Macross On Hd?

[JB0]

PS3 = PC ? 

If this is there strategy then why buy the initial release? PS3 upgrades every so often?  

"The Sony CEO gave another example in the interview: "As PS3 is a computer... it also wants to evolve. We'll want to upgrade the HDD size very soon - if new standards appear on the PC, we will want to support them. We may want the [blu-ray] drive to [have a writable version upgrade]." He then tempered his comments: "Well, BD may not develop like that, though." But extensibility is what Sony is stressing that you get for the price of a PS3, nonetheless."

www.gamasutra.com

407654[/snapback]

Well, they COULD have meant PC in a diffrent sense. That it was a general-purpose computer instead of a fixed-function device.

But the quote makes it clear how they meant it.

They've had so many crazy PR statements the last few years that I'm not sure what to make of their comments anymore.

[TheLoneWolf]

I suppose it's easier to market a $600 computer vs a $600 game system.

[Vince]

well ps2 was a linux box anyway, it's no surprise. it seems you can upgrade your ps3 like your computer. one thing for sure, it won't be running windows. I might be able to replace my solaris box (it pretty old btw) with a ps3.

but honestly, I only want to use my game console to play games.

[JB0]

well ps2 was a linux box anyway,  it's no surprise.

Well, it COULD be a Linux box.

Like the NetYaroze before it, Sony had some very serious schizophrenia and did everything they could to ensure that no one BOUGHT PS2 Linux.

it seems you can upgrade your ps3 like your computer. one thing for sure, it won't be running windows.  I might be able to replace my solaris box (it pretty old btw) with a ps3.

I wouldn't count on it.

My bet is they're spewing gibberish, like usual.

[Hurin]

Blu-Ray DVD drives will not have analog outputs that are HDCP-free? I thought the whole point of HDCP was to prevent digital bit-for-bit copying of high-res/HD material. Wow. I didn't even know that HDCP would work over analog.

H

[JB0]

Blu-Ray DVD drives will not have analog outputs that are HDCP-free?  I thought the whole point of HDCP was to prevent digital bit-for-bit copying of high-res/HD material.  Wow.  I didn't even know that HDCP would work over analog.

H

407777[/snapback]

HDCP WON'T work over analog. But the point is to prevent ANY HD copying, not just digital copies.

So if HDCP is enabled, the player HAS to disable HD analog signals. It's not possible to have HDCP-compliant component or RGB lines, so the HDCP license forces the player manufacturer to cripple analog outputs.

[Hurin]

HDCP WON'T work over analog. But the point is to prevent ANY HD copying, not just digital copies.

So if HDCP is enabled, the player HAS to disable HD analog signals. It's not possible to have HDCP-compliant component or RGB lines, so the HDCP license forces the player manufacturer to cripple analog outputs.

407905[/snapback]

Okay, last question. I'm not trying to be a pain here and after this I'm just going to start googling this stuff on my own (I've been remiss in keeping up with this stuff). . .

If HDCP won't work over analog, and therefore someone with only component (analog) inputs on their HDTV can't use it, what is the point of there being analog/component outputs on a Blu-Ray DVD player?

[Zinjo]

I suppose it's easier to market a $600 computer vs a $600 game system.

407701[/snapback]

Yes!

Considering most off the shelf PC's run about $500.00 - $800.00 then the price is a bit more reasonable...

[JB0]

HDCP WON'T work over analog. But the point is to prevent ANY HD copying, not just digital copies.

So if HDCP is enabled, the player HAS to disable HD analog signals. It's not possible to have HDCP-compliant component or RGB lines, so the HDCP license forces the player manufacturer to cripple analog outputs.

407905[/snapback]

Okay, last question. I'm not trying to be a pain here and after this I'm just going to start googling this stuff on my own (I've been remiss in keeping up with this stuff). . .

If HDCP won't work over analog, and therefore someone with only component (analog) inputs on their HDTV can't use it, what is the point of there being analog/component outputs on a Blu-Ray DVD player?

407913[/snapback]

Because they like to point and laugh?

The currently-available HD-DVD players have composite outputs too, and those are a sick joke by any standard.

Seriously, there's 2 reasons.

