Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Entertainment Idle

HDTV Expert Alfred Poor Tells You What to Buy and What Not to Buy (Video) 324

Posted by Roblimo
from the there's-no-such-thing-as-a-TV-that's-too-big dept.
Alfred Poor's website is called HDTV Almanac. That's where he talks about the latest HDTV industry news and changes. He also writes about HDTVs and monitors for a variety of industry publications and does some marketing consulting for manufacturers in the field. In this 17 minute video, Alfred tells us what features we should look for in our next TV buy and which ones aren't worth spending extra money on. He also says that for a variety of non-technical reasons, you might want to consider buying your next TV between now and June -- and says you should think about getting a 3D TV even if there aren't many 3D TV shows you want to watch right now.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HDTV Expert Alfred Poor Tells You What to Buy and What Not to Buy (Video)

Comments Filter:
  • by jkflying (2190798) on Monday March 26, 2012 @08:53AM (#39473125)

    BUY BUY BUY!!!!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      People are going to buy anyways. No one actually needs to tell consumers to consume. Supply attempts to meet demand.

      Most new TV products, like all new products, attempt to come in with all the bells and whistles at a given price point; unless you are prepared to do the research yourself then you're like most people wanting an expert to break it down and allow us to make an informed decision. This does of course introduce another point of failure, the expert. Which expert to listen to?

      At the end of the day,

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:43AM (#39473521)

        >People are going to buy anyways. No one actually needs to tell consumers to consume. Supply attempts to meet demand.

        Many people would disagree with you. The US consumer confidence index, while in the rise, has been pretty damned low for the past few years. Unfortunately, the US economy is largely reliant on rampant consumerism. Lack of consumer confidence means consumers are less likely to spend money, less spending of money by consumers is bad for the US economy.

    • by realityimpaired (1668397) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:13AM (#39473261)

      When they figure out how to do 3D TV's which don't require that I wear clunkly glasses and keep my head perfectly level, I'll consider buying a 3D TV. Until then, the 42" LG flatscreen that I bought 5 years ago works perfectly well. It does 1080p, the picture is bright enough and clear enough, and it has 2 component video inputs and 3 HDMI, which is better than a lot of TV's on the market today.

      For the foreseeable future, I don't see any reason to replace it unless it decides to shuffle off its mortal coil.

      • by Moryath (553296) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:17AM (#39473297)

        Given the size of my living room, a 720p 50" Sony I bought years ago is doing just fine. It doesn't need 1080p, because at the distance I'm sitting from it, the eye can't tell the difference anyways.

        http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html [carltonbale.com]

        • by Jmc23 (2353706)
          How big is your living room? I used to wear glasses and even at 20' I can tell the difference between 1080p and 720p on my 37"!
          • I'd bet that's more the result of a poor scalar, than your eye distinguishing between the different resolutions.
      • by poetmatt (793785)

        exactly. it's almost beyond comedy to act like buying anything *now* is ever good advice.

        In addition we have 4K tv's on the way. Wouldn't a better time to buy a TV be right when 4K TV's become widespread and relevant 1080P TV's become cheap as dirt?

        • Wouldn't a better time to buy a TV be right when 4K TV's become widespread and relevant 1080P TV's become cheap as dirt?

          Not if A. your TV just failed, or B. you're trying to put together a home theater PC with the latest version of XBMC and you've discovered that it doesn't have a composite output and your existing 480i TV doesn't have a VGA or HDMI input. And I don't see 4K (i.e. 2160p) TVs becoming widespread for a long time. There isn't enough room in the OTA spectrum for 4K, and people with old TVs don't want to have to buy yet another converter box to downscale 4K broadcasts to 2K (i.e. 1080p).

          • by afidel (530433)
            My tv just failed and I went out and bought a 2011 LED backlit non-3D model on clearance sale ($550 on a $850 MSRP model). I'm really not sure why you would want to pay twice as much for a screen with almost identical specifications but with some added electronics for 3D that are of basically no use today and arguably likely to always be of little use.
        • 4K on the way (Score:5, Informative)

          by AlfredPoor (2352218) <apoor@verizon.net> on Monday March 26, 2012 @10:18AM (#39473847) Homepage
          Yes, 4K television is under development. ("4K" is roughly equivalent to 4 times the resolution of 1080p, for those not familiar with the term.) I would not recommend waiting for 4K for several reasons. First, people are fine with watching DVDs (which are standard definition) on their HDTVs right now, and don't even bother getting the Blu-ray version of a movie (which is high definition). They tend to sit too far from the screen for its size, which means that they can't see the added detail anyway. They're not going to sit twice as close (or get a set twice as large) in order to get the extra detail that 4K offers. And we're probably at least 10 years away -- if that -- from having a distribution system (broadcast and physical media) that can get the image to your set in the first place. So I'm not going to postpone my purchase just for 4K technology.

