> I asked the question, > WHY would you stick with analog when you > can now get something much much better > for very low cost?
and plenty of people have given you the answer: they just don't give a shit. So why not leave it at that? -- Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of J. C. O'Connell > Sent: 19 December 2006 23:30 > To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' > Subject: RE: Please everyone set up an email filter > > I will respond to one thing, and its not > to "win" its on the topic. I have already > stated this about 10 times, these sets > are now CHEAPER than they were 10 years > ago with way better picture quality which > give you ( I think I forgot to mention this) > way better VIEWING EXPERIENCE. I remember > when I first started viewing really good > HD sources, that now only was the the > picture better than I expected, it was > better than I could even imagined was possible. > That was my first impression of it all. > > Secondly, you get fairly easily get a whole > bunch of HDTV feeds for no monthly fee > at all by buying a good antenna for around > $100. > > As for the "stupid comments" I didnt > say anyone was stupid, I asked the question, > WHY would you stick with analog when you > can now get something much much better > for very low cost? Its like sticking > with dialup even after DSL came way down in > price, or sticking with an old PC just > because it still works. If the new product > is cheap enough to be affordable, who > cares if its 100 times the price of the > old one if it does things the old one cant? > NTSC cant do for you what HD can. Trust > me on this, the difference is not subtle > and I am not talking about specs, I am > talking about the difference in the viewing experence. > > I not only wouldnt watch an old analog > NTSC set even if you gave me the best > one ever made and for free. that means > HD would be infinately more costly, but > it not the "cost factor" that counts, > its the entertainment value that counts. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of > Cory Papenfuss > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 5:19 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: RE: Please everyone set up an email filter > > > On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > I forgot something, THE PICTURE (quality) IS NOT > > IMPORTANT "for a lot" of people? Are you crazy? I am posting this > > stuff in a photo forum inhabited by mostly photographers. > They should > > know better than that unless all they watch is hillbilly shows like > > COPS, Pro Wrestling, AND Fear Factor. Thats not the demographic of > > this group I dont think makes any sense to say that. Vastly > improved > > picture quality enhances motion pictures just as much it does > > still pictures...Come on with this stuff! > > jco > > > For a factor of 2-3x in price to replace a TV set, followed with > > (often significantly) higher costs for high-def feeds? Most people I > know > don't spend 5 hours a day watching TV. I personally watch about 3 > hours, > but it's on my homebrew Tivo (MythTV, actually), so I can > watch 3 hours > of > network television (documentaries, mostly) in about 1.5 hours. No > commercials and sped up a few percent. > > You stated a few facts. High-def is better, technically, yes. > HD sets have gotten cheaper, yes. Imposing your OPINION that > everybody > who hasn't bought a new set and upgraded their service is stupid is, > well, > stupid. State your facts, correct others' incorrect facts in > a polite > way, state your opinions, and then respect the fact that > others may not > agree. > > I'm sure you will find the need to rebut this response to "win," > > so feel free. I will not reply anymore. You have already "won." > Cheers. > > -Cory > > -- > > > ************************************************************** > ********** > * > * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA > * > * Electrical Engineering > * > * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University > * > ************************************************************** > ********** > * > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
