Maybe flatscreen TV is ok, after all ...

[William Sommerwerck]

As I've said many times, I'm very much in favor of Big Government
and highly intrusive legislation -- where it's appropriate.

Except that the "progressives" go way beyond "where appropriate".
More accurately,they are REgressives.
(it seems like every city and state they run are broke,in debt,and crime-
ridden.Just as in other nations.)

I don't think that's true. European societies are different from American --
they have many more years of "tradition" which tends to level things.

The real problems occur when you have institutionalized differences in
social classes.

US Gov't was meant to be "limited", not "Big".
(like in "Big Brother", rather appropriate...)
Guys like you are screwing that up, along with America.

America without government interference would be even worse -- except "guys
like you" would consider it natural/normal, and therefore "good".

The current fracas over regulating money institutions is a good example.
They screw up, by doing stupid and immoral things they shouldn't have been
doing even if they hadn't been regulated -- and then they want to be left
alone, to continue effing-up the economy.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I have spent the last few days looking very closely at
my new TV, and I can honestly say that I have not
seen a single motion or scaling artifact at any resolution.

Scaling artifacts have nothing to do with technology. I have a 32" 720p
Vizio that displays 1080i beautifully.

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:hipjrf$3aj$1@news.eternal-september.org:

As I've said many times, I'm very much in favor of Big Government
and highly intrusive legislation -- where it's appropriate.

Except that the "progressives" go way beyond "where appropriate".
More accurately,they are REgressives.
(it seems like every city and state they run are broke,in debt,and
crime- ridden.Just as in other nations.)

I don't think that's true. European societies are different from
American -- they have many more years of "tradition" which tends to
level things.

Who's talking about Europe? Not me. I'm talking about AMERICA.

You want "European",MOVE there.
they have a long tradition of serfdom,too.

The real problems occur when you have institutionalized differences in
social classes.

What a load of crap. "social justice" nonsense.
If anything,socialism locks people into "institutional differences",whereas
capitalism allows people upwards mobility,based on their own efforts.
Socialism is "redistribution of wealth",benefitting those who determine who
gets what.

US Gov't was meant to be "limited", not "Big".
(like in "Big Brother", rather appropriate...)
Guys like you are screwing that up, along with America.

America without government interference would be even worse -- except
"guys like you" would consider it natural/normal, and therefore
"good".

Ah,the argument that any "gov't interference" is justification for massive
interference. A false argument,to use Obama's words.

I said LIMITED government,not the absence of gov't.

The current fracas over regulating money institutions is a good
example. They screw up, by doing stupid and immoral things they
shouldn't have been doing even if they hadn't been regulated -- and
then they want to be left alone, to continue effing-up the economy.



The financial institutions are screwed up because Barney Frank(D) and Chris

Dodd(D) blocked (Repub)legislation to correct other DemocRATs
(Carter,Clinton) screwups.

AND,Dodd and Franks -personally benefitted- from it.
It's become clear the DemocRATs are the Party of Corruption.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I said LIMITED government,not the absence of gov't.

Oh, I do, too. I just feel the line of limitation falls a lot farther to the
left.

The current fracas over regulating money institutions is a good
example. They screw up, by doing stupid and immoral things they
shouldn't have been doing even if they hadn't been regulated -- and
then they want to be left alone, to continue effing-up the economy.

The financial institutions are screwed up because Barney Frank(D)
and Chris Dodd(D) blocked (Repub)legislation to correct other
DemocRATs (Carter, Clinton) screwups.

I couldn't disagree more. The institutions were doing things that were not
only stupid, but immoral. Had they not been so greedy, these things would
not have occurred, regulation or not.

I believe in regulation where it is needed. And the banking industry needs
more of it, badly.

 

[GregS]

In article <Xns9D0090761175Bjyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44>, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:zeJ3n.541$Cn1.366@newsfe25.ams2:


"Klaatu" <nospam@today.com> wrote in message
news:3fOdnRUYT45709LWnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d@centurytel.net...

"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:4Tu3n.19715$2N3.18738@newsfe14.ams2...
Most on here are well aware of my general hatred of the dreadful
pictures that most flatscreen (LCD) TVs produce, and the even worse
situation when you stick them on a DTV signal.