          Alfred Poor
          HDTV Almanac
        • Advising people to postpone their purchase is equally silly, if they're after a TV that comes with features they want but don't currently have. Sure, in a few months, TV's will have become bigger, cheaper, and they will come with more features. This have pretty much always been the case, especially since flat panel displays became commonplace. Not everyone needs 3D, 4K, built-in full feature media players or digital tuners, or a TV larger than 55". If you're just looking to replace your clunky 720p "HD
      • by skids (119237) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:25AM (#39473353) Homepage

        I've found the tunable 3rd party glasses (Monster MV3D or XPAND X104) require significantly less head leveling. FWIW.

        (BTW if you are buying for 3D, DLP is the better performer in this space, despite what manufacturers say about their LED/LCD/Plasma refresh rates. Problem being you can no longer get a DLP set smaller than huge.)

        • Dual DLP projectors with a 3D separation box (there are several) is even nicer, but you'll have to align the two images very well.

      • by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:44AM (#39473531)

        3D is a gimmick, just like it always has been up to this point. I'll invest in 3D when we're seeing true 3-dimensional holography without the need for special glasses, and it doesn't seem like that's going to be anytime soon...

        Plus I always get headaches after a couple hours of watching 3D content, so I avoid it in the theater whenever I can. The only film I even care to see in 3D at this point is The Hobbit [imdb.com], and that's not so much because it's 3D in itself but because I've been watching the behind the scenes footage of their technical setup [youtube.com] and am interested to see the difference in quality compared to the typical shit-tastic, fake 3D slapped on top of a 2D movie, Hollywood crap.

        • by ZorinLynx (31751)

          Even though 3D is a gimmick, 3D sets are still a good idea to buy due to response time.

          For 3D to work, the pixel response time has to be VERY fast. So you are guaranteed a set with very good response time if you buy one that has 3D ability. Even if you never use the 3D ability, you will benefit!

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        The problem isn't technological. I'll buy a 3DTV when they discover a way for 3D to actually be an important part of the story and to move the story (and my emotions) in ways that regular 2DTV cannot. So far, they have not been able to do it at the movie theaters so my expectation is that they will not be able to do this for quite some time.

        • Back when color film was first created, it was a new aspect of the image that film makers had to learn how to use. In fact, in the early days the studios would employ Color Supervisors, who would work with the director to make sure that the colors of the frame were not only pleasing aesthetically, but could be used to enhance the story emotionally. Of course as time goes on we don't need Color Supervisors anymore; film makers have a grasp of how to use color.

          Right now we have a similar thing happening on
      • by b4dc0d3r (1268512) on Monday March 26, 2012 @10:11AM (#39473779)

        "You might want to consider" is about the same as "If you're in the market" plus a little of "Take a moment and think about if your wife has been complaining about something with the TV."

        If you are in the market, and especially if you are in the market and don't realize it, this is probably great advice. If you are not in the market, even the normally terrible summary doesn't tell you to buy one, only consider it.

        I don't understand the knee-jerk "It works for me" replies to any 3D TV story. I'm interested, I don't have one yet, and having this guy's opinion gives me more info to base my decision on.

        In other words, if your needs are fulfilled right now, you are very likely not the target audience.

      • by Jmc23 (2353706)
        Um passive 3d? It requires glasses, but they aren't clunky and you can basically put the lenses onto any frame you want. You don't have to keep your head perfectly level if you sit at a decent distance. It does require you to be vertical, so if you're one of those depressed people that's always lying down watching tv or one of those scrawny people who can't hold his head up, then they really aren't for you, what is for you is probably some exercise.
      • by tgibbs (83782) on Monday March 26, 2012 @10:30AM (#39473995)

        Actually, most modern 3D technology does not require you to keep your head perfectly level. Older 3D glasses that used linear polarization showed crosstalk if you tipped your head but this is not the case with the modern technology. "Active" (shutter) glasses (the somewhat clunky ones) work perfectly well with moderate tips of the head, although your brain gets confused if you tip your head completely sideways (because the parallax is not in the direction that your brain expects from the position of your eyes). Most modern passive 3D systems use circular polarization, which is similarly insensitive to head angle.

