NotebookForums.com › Forums › Off Topic › Desktop and Hardware Discussion › 1080p LCD recommendations
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

1080p LCD recommendations - Page 2

post #21 of 46
6/2/07 at 4:45pm
Hmm intresting, A little off topic but if you don't log in and try to post, it takes you to a blank screen and I was confused for a bit. Anyway getting back on topic..

I suggest getting a Sony Bravia 1080P LCD. The Bravia's have some Amazing Picture quality, rated by someone to have even higher picture quality then even the sharps. (Source was my Aunt who bought a Sharp 1080P screen from Costco and told me when she visited that she likes her Sharp but that Sonys had higher picture quality) Sharps are still good don't get me wrong, but I currently own 2 Bravia's and I love mine. The only complaits I've ever heard from people are the blacks on the Bravia. Not sure what you're watching but I never have blacks on my screen. Lifelike is what Sony's look like, lol.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 46
6/2/07 at 5:49pm
I have a 40" Sony Bravia 1080p LCD in my bedroom - it's a great TV. But, Sharp is currently one of the few (if not only) 32" LCD TVs with 1080p. Lots of people are picking them up as computer monitors. All the top brands give good pictures, so I doubt most of us could tell the diff in a test.

pdonket ... check out Kaltek's post in the Apple section - he just got the 32" Sharp and has it set up with his Mac.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 46
6/2/07 at 6:29pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks shazza, quite a few awesome pics in that post!
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 46
6/3/07 at 12:25am
Just saw this thread. My pics suck b/c my hands shake but you get a general idea. Sharp and a PC looks gorgeous, Better than the dell 2407wfp I had before.

http://www.notebookforums.com/newpos...ead197864.html

Thats my thread for anyone else and I can take more pics for anyone that wants
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 46
7/3/07 at 6:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockSteady View Post
1080p at sizes below about 50 inches aren't going to show much discernable difference as a TV. Few if any truly utilize beyond the 1080i range anyway. A LCD that can show 1900 X 1200 would be a better investment IMO. Still giving you the ability for the higher res without limiting. Something like a Samsung Syncmaster 305T.

That's totally wrong. I have a 1080p 37" Olevia HDTV and channel 7 broadcasts both 720 and 1080i and I do notice the quality difference! 1080i matters, and prices for HDTVs with that went up! Minie cost $1000 after rebates!

My Gateway 24" LCD monitor is supposed to do 1080i also.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 46
7/18/07 at 10:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspiredE1705 View Post
That's totally wrong. I have a 1080p 37" Olevia HDTV and channel 7 broadcasts both 720 and 1080i and I do notice the quality difference! 1080i matters, and prices for HDTVs with that went up! Minie cost $1000 after rebates!

My Gateway 24" LCD monitor is supposed to do 1080i also.

Did I say anything about the difference of 1080i and 720p?
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 46
7/19/07 at 2:09am
If you are getting a display for TV & gaming 720p or 1080p.


Personally I love my 32" 720p display. It has a computer mode (1360x768). I love it.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 46
7/19/07 at 2:32pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolApathy View Post
If you are getting a display for TV & gaming 720p or 1080p.


Personally I love my 32" 720p display. It has a computer mode (1360x768). I love it.

I would've thought that resolution would be a bit too low, I've seen some pics before and it does look pretty nice. You tempt me to buy.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 46
7/19/07 at 2:36pm
you know I thought it would be at first, but it really looks quite nice. It's definitely not setup to show 2 word documents side by side, but it is the perfect size for gaming & writing. Let me know if you want any pics of it in certain situations (gaming/word documents..web)...erc
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 46
7/19/07 at 3:20pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolApathy View Post
you know I thought it would be at first, but it really looks quite nice. It's definitely not setup to show 2 word documents side by side, but it is the perfect size for gaming & writing. Let me know if you want any pics of it in certain situations (gaming/word documents..web)...erc

If it's not too much trouble, I'd love if you posted a pic of it while playing any game you have on hand (recent game preferred) but don't go out of your way to do it, just if you have spare time or something. Also I guess a word document would be nice to see the sharpness of the text
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 46
7/19/07 at 4:13pm
As you can see the monitor can display 2 pages side by side. right click to enlarge then click again for the full pic. It dies not do the monitor justice with the jpeg compression but it gives you an idea.



