So I surprised myself when I was particularly taken by the picture
on a 50" Panasonic plasma that I saw in a local supermarket. In
fact, so impressed was I with the standard resolution picture,
provided by no less than its own internal DTV receiver, let alone
the HD pictures from sat, and the unbelievably good full res pics
from a BluRay player, that I have actually bought one. It was just
Ł699 complete with a five year full parts and labour (inc the panel)
warranty. How good is that for a 50" plas ? I had always thought
that plas piccies blew the socks off of LCDs, but the prices of
these were just prohibitive.

Anyway, it was delivered Monday, and yesterday I had my replacement
HD sat box delivered and installed, to go with my shiny new HD
subscription upgrade. I have to say that I am absolutely delighted
with the picture on DTTV, standard res sat and HD sat. The standard
res transmissions look at least as good, and possibly even slightly
better than they did on my 37" Tosh CRT set, and the HD
transmissions are stunningly good.

So there we have it. Another old Luddite finally converted, and
prepared to accept that with the right equipment, DTV and a flat
panel TV *can* replace a CRT set being fed with a good quality
analogue signal ...

Arfa

Evidently, plasmas are incredibly expensive in the UK. If my
currency conversion is correct,
(1$ = 1.6266pound), then your TV was $1136.00. 50 inch plasmas were
around $500 here in the US during Christmas time. And an additional
3 year warranty was around $70.
Why so expensive? It seems plasmas are being phased out here in the
states.

Klaatu

You would struggle to buy a half-way decent LCD TV for 500 bucks
equivalent here in the UK. I don't know where the idea comes from that
plasmas are being phased out.

because of California legislation concerning "excessive power consumption"
on large screen flat-panel TVs.
The "progressives" have set a limit on a TV's power consumption,for
California.[screw them...]


It's not going to affect other countries,except for some of their imports
to the US.

I find it interesting to walk by the TV's in the showroom. At least it nice and warm.
I can feel the heat comming off. Some are really warm. LED's seem to be the coolest.

I don't do plasmas since they have an idiotic shiny front screen.

My LCD Visio TV has a lip sinc control. For the most part its under control.
Still idiotic that TV's don't have a selectable audio compressor or AVC.

greg

 

[GregS]

In article <hiq7p1$gdb$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:

In article <Xns9D0090761175Bjyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44>, Jim Yanik
jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:zeJ3n.541$Cn1.366@newsfe25.ams2:


"Klaatu" <nospam@today.com> wrote in message
news:3fOdnRUYT45709LWnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d@centurytel.net...

"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:4Tu3n.19715$2N3.18738@newsfe14.ams2...

on large screen flat-panel TVs.
The "progressives" have set a limit on a TV's power consumption,for
California.[screw them...]


It's not going to affect other countries,except for some of their imports
to the US.

I find it interesting to walk by the TV's in the showroom. At least it nice and
warm.
I can feel the heat comming off. Some are really warm. LED's seem to be the
coolest.

I don't do plasmas since they have an idiotic shiny front screen.

My LCD Visio TV has a lip sinc control. For the most part its under control.
Still idiotic that TV's don't have a selectable audio compressor or AVC.

I am working on my new TV room. The real big problems now is
trying to get more than one station, cause you need at least
2 channels at all times. I would really like to have at least 3 selectable
channels to view at all times. Sure its a home theater, but its also
a sports room.

In the old house we had two 32 inch CRTs set up in the living room.
I can't think of one time where watching only one channel is any good, except
for watching a special movie.

These cable boxes are getting out of hand. I should talk to my brother who
has many channels in his resturant.

greg

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:hiq5g6$b3c$1@news.eternal-september.org:

I said LIMITED government,not the absence of gov't.

Oh, I do, too. I just feel the line of limitation falls a lot farther
to the left.

That's an ABSENCE of limitation,what you postulate.
Gov't control over as much as possible.
Regulate here,regulate there;control,control,control.

The current fracas over regulating money institutions is a good
example. They screw up, by doing stupid and immoral things they
shouldn't have been doing even if they hadn't been regulated -- and
then they want to be left alone, to continue effing-up the economy.

The financial institutions are screwed up because Barney Frank(D)
and Chris Dodd(D) blocked (Repub)legislation to correct other
DemocRATs (Carter, Clinton) screwups.

I couldn't disagree more.

So WHAT? you'd be wrong. It's called willful blindness.

The institutions were doing things that were
not only stupid, but immoral. Had they not been so greedy, these
things would not have occurred, regulation or not.

"greed"? Is making a profit "greed"?
First,they were forced into making questionable loans by DEMOCRATS.Then
Democrats Frank and Dodd BLOCKED regulation proposed by Republicans,but
BENEFITTED from their own corruption.