      • For the best experience in mortal coil shuffling, I recommend Monster Cable brand mortal coil. It's death contacts are gold tipped, because that matters to digital mortal coil shuffling just as much as analog mortal coil shuffling.

    • Want some real advice? Do not buy a 3D tv. There's almost no content, the technology is immature, and the price will only go lower for better technology as time goes on.

      BTW - this guy is no expert.

      Who submitted this shite anyway? Oh, there was no submitter - it's a slashvertisement brought to you by roblimo. Can we have a way to down-mod stories? We've only been asking for that for years and years and years now. It would be better than those stupid anti_social_media buttons.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26, 2012 @08:54AM (#39473129)

    I have tested NVIDIA 3D technology with some games at it's awesome! The effect is even more real because you are actually interracting with the world. For example Left4Dead is great with 3D glasses. Now we just need more support from game developers.

    • I played Crysis 2 on the Xbox at a friend's house. He has a Samsung 3D TV using powered glasses (I don't know the tech involved, but they were not shutter glasses, apparently they send some sort of pulse through the lense) that were very comfortable.

      Anyway, I nearly creamed myself. It is a crazy experience playing a FPS, looking down the iron sights and target being away there, in the distance, really...

      The TV (I don't know the exact model) had it's own native conversion process for other games which worked

    • by ifrag (984323)

      Now we just need more support from game developers.

      The benefit games have is the 3D information was already there, even retroactively, so it could instantly work on a bunch of older titles.

      It would be nice if NVidia would support OpenGL 3D-vision in games (again?). I've heard older drivers could do this but have never found any workable solution for current drivers.

      • The benefit games have is the 3D information was already there, even retroactively

        But even if the information is there, it's not automatically extractable. Because each game has its own unit scale (one may use inches, another centimeters, another meters), a driver doesn't necessarily know the appropriate inter-pupil distance in game units, which rules out automatically changing the view frustum for both left and right eye views. Worse, some may use more than one scale in the same scene (one for the playfield, another for the skybox, another for the HUD), which rules out even setting one

      • by jandrese (485)
        Sadly, nVidia doesn't seem all that interested in the 3D-Vision project anymore. I don't think the sales numbers were what they had hoped for and the whole project is just on life support at this point. I don't think they're going to drop driver support anytime soon, but I don't think they're going to push game devs to go "3D Vision Certified" either anymore.

        Even though in theory it should work perfectly since your 3D card knows all of the information it needs to send proper 3D to the glasses, game deve
  • 3D Display... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nrrqshrr (1879148) on Monday March 26, 2012 @08:55AM (#39473145)
    Manufacturers really should get over their 3D complex. Sure, they spent a lot on it, R&D and Marketing, but it does more harm than whatever gimmick-value it provides...
    • Re:3D Display... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Cazekiel (1417893) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:10AM (#39473245)

      My dad has always been a 3D nutter; he even constructed his own 3D digital camera around ten years ago (consisting of TWO digital cams, measuring the exact distance from each other/shot timing and put onto a homemade wood frame. The images were run through a program on the computer that arranged them to make the pictures viewable through a classic stereoscopic viewer). While he has the new technology, the 3D TV, manufactured digital cams, etc., he has that complex... only it's been a lifetime love affair, organic, geeked-out and really cool to grow up with. :)

    • I think Science Fiction had made us want a Holodeck like entertainment. If you cannot touch or interact we want 3D where it surrounds us. Not a TV that tends to give some depth to what we are looking at.
      3D TV doesn't really effect most people because most people don't watch TV like they do movies. They watch TV slightly distracted.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by MikeBabcock (65886)

      3D wasn't expensive to develop at all, that's the lie.

      3D is just a high refresh rate and an IR transmitter sync'd to vsync to flip which image each eye sees.

      This isn't high tech, it was done long ago, including in video games in the early 90's.

    • by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:50AM (#39473589)
      When logged in, go to Options, then Exclusions section. Check the box "Roblimo" and hit save.

