for the future.

Are you going to view youtube (Browse Internet, and similar) and if so,
what is going to be the engine processing this? (the TV or your mythbox?)

What's your profile / mix preferences?

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

dmoo1790 at ihug

Mar 25, 2011, 9:08 PM

Post #12 of 26 (2087 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/11 12:53, Stephen Worthington wrote:
> What I would really like is for TVs to be available that do not bother
> to have speakers, or even tuners, as both are really unnecessary when
> you are using MythTV and I hate having to pay for them.
>
I have found the tuner in my set (Pana Plasma) to be useful for signal
analysis, i.e., is it noise or low power giving you glitches? Myth and
the command line scan/monitor tool (I forget the name) don't seem to
give reliable noise/error results for my HVR-2200 tuner.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

stephen_agent at jsw

Mar 25, 2011, 9:10 PM

Post #13 of 26 (2080 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 14:50:21 +1300, you wrote:

>On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 13:47, <criggie [at] criggie> wrote:
>
>> On 26/03/11 12:53, Stephen Worthington wrote:
>>
>> What I would really like is for TVs to be available that do not bother
>> > to have speakers, or even tuners, as both are really unnecessary when
>> > you are using MythTV and I hate having to pay for them.
>>
>> They exist - we call them monitors :)

Not really - there are not many (any?) monitors in 32" plus sizes that
are anything like the equivalent TV price.

>>
>
>Unfortunately they don't come in 40+" varieties. And in many ways monitors
>have been replaced by TVs on computers, which is not a good thing. There
>aren't many monitors with resolutions above 1080p, those that exist are very
>pricey. Pixel size seems to be stuck at no more than 110ppi - my phone has a
>300ppi screen and I have a 12 year old CRT that's 120ppi. It's stuck because
>TVs don't need higher resolutions. And I may be in the minority here, but I
>much prefer 4:3 for monitors - I just don't see any benefit to the
>widescreen format for anything but video and some games. For anything
>involving reading vertical space is far more important than horiztonal space
>yet 4:3 monitors are getting rare. All because the panel manufacturers want
>to focus on TVs.

I agree about wanting vertical space, but I got a 1920x1200 monitor so
that it had the same vertical space as my old 19" CRT, and that works
very well. I tend to use the extra horizontal screen space for all
sorts of useful but not totally necessary things.

>I guess things might improve when TV takes the next step up in resolution to
>4K or 2540p or whatever. Which will probably happen in about 3-5 years once
>3D has lost it's selling power.
>
>Cheers,
>Steve

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

criggie at criggie

Mar 25, 2011, 10:45 PM

Post #14 of 26 (2079 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/11 17:10, Stephen Worthington wrote:
> I agree about wanting vertical space, but I got a 1920x1200 monitor so
> that it had the same vertical space as my old 19" CRT, and that works
> very well. I tend to use the extra horizontal screen space for all
> sorts of useful but not totally necessary things.

Have you ever been in a medical place (cdhb and st georges come to mind)

They often rotate their monitors to allow for "portrait" mode for more
height.

Must be possible for desktop usage, but would be an utter waste for mythtv.

--
Criggie

http://criggie.dyndns.org/

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

stevehodge at gmail

Mar 25, 2011, 10:46 PM

Post #15 of 26 (2076 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 17:10, Stephen Worthington <stephen_agent [at] jsw
> wrote:

> I agree about wanting vertical space, but I got a 1920x1200 monitor so
> that it had the same vertical space as my old 19" CRT, and that works
> very well. I tend to use the extra horizontal screen space for all
> sorts of useful but not totally necessary things.
>

I guess you've got a 24" widescreen? It'll be interesting to see if those
panels survive in the market as I think 16:10 is declining in popularity.
But if I upgrade, one of those would probably be my choice.

Currently my desktop has two 19" 4:3 monitors, one is landscape, one is
portrait. The portrait one is what I use for browsing and most documents.
Landscape one gets used for games and spreadsheets and VMs mostly. It's nice
to be able to just maximize a window on the portrait monitor alone. OTOH, I
can't use subpixel rendering (i.e. ClearType) because Windows is too stupid
to understand how to do it properly in portrait orientation.

To match the portrait monitor's vertical space I'd need a 15" high screen
with 1280 lines. A 30" 1920x1080 would be pretty close to matching my two
monitors together (about the same space but with 20% less pixels). A 30"
2560x1600 would be great. But any 30" is going to cost at least $1500. Not
gonna happen.