I believe in regulation where it is needed. And the banking industry
needs more of it, badly.

regulation that DemocRATs Dodd and Frank blocked.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I don't do plasmas since they have an idiotic shiny front screen.

Mine doesn't.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

The institutions were doing things that were not only stupid,
but immoral. Had they not been so greedy, these things
would not have occurred, regulation or not.

"greed"? Is making a profit "greed"?

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to make a
profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the securities you
sell is absolutely wrong.

 

[AZ Nomad]

On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 10:17:20 -0800, William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

The institutions were doing things that were not only stupid,
but immoral. Had they not been so greedy, these things
would not have occurred, regulation or not.

"greed"? Is making a profit "greed"?

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to make a
profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the securities you
sell is absolutely wrong.

Oh come on, what's morally wrong about writing a loan to somebody who
can't afford a house and lying in the application about their income, debts,
or even if they have a job. Nothing wrong about writing the loan
and punting it, right? It makes a nice profit and the short term
is all that matters.

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:hiqben$qc$1@news.eternal-september.org:

The institutions were doing things that were not only stupid,
but immoral. Had they not been so greedy, these things
would not have occurred, regulation or not.

"greed"? Is making a profit "greed"?

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to make a
profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the securities you
sell is absolutely wrong.

How did they(banks,I presume) "grossly misrepresent" the nature of the
securities they sold? What securities?

exactly what are you referring to? Be specific.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[William Sommerwerck]

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to
make a profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the
securities you sell is absolutely wrong.

How did they(banks,I presume) "grossly misrepresent" the nature
of the securities they sold? What securities?
exactly what are you referring to? Be specific.

The bundling of shaky mortgages.

 

[Arfa Daily]

I find it interesting to walk by the TV's in the showroom. At least it
nice and warm.
I can feel the heat comming off. Some are really warm. LED's seem to be
the coolest.

I don't do plasmas since they have an idiotic shiny front screen.

Wot, and CRTs didn't ? Many of the antiglare finishes on LCD screens serve
only to further worsen the already fuzzy picture, caused by the horribly
slow LC cells ... : )

Arfa
>

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I just watched "Hellboy II" on a 59.58" plasma screen. Impressive.

 

[Arfa Daily]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hipkeg$6g6$1@news.eternal-september.org...

I have spent the last few days looking very closely at
my new TV, and I can honestly say that I have not
seen a single motion or scaling artifact at any resolution.

Scaling artifacts have nothing to do with technology. I have a 32" 720p
Vizio that displays 1080i beautifully.

I'm talking more the other way round where a 'standard' low res digital
signal is being upscaled by the panel drive electronics, to make it display
'correctly' on a full HD 1920 x 1080 panel. The display driver seems better
able to this in an artifact-free way on a plasma, than on an LCD.
Downscaling is relatively easy. You just have to pick some H and V 'lines'
to throw away, and then do it.

I have an expensive HP ws LCD monitor on the end of this computer, and it is
very very good when operating in native res, but at lower resolutions, it is
very poor. Likewise, I have a 32" LCD TV with VGA input, in my workshop,
connected to both a TV antenna, and the computer attached to the weather sat
receiver. When displaying a standard res TV signal, the picture is barely
acceptable, but when it is switched over to its native V resolution of 720,
and fed with an XVGA signal from the computer, the picture is like a fine
quality photograph, which is exactly what I want for displaying weather sat
pictures.

When the plasma TV that I now have is displaying a low res terrestrial DTV
signal, the picture is very impressive - very nearly as good as my old Tosh
CRT TV. The plas has a full HD panel, so considerable display drive
processing is taking place to match that low res signal to the physical
panel pixels, yet the picture is, as far as you can see, artifact-free. It
was this factor which initially drew to me to this TV from the other side of
the store. So convinced was I that it must be displaying an HD transmission,
that I had the sales boy pull the antenna from the back of the TV to prove
that the picture went away (it did!)

I don't like this 'con' in the way that most places are selling flatscreen
LCDs. Almost everywhere that you go (as far as I have seen, true in the U.S.
as well as here) these sets are displayed for sale with either an HD picture
showing, or worse yet, a BluRay picture. Of course, they look excellent -
LCD as well as plas. But when you ask to see them displaying a 'standard'
res DTV signal, the store conveniently doesn't have one ...