      No more advertising videos.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26, 2012 @08:57AM (#39473155)

    Alfred Poor...says you should think about getting a 3D TV... .

    Thank you summary, you just saved me 17 minutes by letting me know that Alfred Poor is a tool.

    • by Daetrin (576516) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:13AM (#39473259)
      Guy who does "marketing consulting" for the people trying to sell us the latest TV with all the gimmicks tells us to buy the latest TV with all the gimmicks. Color me shocked.

      There are certainly a lot of things i'd like to know about which specs and features i needed to worry about and which i don't, i certainly did a lot of research on it the last time i bought a tv, but the first thing i put in the "just a marketing gimick that i don't care about" is 3D. I say this as someone who owns a 3DS and and never gets headaches from it. 3D works for me just fine, i just don't give a damn most of the time. And from what i've gathered from talking to other people i'm far from the only one. So the fact that this guys is pushing it makes me doubt everything else he has to say.
    • by gl4ss (559668)

      I recently bought a hdtv.

      It's got 3d. I got no intention of using it. but the electronics needed for it.. well, they're not really that much. if the tv has fast enough refresh, it can do 3d with very little extra circuitry. In other words it would have been hard for me to find a set like the one I bough without 3d and that doesn't bother me too much. It was pretty cheap, imagine is nice. big enough.

      everything is going to be cheaper in a year though. but this video? could have been one paragraph of text...

      • by slyrat (1143997)

        In other words it would have been hard for me to find a set like the one I bough without 3d and that doesn't bother me too much. It was pretty cheap, imagine is nice. big enough.

        everything is going to be cheaper in a year though. but this video? could have been one paragraph of text...

        Tvs come with imagination now? I guess it is good that it has a big enough imagination too, wouldn't want a tv that couldn't imagine enough things. That has got to make watching them a bit odd. I agree that text would have sufficed, that is what imagination is for.

    • If you play video games, there are a lot of 3D video games (on the PS3 at least), whether you want 3D for TV or not. Some of them are headache inducing personally, like Motorstorm Apocalypse and others are beautiful like Uncharted 3. YMMV.

  • by alexandre_ganso (1227152) <surak@surak.eti.br> on Monday March 26, 2012 @08:57AM (#39473161)

    In a couple of lines, what does he say?

  • by mattdm (1931) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:00AM (#39473185) Homepage

    This is some guy with a website, with a dull and poorly produced video telling you to buy stuff. I stopped when I got to the part where it says that most people buy smaller TVs than they "need". N-E-E-D.

    Now, if he said "people buy smaller TVs than would be AWESOME", okay, fine. But this is basically crass consumerism pumped up by guy who isn't an "industry expert" but rather someone who worked for a crappy rah-rah-buy-stuff computer magazine for 20 years and is trying to trade on that to get some money. That's not wrong in itself, but it sure does translate to being a slashvertisement here.

    Two thumbs down.

    • by Loughla (2531696)

      No, you need that tv; just like you need a new car today; just like you need a smart phone.

      Just like you need Brawndo, remember, It Has Electrolytes!

    • Didn't watch, but he's saying people buy smaller TVs than they need? Most of the TVs that I see for sale these days are 40" or larger. As someone who had a 19" TV for several years and felt lucky for it, I feel downright decadent with my 32" LCD TV, which is now several years old.

      Even setting aside the question of whether anyone "needs" a TV, nobody needs a 40" TV. It's all luxury.

    • by Jmc23 (2353706) on Monday March 26, 2012 @10:22AM (#39473899) Journal
      Ever heard of context? Need was said in the sense of being able to utilize the resolution. Makes no sense to buy an hdtv at 19" and sit 6' away from it, you really NEED it to be bigger.

      Modded +5? Two thumbs down.

  • Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cherubim1 (2501030) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:01AM (#39473191)
    Poor advice. There is no need for anyone to buy anything beyond a HDTV. This is all marketing BS delivered by a corporate-paid shill.
    • No Need to buy a TV. Not had one for over a year. Can't see a reason for me to get one either. Projector for films and PC to watch things on youtube. Not much on. Well, not in the UK. I'm out of the need a TV demographic.
  • by neokushan (932374) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:06AM (#39473213)

    Due to a (somewhat) rare eyesight condition, 3D doesn't work on me. I have two working eyes, just one doesn't see as well as the other so my vision is way off balanced to the right. I am also fairly near-sighted. Day-to-day, this causes me absolutely no trouble at all. I can't wear glasses (doesn't help), so I make do with just getting closer to things.