Cheers,
Steve

stephen_agent at jsw

Mar 26, 2011, 12:58 AM

Post #16 of 26 (2078 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 18:46:30 +1300, you wrote:

>On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 17:10, Stephen Worthington <stephen_agent [at] jsw
>> wrote:
>
>> I agree about wanting vertical space, but I got a 1920x1200 monitor so
>> that it had the same vertical space as my old 19" CRT, and that works
>> very well. I tend to use the extra horizontal screen space for all
>> sorts of useful but not totally necessary things.
>>
>
>I guess you've got a 24" widescreen? It'll be interesting to see if those
>panels survive in the market as I think 16:10 is declining in popularity.
>But if I upgrade, one of those would probably be my choice.

27" - it was $1200 when I got it.

>Currently my desktop has two 19" 4:3 monitors, one is landscape, one is
>portrait. The portrait one is what I use for browsing and most documents.
>Landscape one gets used for games and spreadsheets and VMs mostly. It's nice
>to be able to just maximize a window on the portrait monitor alone. OTOH, I
>can't use subpixel rendering (i.e. ClearType) because Windows is too stupid
>to understand how to do it properly in portrait orientation.
>
>To match the portrait monitor's vertical space I'd need a 15" high screen
>with 1280 lines. A 30" 1920x1080 would be pretty close to matching my two
>monitors together (about the same space but with 20% less pixels). A 30"
>2560x1600 would be great. But any 30" is going to cost at least $1500. Not
>gonna happen.
>
>Cheers,
>Steve

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

steve at greengecko

Mar 26, 2011, 6:43 PM

Post #17 of 26 (2053 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 13:43 +1300, criggie [at] criggie wrote:
> On 26/03/11 10:07, Nick Rout wrote:
> > EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
> > floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh term).
>
> No opinion on the TV, but you should put ~$100 in for a wall bracket.
> My TV didn't budge at any time.
>
> Pedestal stands are too unstable, and after two events we should be
> quake-proofing.

+1. Mine ended up at a strainge angle but still firmly attached. I opted
for Panasonic too, but that was a year ago...

Steve
--
Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>
http://www.greengecko.co.nz
MSN: steve [at] greengecko
Skype: sholdowa

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

steve at greengecko

Mar 26, 2011, 6:51 PM

Post #18 of 26 (2048 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 18:45 +1300, criggie [at] criggie wrote:
> On 26/03/11 17:10, Stephen Worthington wrote:
> > I agree about wanting vertical space, but I got a 1920x1200 monitor so
> > that it had the same vertical space as my old 19" CRT, and that works
> > very well. I tend to use the extra horizontal screen space for all
> > sorts of useful but not totally necessary things.
>
>
> Have you ever been in a medical place (cdhb and st georges come to mind)
>
> They often rotate their monitors to allow for "portrait" mode for more
> height.
>
> Must be possible for desktop usage, but would be an utter waste for mythtv.
>
>
Not brilliant even for the desktop, as pixels aren't square...

--
Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>
http://www.greengecko.co.nz
MSN: steve [at] greengecko
Skype: sholdowa

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

robert at fisher

Mar 26, 2011, 7:39 PM

Post #19 of 26 (2055 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

.....and after two events we should be quake-proofing.

I would love to know what percentage of NZ homes now have emergency kits.

--
Regards, Robert

--------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Fisher
(aka - Rob, Bob, Robbie, Robbo, Fish)
www.fisher.net.nz
Phone: 03 383 5807
Mobile: 027 228 4698

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

stevehodge at gmail

Mar 26, 2011, 7:49 PM

Post #20 of 26 (2053 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 14:51, Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>wrote:

> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 18:45 +1300, criggie [at] criggie wrote:
> > They often rotate their monitors to allow for "portrait" mode for more
> > height.
> >
> > Must be possible for desktop usage, but would be an utter waste for
> mythtv.
> >
> >
> Not brilliant even for the desktop, as pixels aren't square...
>

What do you mean?

Cheers,
Steve

steve at greengecko

Mar 26, 2011, 9:53 PM

Post #21 of 26 (2052 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 15:49 +1300, Steve Hodge wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 14:51, Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>
> wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 18:45 +1300, criggie [at] criggie
> wrote:
> > They often rotate their monitors to allow for "portrait"
> mode for more
> > height.
> >
> > Must be possible for desktop usage, but would be an utter
> waste for mythtv.
> >
> >
>
> Not brilliant even for the desktop, as pixels aren't square...
>
> What do you mean?
>
> Cheers,
> Steve

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio

A lot are now square ( they weren't when I was working in image
processing but that was in the steam powered days - we had one expensive
monitor with square pixels, the rest were 4x3 ).

