Your right, I misread your earlier post on the "not that great" quote. Sorry about that. But you did state, "given the improvement in picture" which implies that the improvement was not substantial, but it is huge, especially on larger screens.
But did you do the math? How much money are you actually saving vs. time by watching an older mediocre analog set and signals instead of a superb good sized HDTV? Here its only about $20-$40 a month and thats conservatively on the high side based on only a 5 yr life of the set and a set costing $1200 to $2400. I wouldnt dream of going back to old analog set to only save $20-$40 a month vs really good HDTV ownership. Maybe its more where you are, I dont know, but its gotten really cheap here even as the quality keeps going up and up. And dont get me wrong, I am not into hardware or a gear head. My entire position on all this is not really about the actual sets or the specs. or even the picture quality of HD directly, it all about how much more pleasurable the HD viewing experience is and you end up getting a whole big ol' massive bunch of this pleasure during the life of the HD set. jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith McGuinness Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:57 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Please everyone set up an email filter J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Well you didnt post that, you posted you. ? > The didnt give a shit about picture quality. > Now your saying its a value issue and not > worth the extra cost for the "not that > great" improvement in quality. I did NOT say that the improvement in quality was "not that great". The improvement in quality IS substantial. No argument there. > Your daily personal entertainment has got to be worth more than that. Well it isn't. I've got plenty of other things I would rather spend the money on. Keith McG > jco > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Keith McGuinness > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:30 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Please everyone set up an email filter > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> Because I dont belive it, that's why. >> Why wouldnt they care? Are they legally blind >> or something? I have never >> heard of anyone who didnt care whether >> their TV picture sucks or is good in my >> life. And that is what this is, good vs sucks >> TV picture. > > For me, the improvement in picture is not worth the cost of > upgrading. > > It is a VALUE judgement and that is how I see it in MY case. > > Claiming that the cost (which in Australia is not that small) is > not that great, given the improvement in picture, is pointless. > > My choice is, given present circumstance, the correct one for me. > You come to a different decision; fine, that is your choice. > > I am writing the truth as I see it and I am not blind (legally or > otherwise). > > Keith McG > > > > -- 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