    Anyhoo, it never stopped me from being able to use a computer. Standard font sizes on standard monitors were fine, I could read them just fine. However, as displays have gotten higher and higher resolutions, I'm finding it harder and harder to read them. My eyesight hasn't got any worse, it's just that things are getting smaller.

    Despite all of the advances in Technology for the differently abled, such as DPI settings in windows, it doesn't actually help. Adjusting DPI breaks so many apps that it's more trouble than it's worth. 3D seems to be the big new thing everyone wants you to buy and I can only pray that it fails so badly, people just give up trying to sell it. I worry because if 3D becomes the "standard", there's possibly going to be a shift towards content that is only /i>3D, in much the same way that content has shifted to "HD everything", meaning I'm screwed.

    So, for little ol' me, don't buy into 3D. Please.

    • by gl4ss (559668)

      adjusting dpi in windows is nowadays almost flawless for me, certainly more useful than it's trouble. the only thing is that some crappy programs like gimp need to be adjusted(from run properties) to not use pixel doubling(works fine with pixel doubling.. but.. it's a drawing program so).

      only with very few old programs, usually installers, there is problems. usually very poorly written programs. with them you sometimes can't reach buttons because they're so far in the window.

      (one trick to avoid pixel doubli

      • by neokushan (932374) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:32AM (#39473429)

        Indeed, it's a lot better than it used to be but I still have a major program that doesn't like it - Visual Studio.
        Now the funny thing is, it's "DPI-Aware" and the interface is, mostly, fine. The problem is the Windows Form Designer. It works, but the results on my screen differ from a non-DPI adjusted screen. So simple things, like lining up a bunch of text boxes so they're straight (and thus visually appealing) just doesn't work, not unless whoever runs the program is running the same DPI settings. Oddly enough, if a program is designed with DPI set to the default, on my DPI-adjused screen it's still fine. It makes no sense, really.

        When I encounter a program that doesn't adjust correctly (as you said, often older or badly written programs), you can disable all DPI scaling easily enough but VS completely ignores these settings.

        I'm lucky in that I have a decent sized monitor - 22", but at 1080p I find it just about uncomfortable to use. I only need about a 10% increase to be comfortable with it, but that's just enough to break things. I have a 24" monitor at home that's 1200p (1920x1200) and it's perfect for me. I'm saddened that you can't find 16:10 monitors any more because of this.

    • by skids (119237)

      The content should not worry you too much. There are some cinematic effects that producers simply won't use in a 3D movie because they don't come over well in 3D, so those will be missing from the cinematic bag of tricks, but it is hard to imagine a 3D production that won't be watchable in 2D without ruining it.

      Where you need to worry is in the lack of 2D viewing equipment. People with your types of conditions need to start pummeling the TV manufacturers and theaters publicly, because they have stopped pr

      • by neokushan (932374)

        You're quite right, it's the equipment that's the issue rather than the content. I guess what I'm (poorly) trying to say is that I'm worried 3D will become the "standard" much like HD has, whereby there's no "off" switch because why wouldn't people want the better picture?
        3D glasses aren't actually a problem. They simply don't "work" on me, I see the same image with or without the glasses (or rather, if I watch the 2D version it's the same for me, as 3D-without-the-glasses is of course all blurry). I've tes

    • by Jmc23 (2353706)
      Ever tried wearing an eyepatch as well as the colored balls on a string focusing exercise for bringing about some co-operation between your eyes? That and some other exercises worked for me, the default landing position of my right eye used to be staring at the right side of my nose.
  • Blu-Ray vs. DVD (Score:5, Insightful)

    by XxtraLarGe (551297) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:08AM (#39473229) Journal
    This guy must have bad eyes. I have a PS3 & 42" 1080p TV. Ours is probably 8-10 feet away depending on where you sit in our living room. I can easily tell the difference between a Blu-Ray and DVD. In fact, it's a tremendous difference in clarity.
    • by Lumpy (12016)

      You can tell even more of a difference if you were to sit closer. you are sitting outside the window that physics dictates, but then you might be a superhero that has laser vision.

      99% of people CANT tell the difference between a clean SD signal and a 1080p signal on a 42" beyond 12 feet. And I am betting that you would have trouble if someone were to show you a very clean superBit DVD and the bluray of the same content.

  • by alen (225700) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:11AM (#39473247)

    you need to buy a 3D TV for the most money even though there is little media for it and even though they will be a lot cheaper in a few years when or if there is more media just to be ready for the media. remember you won't be able to buy a 3D TV in a few years when the 3D media arrives so you have to buy it now just to be ready for the arrival

    anyone remember maximum PC 15 years ago? they were saying the same thing. buy expensive crap before there is any media just to "be ready". like the hardware is not going to be cheaper when the media arrives. i see the same nonsense now about the upcoming 4K TV's

    • Before I read the comments I was guessing reasons to buy now might include things like, "Get 3D now before it's got twice the DRM packed in with it." or 'Ideally you should get a new TV before June because that is when they are releasing the TVs with hidden cameras that send data back to 3rd parties." Instead it sounds like he's simply saying buy 3d now so I get a larger bonus.

      I can believe there are sometimes reasons to buy early even if later prices will come down but it doesn't sound like this guy has an

    • by gutnor (872759)

      And worse, you are never really ready. People with laser disk are still waiting for their content and people with first gen *anything* have to buy a third/fourth gen of the same gadget when the content is available (I fell for that, I have this nice Marrantz DVD player, that can only read the DVD from 10 years ago, not the bulk of the DVD created later).

      Also happened with the tech itself: "upgradable" motherboard as long as socket, base frequencies, multiplicator, port, ram, or disk tech do not change in t

  • wth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by matt_king (19018) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:12AM (#39473257)

    If you are going to post "advertorial" content SLASHDOT, at least mark it as such. I just lost some respect for this site.

  • So, like many others I'm sure, I can't be asked to watch the video... but I'm curious as to what these non-technical reasons are for buying a new TV before June. Anybody care to list them?

    • by alen (225700)

      the 2012 models will ship in volume later in the summer so you can pick up a 2011 model on sale

      • by sirdude (578412)

        Ah, thank you :)

        • by alen (225700)

          ive looked at TV prices for myself and others and in the june/july/august time frame there is a lot of discounting. usually manufacturers will run specials with a retailer at a time over a few weeks

    • by residieu (577863)
      The TV manufacturers are retailers need to increase their sales numbers for the second quarter, so you should help them by buying their inventory before the next models come out. (You should buy those in July - September)
  • Everybody seems to be bashing this guy as some kind of shill, could some of those same folks please point out some advice that they *would* give credence to?

  • Shop for Deals (Score:4, Informative)

    by na1led (1030470) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:22AM (#39473327)
    My dad purchased his Samsung 55" LCD 3D TV with glasses for $2200. I purchased my Samsung 51" Plasma 3D TV w/ glasses in December for $599 at BestBuy. I always try to find the best deal, not the latest and greatest.
  • There is no real technical information here, this video is targeted to the standard consumer, not a slashdot reader.

    What I find most offensive though, is that you get 3/4 of the way in before you realize this is really a sales pitch for 3D. Yes, he really wants us to buy 3D so the installed base gets bigger and more content is available. Sorry. I wear glasses, I will never sit down and watch a 3D movie. I just don't care about 3D, nor do I see any sense in spending the extra money for a 3D set. It doesn't m

  • next big thing is HD4K2K = 4 times the number of pixels than an HD screen, some sport this year is being recorded in HD4K2K so are most movies, where was it in this advertorial NO WHERE.
    Horrendously expensive at present like $55k for a 3m screen but prices will drop with Moore's law regularity
    • some sport this year is being recorded in HD4K2K so are most movies

      How many Mbps does 2160p video take, and can it fit into an 18 Mbps broadcast channel?

  • by Lumpy (12016)

    Having a blog makes you an "expert" now.

    Glad to know the bar is lowered a lot for expert status.

  • by SpeedyG5 (762403) on Monday March 26, 2012 @09:51AM (#39473609) Homepage
    Personally I go to the movies to relax and enjoy. I do not go to have things popping up in my face(Insert porn joke here). I am there to be immersed in the story I don' t want to ducking, bobbing and weaving. What is the obsession with 3D, they keep trying to shove it down my throat(Another porn joke). I could get a little subtle depth play, but that wouldn't warrant me paying good money for a new plasma. Regardless of wether the content is there I don't want it.
  • by Lando (9348)

    People talking about buying 3d or any television because they need it? Frankly, my television is sitting in the corner and hasn't been turned on in 2-3 years. What need is there for a television? I don't see the need to buy DRM encumbered technology, which is what I understand tvs are these days. So really, I doubt anyone "needs" to buy a television. Food on the other hand...