Widescreen PAL and 1080i are two local notable exceptions.

Steve

--
Steve Holdoway BSc(Hons) MNZCS <steve [at] greengecko>
http://www.greengecko.co.nz
MSN: steve [at] greengecko
Skype: sholdowa

Attachments:

smime.p7s (6.39 KB)

stevehodge at gmail

Mar 26, 2011, 10:52 PM

Post #22 of 26 (2055 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 17:53, Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>wrote:

> On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 15:49 +1300, Steve Hodge wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 14:51, Steve Holdoway <steve [at] greengecko>
> > wrote:
> > On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 18:45 +1300, criggie [at] criggie
> > wrote:
> > > They often rotate their monitors to allow for "portrait"
> > mode for more
> > > height.
> > >
> > > Must be possible for desktop usage, but would be an utter
> > waste for mythtv.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Not brilliant even for the desktop, as pixels aren't square...
> >
> > What do you mean?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio
>
> A lot are now square ( they weren't when I was working in image
> processing but that was in the steam powered days - we had one expensive
> monitor with square pixels, the rest were 4x3 ).
>

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any new monitor which doesn't have
square pixels. I thought you might be referring to the individual colour
elements (as I said Windows doesn't understand how to do subpixel rendering
in portrait mode). But I wouldn't have though non-square pixels would cause
many problems anyway unless they were very rectangular.

Cheers,
Steve

tortise at paradise

Apr 1, 2011, 12:43 AM

Post #23 of 26 (2014 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On 26/03/2011 10:07 a.m., Nick Rout wrote:
> EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
> floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
> term).
>
> I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
> 24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
> proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
> ethernet connectivity and DLNA.
>
> So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
> things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
> ever going to be worth it?

Nick I hope you'll let us all know what you decided, why, and did it
meet your expectations?

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

brett at davidson

Apr 1, 2011, 1:25 AM

Post #24 of 26 (2016 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

FWIW, I'm in the same boat as Nick except mine was a Panasonic.

I'm looking at the Panasonic V series or maybe a Samsung. (Like the
Samsung in our bedroom).

The Samsung has DLNA but it won't support any movies I have. (Not even
my camcorder avi ones). Never used it.
3D is overhyped and I'm not paying for 3D glasses for everyone. Once
they can make 3D holographically I "might" be in.

When I get round to deciding I'll take a laptop with me and test them
out. :-)

Brat.

On 01/04/11 20:43, tortise wrote:
> On 26/03/2011 10:07 a.m., Nick Rout wrote:
>> EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
>> floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
>> term).
>>
>> I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
>> 24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
>> proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
>> ethernet connectivity and DLNA.
>>
>> So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
>> things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
>> ever going to be worth it?
>
> Nick I hope you'll let us all know what you decided, why, and did it
> meet your expectations?
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtvnz mailing list
> mythtvnz [at] lists
> http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
> Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/
>

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

nick.rout at gmail

Apr 1, 2011, 6:17 PM

Post #25 of 26 (1999 views)
Permalink

Re: Slightly OT - which new TV [In reply to]

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:43 PM, tortise <tortise [at] paradise> wrote:
> On 26/03/2011 10:07 a.m., Nick Rout wrote:
>> EQC/Insurance will have to replace our Sony 46" TV, which hit the
>> floor and the centre speaker, rendering it munted (official ChCh
>> term).
>>
>> I really liked the Sony, good picture, 3 or 4 HDMI inputs, does
>> 24/50/60 fps at 1080p, has a setting to get rid of overscan, has
>> proper EDID info, sensible remote control, but was a generation before
>> ethernet connectivity and DLNA.
>>
>> So what should I be looking for in a TV these days, besides the above
>> things. Not sure I really need DLNA, but it might be useful. Is 3D
>> ever going to be worth it?
>
>
> Nick I hope you'll let us all know what you decided, why, and did it
> meet your expectations?

Haven't decided yet, making do with the old bedroom TV, a 32"
panasonic "hd ready" - in other words hopelessly 1368x768, bleech.

Saw what i really want, a sony 55" 720 series in the sony shop in
riccarton today, very thin, led/lcd. Must be good, Bob Parker was
looking at them too...

I will have to pay more than what insurance will get me for that
though I suspect.

_______________________________________________
mythtvnz mailing list
mythtvnz [at] lists
http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/mythtvnz
Archives http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/mythtvnz/

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads