[John Corn]

Forget Washington politicking, the 30 million people who own DVD players will be the ones who cast the deciding votes on the success of digital television.

Congress and the FCC say that broadcasters will begin sending out their shows in digital form by 2006. Consumers have been unwilling to wait until then, gobbling up digital movies and music videos on DVD as fast as they're churned out.

That's because DVDs deliver everything DTV promises -- from theater-quality pictures to Internet interactivity, without the added cost of upgrading your cable or satellite network.

But without a high-definition TV, DVD owners might as well watch a VHS tape, because the picture and sound quality are limited. Television retailers are hoping to use that as a selling point since the HDTV market has sagged of late. An added benefit: Those HDTV sets can be wired later to receive digital broadcasts.

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,54442,00.html

 

[Nick]

I've always believed that "good enough" isn't. DVDs have been out for what - 4-5 years now? Their increasing popularity has sold tons of DVD players, but not that many HDTV sets.

When it comes to PQ, apparently the average consumer thinks 'good enough' is, well, good enough.

 

[EvanS]

Originally posted by Nick
I've always believed that "good enough" isn't. DVDs have been out for what - 4-5 years now? Their increasing popularity has sold tons of DVD players, but not that many HDTV sets.

When it comes to PQ, apparently the average consumer thinks 'good enough' is, well, good enough.

I dunno Nick, I think it is more a combination of things. When you first hooked up that DVD via S-Vid there was probably a HUGE "OOOH--AHHHH" heard through the whole house. Which is fully justified in my mind, especially if you werepreviously renting tapes at the local BlockBuster.
Now ya get someone like me (and I know quite a few people whose timing, demeanor and finances were similar) who needed a new TV 2 to 3 years ago.
I was not willing to spend the HUGE $$$ for an HDTV at the time, let alone having to redo the cabinetry for the HT setup that I had just assembled. So, having just spent about $3K on DD 5.1 and DTS audio I was having a hard time forking over several MORE $$K for a new TV. So I went with a GOOD quality 32" flat screen and again, there was another OOHHH AHHH in the house, especially when I switched the DVD to compnent video. I got that $1400 TV on sale for just under $1000.
NOW I am in a position of go HDTV, and truly understand how much better it would be, but prices are falling AND there is the psych-aspect of ditching a $1K TV that is barely broken in.

anyway, I know there are a lot of "good enough is good enough" people out there but I also believe that there are at least as many "this is already so much better than before" and also "I just can't spend THAT much on a TV" people.

With that said I will now take the time to proclaim that "WITH GOD AS MY WITNESS I WILL NEVER WATCH SDTV IN MY HOUSE AGAIN...after the 1st of the year, anyway"

 

[Mark Holtz]

Originally posted by John Corn
But without a high-definition TV, DVD owners might as well watch a VHS tape, because the picture and sound quality are limited.

Ooops, that's wrong. The standard VHS is only capable of 240 lines of resolution, while DVD is capable of the full picture capability of 480 lines. (The other 45 lines are in the "black bar", and is often used for closed captioning.)

 

[Jacob S]

I wonder what all of this is going to look like on the new digital tv's with an analog to digital converter, to convert the analog signal from the dvd player back to digital to the television set, if this is even possible?

Will dvd's be made different when the digital standard comes about to have more lines for the new tv's? How would we be able to adjust to all of this change in technology all of a sudden?

 

[AllieVi]

Originally posted by Z'Loth
Ooops, that's wrong. The standard VHS is only capable of 240 lines of resolution, while DVD is capable of the full picture capability of 480 lines. (The other 45 lines are in the "black bar", and is often used for closed captioning.)

Oops, that's wrong.

VHS (and all other standard video) provides 480 horizontal lines. The 240 lines you mention is the number of vertical lines that can be distinguished.

It's unfortunate that the term "lines" is used in these two very different ways when describing the picture. A different term for one of them would eliminate the confusion.

 

[MarkA]

"But without a high-definition TV, DVD owners might as well watch a VHS tape, because the picture and sound quality are limited."

Again, I SERIOUSLY hope that's a joke. Let's compare:

VHS:

Blurry
Snowy
No special features
Half the movie USUALLY missing

DVD:

Sharp
Clean
Tons of special features
USUALLY has whole movie

 

[catman]

Does anyone remember beta vcrs ? Remember them saying then , " beta will be around along time . " Same thing here .

 

[Jacob S]

Can they not make a VCR tape that is able to have a higher resolution for HD? Is it possible?

 

[Mark Holtz]

Yes, it's called D-VHS, and has a higher resolution than DVD. However, the technology is very expensive.

 

[Jacob S]

Wow, I had no idea that they had such a high quality for VHS. Are these commonly found in stores that sell electronics or have to be bought specially and what are the prices of those vcr's? Also since they have something offered in a vcr vhs tape that is higher than a dvd, is there a dvd that can outperform the vcr d-vhs tape seeing that a regular dvd outperforms a regular vcr tape?