    Consider it a different way, if the guy was saying I need a new computer, when my current system works fine and beyond that t

  • This seems like a strange post for slashdot. But, I will say that HDTV does make a difference for baseball, so he's wrong and I still like my 30 inch Sony CRT HDTV better than any plasma or led screen I've seen. Being immersed in a pixelated view is distracting.
  • Transcript (Score:5, Informative)

    by QuasiSteve (2042606) on Monday March 26, 2012 @10:33AM (#39474045)

    TItle: Industry Expert Alfred Poor Gives HDTV Buying Advice
    Description: There are features you need and some you don't

    [00:00] <TITLE>
    A "Slashdot TV" logo appears in the bottom left with "An Interview with Alfred Poor of HDTV Almanac" to its right.
    "What mistakes do / people make when / they buy an HDTV?" zooms into view.

    [00:04] Alfred>
    The biggest one they make of all is not buying [...]

    [00:06] <TITLE>
    A webcam picture of Alfred Poor fades into view.

    [...] the right size TV.
    A lot of people were trained - I don't know about you, but I was trained, growing up, to not sit too close to the TV - it's going to ruin your eyes.
    In fact, I was taught: hold your palm out so that if it covers up the screen, then you're at the right distance.
    That's great for the old-fashioned standard definition TV but it's not the right move at all for HDTV.
    I try to tell people to think in terms of going to the movies; You don't sit all the way in the back of the theater so that you can cover up your screen with your hand - You want an immersive experience, where you're enveloped by the image.
    That's the same thing you want at home.
    For most people, they typically get a screen that's a lot smaller than what they really should have.
    There are a lot of rules of thumb out there - some of them are wrong, but they basically.. if you're gonna be sitting about 6 feet away, you need at least a 42" screen.
    A 47" screen would be even better.
    So, that's one of the big mistakes that people make.
    Now the prices have come down so much that a larger screen doesn't cost that much more.
    So I encourage people to buy probably the next size up from what they they ought to get.

    [01:22] <TITLE>
    "Are HDTV prices going / to keep on going down?" fades in and out of view. These titles appear throughout the video.

    [01:28] Alfred>
    Actually, the story is that the prices have been coming down very steadily.
    They've been coming down almost 20%/year, for the last 4 or 5 years.
    If there's one business that I would not want to be in, it would be manufacturing HDTVs.
    It's a brutal, brutal business.
    We've seen Pioneer get out of it.
    Panasonic is backpedaling, even though they have this huge commitment to plasma screens.
    SONY is trying to figure out how not to make their own anymore, just job it all out to somebody else in China.
    Philips doesn't make 'm anymore - they've just loaned the name to somebody else to stick on their sets.
    On and on and on - it's a brutal, brutal business.
    We've got Samsung, we've got LG - you've got a handful who are doing a good job of making a go at it, but they're probably losing a lot of money on it also.
    So the price has been coming down pretty steadily.
    Will they keep coming down?
    Well, each year I say they just can't keep coming down any more than they have, just because you get all the materials' cost.
    And yet, they continue to do so.
    I think it's gotta slow down - I think we're probably getting near the bottom.
    If we see cuts at this point, it'll be more due to distress than increased efficiency.
    It will be because there'll be either retailers or manufacturers who are stuck with inventory and trying to get some cash out of it, rather than sit there having to pay interest on the inventory.
    Though having said that, we're gonna see a bunch of good opportunities, probably in the next 3 or 4 months, to get some very good deals on HDTVs.
    Sears has announced that they're gonna be closing a whole lot of stores, and that could put a whole lot of product into the channel at low prices as they try to liquidate some of that inventory.
    Each store is gonna have several of each model on hand.
    So you're talking about hundreds of sets right there.
    If Sears starts advertising prices that are way low, well Best Buy, Costco, they're gonna have to follow them right down into the mountain, so that they don't give up market share.

    [03:44] <TITLE>
    What's the HDTV

  • Yup, still works. Sorry, Alfred, I interrupted you while you were shilling. Please do go on.

"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead." -- Lucy Van Pelt

Working...