@Reasonable

I don't know if you owned LCD HDTV that was 20" but if you have you would be satisfied with what you have. A smaller HDTV is practically on par with an 1080p TV because its smaller and everything is crammed into place. Where as if I had a 42" HDTV that was 720p versus a 1080p HDTV then I would notice the difference. Like I said before I'm speaking from a 20" HDTV owner perspective.

Sent via BlackBerry

Yeah, but why the comment about we're nearing the end of picture quality improvements?  And why make a factually incorrect statement that pictuer quality on a lower resolution is superior?

Oh forget it, actually.  No-one should feel they need a big TV, and I can't be bothered wondering why you would make such odd factually wrong statements in amongst what was otherwise a sensible post.

It's the internet after all, and too close to New Year for back and forth on something like this.

@Reasonable

Listen to yourself, you keep leaving out the fact I'm saying picture quality on a smaller HDTV is superior than a 1080p 42"+. That's what I'm saying a smaller HDTV that does 720p will look exactly the same as a 1080p 42"+.

Re-read my posts and maybe you will understand what I'm saying. And besides I know the new year is coming, I'm not making an argument or anything I just want you to know that this thread title shouldn't be targeted to people like me (20" HDTV owner) who does not see an improvement from my 20" 720p HDTV to a 1080p HDTV.

Yes its the internet and this is a forum, which you then post your opinion and to let it be heard

Sent via BlackBerry

lol 77, that's an awesome number right there.

I wasn't arguing with that. I was arguing the fact that medium in it's original state was never meant, nor can not store, nor play those files. We have to change and tweak to make it play those files, and the whole idea of creating a new format is a new standard, so every blu-ray player could play those files, not just 1% of DVD players etc.

not so with a computer monitor, lesser room to work with, I'm running dual 24s when I'm doing regular work and only use the HDTV when I'm doing full screen gaming(which is not often since I broadcast it) or console gaming.

xlost4 said: @Reasonable Listen to yourself, you keep leaving out the fact I'm saying picture quality on a smaller HDTV is superior than a 1080p 42"+. That's what I'm saying a smaller HDTV that does 720p will look exactly the same as a 1080p 42"+. Re-read my posts and maybe you will understand what I'm saying. And besides I know the new year is coming, I'm not making an argument or anything I just want you to know that this thread title shouldn't be targeted to people like me (20" HDTV owner) who does not see an improvement from my 20" 720p HDTV to a 1080p HDTV. Yes its the internet and this is a forum, which you then post your opinion and to let it be heard Sent via BlackBerry

Ah, but it doesn't really look better.  Whether 18 inches, 20 inches or 46 inches the 1080p would look better than the 720p.  Now, the smaller the set he less noticable the difference is, although view distance also plays a part, but my point is - and where I believe you are empirically in error - is that no matter how small the TV the 720p picture will never look better than 1080p - it can't.

It's like sitting in front of a 16 inch monitor and changing the resolution of a game - the lower resolutions are never going to look better, ever.  The different between one resolution and another may be small, but it's there.

My point is you were mixing up an opinion about what you are happy with personally with facts - and I just find that hard to pass up, being a bit empirical myself having studied physics, maths, engineering and the like before computer science.

It's just a teeth gritter for me.

I can understand someone being perfectly happy with 720p 20 inch TV, I myself use 720p HD TV for gaming currently, but that doesn't alter facts is all.

So since we're having one last exchange - why not explain the other comment that puzzled me, that we are approaching the end of the road for visual improvements, because I see little evidence for this?

