The UHP mercury lamps are expensive, though ($400, ultra high pressure mercury arc lamps from Philips).
The plasma displays I've seen had severe screen burn-in problems, and the dot pitch was quite
coarse. LCD's I have no opinion on except that for
computer displays where they are great.
Soon organic LED displays may be unrolled (literally). I'll wait to see what they're like.
Go to Las Vegas or look at the NASDAQ building in New York City to see some wondrous displays
of red-green-blue LED's -- overall brighter than the sun -- but, alas, they cost millions to tens of millions,
but then, when you receive your royalties from your free energy devices, that won't matter.
How about just filling your living room wall with red-green-blue LED's :-) .
Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I been looking at flat screen HD TVs for a while. The prices are coming down. Perhaps they will come down to the point where I can afford one in the next few years. I am perplexed. I have a first class FCC license and am thoroughly versed on standard TV.
I see flat screen TV with 1040 and 480 resolution and 620 x 480 resolution. What is the difference? I see liquid crystal projection TV's. I know of the older ones with the three over driven tubes. They did not last long. What do we know about liquid crystal projection? Is it any good? I see expensive plasma TVs. Are they worth the extra cost? Do they last? I see liquid crystal flat screens. Is this technology better or worse?
Finally I see flat screens with built in standard NSTV tuners. I see them with built in DVD drives. I see none with built in HD tuners. Why not? If I were to pay $1,000 for a TV I want the HD tuner built in. It reminds me of the day when we had to install FM converter boxes in our autos. Any reason for this?
Perplexed.
Frank Z