Reply
Reply
post #32 of 46
7/19/07 at 4:58pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks sol! It does look pretty nice, gotta go look around at HDTV's some time
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 46
7/19/07 at 5:11pm
the one in my sig... click on it
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 46
7/19/07 at 9:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiz33 View Post
Then you are missing out on the best signal for HDTV possible. OTA ATSC signal is the best signal for 1080i with the least amount of compression. Much better than Digital cable (which compress a lot of their HD signals) and Satellite TV (still some compression but better than cable). Also, you won't need one of the big fishbone antenna anymore for HDTV. Current HDTV antennas are much more compact and can be place at the edge of the roof.
Uh FIOS.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 46
7/19/07 at 9:47pm
1080i sucks if you have a lot of movement.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 46
7/26/07 at 6:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarqHelmet View Post
Uh FIOS.
Dream on. OTA HDTV is 8GB per hour which roughly translate to 22.75MB/sec per channel. Most major city have abut 10 stations broadcasting in HD now (the 4 major network plus PBS, WC and maybe a handful of local stations) and that would means 220+MB/sec with translate to 180Mbps just for local programming. Adding all the basic cable and premium HD channels will add at least another 150-200Mbps so you are talking about 300-400Mbps of un-compressed bandwidth. This is 10+ times more info than FIOS can handle.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 46
7/26/07 at 8:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiz33 View Post
Dream on. OTA HDTV is 8GB per hour which roughly translate to 22.75MB/sec per channel. Most major city have abut 10 stations broadcasting in HD now (the 4 major network plus PBS, WC and maybe a handful of local stations) and that would means 220+MB/sec with translate to 180Mbps just for local programming. Adding all the basic cable and premium HD channels will add at least another 150-200Mbps so you are talking about 300-400Mbps of un-compressed bandwidth. This is 10+ times more info than FIOS can handle.
Wiz, you do not understand FiOS. while Verizon limits DL/UL BW on the internet side Fiber has considerably more bandwidth than copper could ever provide & will eventually replace copper at all levels. I could get ino the details of fiber optics vs copper and explain to you the capabilities of each as well as the limitations & signaling issues with Cable vs the advantages of single mode fibre connections. suffice to say this link should do the trick... http://www22.verizon.com/content/fio...nel+lineup.htm (look at the bottom) 20 HD channels. Unfortuantely that is more channels than my cable provider gives me in HD ..and keep in mind they are now offering 50mbps DL per household on the internet side in certain markets. Allocating 10gbps for TV service across all households would not be out of the question in the future.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 46
7/26/07 at 9:38pm
You're right that Fibre does have much more bandwidth than copper (which tops out at about 6Mbps in close distance). But if you look at there TV lineup, just the HD channels 9 local plus up to 19 premium is going to be close to 600Mbps. add to that all the basic cable and music channel and it goes beyond 700Mbps easily. I think the current world record for residental is only about 200Mbps (that's with combining multiple fibre channels). Still far short of the 700Mbps needed for totally un-compressed TV signal, that means they are compressing quite a bit to get it to work.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 46
7/26/07 at 10:16pm
You keep comparing residential internet services to TV services. While the bw supplied to each household on the internet side is spec'd per household HD & SD digital services are shared across the entire network & provided to each household.

On a FiOS network Analog based channels are transmitted at all times, where digital channels (which requires a STB) are transmitted in a OD fashion, cutting down considerably on compression requirements since only one channel is being recied at a time. While verizon has not provided any details regarding the compression method (or lack of) it is confirmed that the images (as reported in several forums) are on par with OTA signals while using an HDTV w/HDMI inputs.

My Father lives out in Keller, TX (where FiOS was first tested) and he has the internet but does not subscribe to TV servies.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 46
7/26/07 at 10:52pm
Bandwidth is bandwidth, doesn't matter if you are using it for internet or TV but you are right that if they are doing OD for HD services, that would cut down the bandwidth requirement by a large margin. Although for TIVO type DVR user that are used to recording/watching 2 HD channels at the same time the requirement would still be quite a bit. This would also applies to homes with multiple TVs watching multiple channels at the same time.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Desktop and Hardware Discussion
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Off Topic › Desktop and Hardware Discussion › 1080p LCD recommendations