John Lewis, where I bought my plas, were displaying the set with a standard
res picture, and were able to also show me HD and BluRay, so they got the
sale.

There has been quite a lot of bother this side of the pond with people
buying LCDs based on what they saw in the store, and then being very
disappointed when they got them home and stuck them on their own low-res
antenna signals ...

Arfa

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:hir0rm$che$1@news.eternal-september.org:

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to
make a profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the
securities you sell is absolutely wrong.

How did they(banks,I presume) "grossly misrepresent" the nature
of the securities they sold? What securities?
exactly what are you referring to? Be specific.

The bundling of shaky mortgages.

so how do you think the banks should have dealt with the shaky mortgages
that they were FORCED to make? (by DemocRATs)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[William Sommerwerck]

Scaling artifacts have nothing to do with technology. I have a 32" 720p
Vizio that displays 1080i beautifully.

I'm talking more the other way round where a 'standard' low res digital
signal is being upscaled by the panel drive electronics, to make it
display
'correctly' on a full HD 1920 x 1080 panel. The display driver seems
better
able to this in an artifact-free way on a plasma, than on an LCD.

I've compared the upscaling in my Sony BDP-S550 player with the upscaling in
the Pioneer plasma set. There is no comparison! The player does an
outstanding job, to the point where you sometimes wonder whether you're
watching SD or HD, while the plasma is of, at best, mediocre quality.

Based on the reviews I've seen, the consensus is that both LCD and plasma
sets do a poor job of upscaling SD.

Again, I don't see what motion artifacts have to do with the quality of
upscaling.

Downscaling is relatively easy. You just have to pick some H and V 'lines'
to throw away, and then do it.

Actually, the lines are averaged. Or they should be.

I have an expensive HP ws LCD monitor on the end of this computer,
and it is very very good when operating in native res, but at lower
resolutions, it is very poor.

I've seen the same thing. But, again, that's due to poor scaling -- not that
the display is LCD. (The fact you're watching a static image close up
doesn't help, either.)

I don't like this 'con' in the way that most places are selling flatscreen
LCDs. Almost everywhere that you go (as far as I have seen, true in the
U.S.
as well as here) these sets are displayed for sale with either an HD
picture
showing, or worse yet, a BluRay picture. Of course, they look excellent -
LCD as well as plas. But when you ask to see them displaying a 'standard'
res DTV signal, the store conveniently doesn't have one ...

Few people buy flatscreen sets just to watch SD material.

There has been quite a lot of bother this side of the pond with people
buying LCDs based on what they saw in the store, and then being very
disappointed when they got them home and stuck them on their own
low-res antenna signals ...

No offense, but what did they expect? In the US, you can get digital SD and
HD programming over the air. Except for low-powered "local" broadcasts,
analog TV has been discontinued.

In the US, most people have cable service, and a set-top converter that
supplies a fair amount of true HD adds $6 to your monthly bill (for
Comcast). The image quality on SD is perfectly fine, and on HD is superb.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to
make a profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the
securities you sell is absolutely wrong.

How did they(banks,I presume) "grossly misrepresent" the nature
of the securities they sold? What securities?
exactly what are you referring to? Be specific.

The bundling of shaky mortgages.

so how do you think the banks should have dealt with the shaky
mortgages that they were FORCED to make? (by DemocRATs)

No one forced. Their broke their own rules.

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:hisefi$7t7$1@news.eternal-september.org:

No. But making a profit, by whatever means possible, simply to
make a profit, is. And grossly misrepresenting the nature of the
securities you sell is absolutely wrong.

How did they(banks,I presume) "grossly misrepresent" the nature
of the securities they sold? What securities?
exactly what are you referring to? Be specific.

The bundling of shaky mortgages.

so how do you think the banks should have dealt with the shaky
mortgages that they were FORCED to make? (by DemocRATs)

No one forced. Their broke their own rules.

More willful blindness.

Again,you are mistaken.
The banks were threatened by the DemocRATs to make questionable
loans.Pressured into making them.

Again,how would you have the banks deal with the shaky loans they had to
make?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[William Sommerwerck]

No one forced them. Their broke their own rules.

More willful blindness.
Again,you are mistaken.
The banks were threatened by the DemocRATs to make questionable
loans. Pressured into making them.

Again,how would you have the banks deal with the shaky loans they had to
make?

This is not my understanding of the situation -- not as it was told in the
news. Specific evidence, please.