First is that 512p is a little bit better than the current 480p cap, and you'll still benefit from better encoding regardless.

Second is that HDCP is set on a per-disk basis. If the disk doesn't activate HDCP, you can use component, RGB, or DVI for HD signals. But if the disk DOES activate HDCP, you can't. With luck the HDCP flag will wind up like the Macrovision flag on DVDs, and almost never be used. But you shouldn't have to count on luck.

[Ali Sama]

well, with people starting to move into High Definition TV's... (aka my parents  )

and my finding out that a DVD is not high definition at all.

i'm wondering since they redigitized/cleanedup/made pretty the series and DYRL if they are going to be eventually offered in high defininition?  can you guys shed some light on the posibility of this?

they can do that right?  it's not like Star Wars where Lucas supposedly recorded over the originals?  so they can give it to us still?  but prettier in a couple years?

407245[/snapback]

hd is overrated. People are also cheap bastards. Otherwise tapes would never have taken off nor vhs.

LD's and betamax should have killed vhs if this was the case.

[JB0]

well, with people starting to move into High Definition TV's... (aka my parents  )

and my finding out that a DVD is not high definition at all.

i'm wondering since they redigitized/cleanedup/made pretty the series and DYRL if they are going to be eventually offered in high defininition?  can you guys shed some light on the posibility of this?

they can do that right?  it's not like Star Wars where Lucas supposedly recorded over the originals?  so they can give it to us still?  but prettier in a couple years?

407245[/snapback]

hd is overrated.

Lies!

People are also cheap bastards.

Doesn't matter when HD sets will be all that's available in a few years.

Otherwise tapes would never have taken off nor vhs.

You DO know that VCRs cost an absurd sum of money when they were introduced, right? You just shot yourself in the foot.

LD's and betamax should have killed  vhs if this was the case.

Beta had some issues of it's own. The big one was that you could make a LONGER VHS tape. The quality diffrence on the hardware available at the time was insignifigant, which didn't help matters.

Also Beta never should've killed VHS. It was there first.

LaserDisk had issues too. Aside from being grossly expensive, it was also huge and plagued with reliability issues.

And again, there were serious issues with television quality for most of it's life.

Had the home theater craze hit sooner, Laserdisk likely WOULD have become signifigant in the US market, though.

[Ali Sama]

hd is overrated.

Lies!

why? I have a hd tv. It is very overrated. Why would i want to see imperfections on a star's skin.

People are also cheap bastards.

Doesn't matter when HD sets will be all that's available in a few years.

One tv set we bought in the 80's died a year ago. repair shops thrive for a reason.

Otherwise tapes would never have taken off nor vhs.

You DO know that VCRs cost an absurd sum of money when they were introduced, right? You just shot yourself in the foot.

yeah they did. They also let you record stuff, which was why it sold. Please don't quote me out of context.

LD's and betamax should have killed  vhs if this was the case.

Beta had some issues of it's own. The big one was that you could make a LONGER VHS tape. The quality diffrence on the hardware available at the time was insignifigant, which didn't help matters.

Also Beta never should've killed VHS. It was there first.

newer is not allways better. 75/76 being their respective dates of release. psx was outselling dreamcast and the dreamcast was how much newer?

LaserDisk had issues too. Aside from being grossly expensive, it was also huge and plagued with reliability issues.

And again, there were serious issues with television quality for most of it's life.

Had the home theater craze hit sooner, Laserdisk likely WOULD have become signifigant in the US market, though.

412225[/snapback]

you don't need better visual quality for most of the stuff that is out there.

ps. what is wrong with the tags?

Edited June 29, 2006 by Ali Sama

[JB0]

One tv set we bought in the 80's died a year ago.  repair shops thrive for a reason.

It's not cheapness, since it usually costs more to fix a TV than it does to buy a new one.

Otherwise tapes would never have taken off nor vhs.

You DO know that VCRs cost an absurd sum of money when they were introduced, right? You just shot yourself in the foot.

yeah they did. They also let you record stuff, which was why it sold. Please don't quote me out of context.

How is it out of context? I presented your entire post. Removed not one word of it. Rearranged not one character.

The entirity of your post to that point was "hd is overrated. People are also cheap bastards. Otherwise tapes would never have taken off nor vhs."

