"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:29:56 GMT, wrote:

As for HD - it is going to be worse. No broadcaster is going to spend
the kind of bandwidth necessary for high quality transmission of HD.
There may be areas of screen with nice fine detail, but the rest will
be a disgusting mess of MPEG artifacts - much worse than today on
standard definition. Forget what you have seen so far on the demos -
that doesn't reflect future reality.

d
I hate to disagree with you, but the first time I saw an HD picture it was
on a rear projection TV that was tuned to a channel broadcasting an HD
picture, not a demo. I was immediately aware of the improved quality of
the
picture and more impressed because of the fact that it was rear
projection.

One of my friends moved recently and has a TV that he bought 3 years ago
that was HD capable but he'd enver had it hooked up to a HD signal. Now
that he has, he tells me he almost hates to go out because of the
improvement. It's like watching everything for the first time.




Don't worry, you aren't disagreeing with me. HD is brilliant - it is
the future of HD that is going to be full of disappointment as more
and more channels want to get in on the act.

Quantity will win over quality every time, I'm afraid.

d

I hope you are wrong. There is still an acceptable standard that has yet to
be decided on by the public. Of course they aren't always the best judges,
as in the case of VHS winning out over Betamax.