Reasonable said: xlost4 said: @Reasonable Listen to yourself, you keep leaving out the fact I'm saying picture quality on a smaller HDTV is superior than a 1080p 42"+. That's what I'm saying a smaller HDTV that does 720p will look exactly the same as a 1080p 42"+. Re-read my posts and maybe you will understand what I'm saying. And besides I know the new year is coming, I'm not making an argument or anything I just want you to know that this thread title shouldn't be targeted to people like me (20" HDTV owner) who does not see an improvement from my 20" 720p HDTV to a 1080p HDTV. Yes its the internet and this is a forum, which you then post your opinion and to let it be heard Sent via BlackBerry Ah, but it doesn't really look better.  Whether 18 inches, 20 inches or 46 inches the 1080p would look better than the 720p.  Now, the smaller the set he less noticable the difference is, although view distance also plays a part, but my point is - and where I believe you are empirically in error - is that no matter how small the TV the 720p picture will never look better than 1080p - it can't. It's like sitting in front of a 16 inch monitor and changing the resolution of a game - the lower resolutions are never going to look better, ever.  The different between one resolution and another may be small, but it's there. My point is you were mixing up an opinion about what you are happy with personally with facts - and I just find that hard to pass up, being a bit empirical myself having studied physics, maths, engineering and the like before computer science. It's just a teeth gritter for me. I can understand someone being perfectly happy with 720p 20 inch TV, I myself use 720p HD TV for gaming currently, but that doesn't alter facts is all. So since we're having one last exchange - why not explain the other comment that puzzled me, that we are approaching the end of the road for visual improvements, because I see little evidence for this?

It only depends on how far away he's sitting, if it's monitor distance, PC has been doing 1280x1024 - 1600x1200 at 19-20inch for a while and both look hell of a lot better than something like 800x600 or 1024x768, now that we are at the average of 22-24 16x10 monitors, the difference is huge when comparing 1920x1200 to 1280x800 (or 1080p to 720p, whichever.) The thing is, it only really trully shows when you are on a PC because the power of PC is on par with the actual tech and already over it. For console gamers, it won't matter until next gen, and for videos, only really trained eyes can tell the difference.

I'm not even gonna go into how different companies use different ways to encode H.264 so even if the profile is 4.1, you often get different results from companies so unless you get an actual uncompressed source which would be too much for consumer products atm, it's very hard for people to tell the different. I can easily encode a blu ray source into a very high quality but lower bitrate H.264 result while maintaining the resolution and drop it onto a DVD and most people won't notice the very little artifacts since it's a video, not realtime rendering, well, unless you press your head really close to the screen anyways.

mrstickball said: chingrin - That may be mostly due to the fact one is a Samsung and one is a Sony. I wonder what the price difference between a Samsung and a Bravia is... As for me, I really enjoy my Samsung 50" 720p Plasma. I saved a ton (about $500) by purchasing a 720p over a 1080p. For me, it made the most sense since I own a 360, and wanted to get a larger TV, even if I had to sacrifice a small bit of picture quality to get a killer deal. A lot of the issue also comes down to the TV you buy. Not all TVs are created equal. You need to pay attention to what the picture quality is like, as a Visio is unlikely to look as good as a Sony (of course, a Visio is about half the price). Also, none of the OP statements really have anything to do with Blu-Ray. You are going to get a huge difference between a upper-converted DVD on a 720p vs. a blu-ray. Just because it *can* do 1080p doesn't mean it doesn't look purdy on a 720p

First off, it's Vizio, with a "z".  And their picture quality is way up there with the rest of them.  They are not half the price of the competition, but they are definitely cheaper.  I'm glad they exist because they represent some of the highest quality sets for the price they should be at.  Maybe if they keep dominating the market in the US the other manufacturers will lower their prices too.

If you research Vizio's sets at all, you'll see how they compete pixel for pixel with all the other top brands.  For their price I doubt any set can even come close to them in terms of features and picture quality.

@Reasonable

I like how we are going back and forth on what my eye sight sees and what yours see. I'm personally glad you admitted your a "tech specs junkie". All I'm saying is I see no difference and not an average consumer would see a difference. All they care about is if the HDTV is high definition and about the inches of the TV.

About picture being high quality now. Well to me it is but to you obviously you see different but to each is own on that topic.

Sent via BlackBerry