HD is overrated can be discarded as relevant. HD wasn't an issue in the 70s, as technology hadn't made it feasable yet.

Therefore, you're claiming the VCR took off because people are cheap.

If not, the "otherwise" is connected to an argument that isn't present.

newer is not allways better. 75/76 being their respective dates of release. psx was outselling dreamcast and the dreamcast was how much newer?

I covered what Beta's failings were.

And the Dreamcast WAS better.

As far as commercial success... While I don't have any sales #s handy, I seriously doubt the PS1 was outselling the Dreamcast. Over it's entire life, I'm sure it had more units sold. But for any given overlap, I'd bet the Dreamcast had a much better rate of sale.

you don't need better visual quality for most of the stuff that is out there.

I say you do.

DVD didn't take off because it was cheaper than VHS. It took off because it was far better, without any major drawbacks other than lack of record capability.

ps. what is wrong with the tags?

412228[/snapback]

Max of 10 quote tags per post.

That or there's a messed-up pair somewhere.

[ChrisG]

The only Macross titles I see going to HD are Zero and DYRL, since they're the only ones that are natively widescreen. If future Macross productions are in widescreen like Zero, I'd expect to see them in HD too.

[Nomake Wan]

For Anime, HD is nice because it allows you to show much more detail in long-distance shots. For example, in the newest .hack series, there are lots of scenes where characters are in the background and others are right in front of the camera. And yet, you can see just as many details on the background folk as you can when they're the subject. It introduces a whole different aspect when it comes to shooting (or in this case, drawing) a scene. I think that's pretty darn cool. Think about it--all the Valks in the massive fight scenes would have full detail... that would rock.

[Ali Sama]

And the Dreamcast WAS better.

As far as commercial success... While I don't have any sales #s handy, I seriously doubt the PS1 was outselling the Dreamcast. Over it's entire life, I'm sure it had more units sold. But for any given overlap, I'd bet the Dreamcast had a much better rate of sale.

I never said the dc was bad, It was better yet it lost.

the psx was outselling te dc by 10 to 1....

Both Sony (whose PlayStation outsells Dreamcast by 10 to 1) and Nintendo are said to be developing advanced data storage and networking options for their own next-generation game machines, to be released later this year.

http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/105241

[sketchley]

Japan is going 100% HD in the next few years.

Expect any new Macross productions to be in HD, and the possibility of older titles being rereleased in HD.

That said, Macross isn't exactly a big seller here. It'd be more logical to expect an HD rerelease of the more popular Gundam shows. In other words - don't hold out for any rereleases of Macross in HD...

[JB0]

And the Dreamcast WAS better.

As far as commercial success... While I don't have any sales #s handy, I seriously doubt the PS1 was outselling the Dreamcast. Over it's entire life, I'm sure it had more units sold. But for any given overlap, I'd bet the Dreamcast had a much better rate of sale.

I never said the dc was bad, It was better yet it lost.

Again, you mentioned the Dreamcast DIRECTLY after a statement that "newer isn't better."

the psx was outselling te dc by  10 to 1.... 

Both Sony (whose PlayStation outsells Dreamcast by 10 to 1) and Nintendo are said to be developing advanced data storage and networking options for their own next-generation game machines, to be released later this year.

http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/105241

412260[/snapback]

You DO know that that article was before the system even launched in the US, right? While I WAS apparently mistaken about "any given overlap," it's hardly indicative of the thing's entire life.

By the time Sega decided to cease development of the Dreamcast, about 10 million consoles had been sold.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast

, the PlayStation/PSone had sold a total of over 100.49 million units [2], becoming the first home console to ever reach the 100 million mark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation

Final totals SHIPPED might equal 10-1, but sales rates sure didn't, given the PS1 was in production for over a decade and the Dreamcast had a 3-year life. The Dreamcast's sales rate averaged 3x that of the PS1.

In fact...

In the United States alone, a record 300,000 units (citation Maclean's September 24, 1999) had been pre-ordered before launch and Sega sold 500,000 consoles in just two weeks (including 225,000 sold on the first 24 hours which became a video game record until the PlayStation 2 launched a year later).

Electronic Arts announced it would not support the Dreamcast unless it sold 1 million units. When this happened within a record 90 days, EA went back on their word and declined to support the Dreamcast in favour of Sony's upcoming PlayStation 2.

That's the Dreamcast history before the PS2 launch. Record-breaking sales.

[Vince]

Didn't wide screen format, hd or not, came out in Asia in the first half of the 90's?

I remember seeing some wide screen CRTs back then.

[JB0]

Didn't wide screen format, hd or not, came out in Asia in the first half of the 90's?

I remember seeing some wide screen CRTs back then.

412307[/snapback]

Even in the US there's non-HD widescreen sets.

I know Japan, at least, had a few HD standards in the past.

On Laserdisk, even.

[Hurin]

Ali Sama,

Some people are very into visual quality. I happen to be one of them. Having taken apart my 53" HDTV, performed mechanical and electronic focus, service mode convergence on each CRT, and otherwise tuned the thing up to near-perfection, I can tell you that a true HD source on a well-maintained HDTV is breathtaking. I suspect that you are watching non-HD material or material that isn't natively HD and/or watching it on a crappy HDTV or one that is not calibrated correctly. If you can swap back and forth between baseball in standard definition and baseball in HD and not see an incredible difference in detail and color saturation (and an overall tremendous increase in the "you are there" feeling), then you can't be helped.

Regardless, as I said, some people are videophiles and get excited about improvements in home theater technology. Your point seems to be that HD is "over-rated" and unimpressive to you. You might as well barge into a conversation about comic books and state that you don't like them, or wander into a high-end steak house and state that good steak isnt important to you and is "over-rated." In each case, you'd be entitled to your opinion. But nobody is going to give a sh*t.

H

[Zinjo]

Didn't wide screen format, hd or not, came out in Asia in the first half of the 90's?

I remember seeing some wide screen CRTs back then.

412307[/snapback]

HD has been in Japan since the early 80's. The very first HD commercial featured George Lucas, C3PO and R2D2.

The reason we haven't seen it in North America until lately is that US TV manufacturers blocked the sale of the technology here and the networks were unwilling to put up the billions necessary to convert all their broadcast equipment over to the new format (that isn't to say they didn't do it over time though).

Granted the technology probably wasn't at the same level as it is today, but it did exist.

The reason why DVD's have taken off are (in a general market sense):

1. Smaller size

2. No degradation of picture or audio quality over time

3. "Bonus features" (Vhs tapes with "bonus features" usually would cost much more than regular tapes-this includes something as simple as a wide screen aspect ratio).

4. Widescreen presentations (animorphic widescreen in recent years).

These are a few of many, not including the technological advantages of digital media.

As for Beta, the format was still in wide use among the networks long after it's retail demise. The picture and audio quality was superior to VHS until the advent of SVHS a few years before DVDs entered the market, back in the mid 90's.

[Hurin]

1. Smaller size

2. No degradation of picture or audio quality over time

3. "Bonus features" (Vhs tapes with "bonus features" usually would cost much more than regular tapes-this includes something as simple as a wide screen aspect ratio).

4. Widescreen presentations (animorphic widescreen in recent years).

Not to mention: NO REWINDING and instant chapter/scene selection!

The #1 reason VHS tapes are hanging in there. . . people are idiots.

It's not because DVDs aren't infinitely better than VHS, it's because so many people are technically illiterate and unskilled to the point where plugging something new into their TV is a daunting task. Especially for those over fifty.

Throw in the fringe benefits of digital sound and surround sound, and many people are scared off.

That's a far different thing, however, than saying that VHS is sticking around because everyone feels it's "good enough" or even nearly as good as DVD. People just fear change.

H

[Ginrai]

Maybe people don't fear change so much as having to rebuy their entire collection in a new format in addition to a new super expensive player...

I'm not at all interested in retiring my DVDs.

[isamu]

PLEASE PUT DYRL AND MAC+ ME ON BLEW REI I AM BEGGING U!!!!!!!!!!!

[JB0]

Maybe people don't fear change so much as having to rebuy their entire collection in a new format in addition to a new super expensive player...

I'm not at all interested in retiring my DVDs.

412540[/snapback]

A. Both HD-DVD and BluRay players are backwards-compatible. So your DVDs will work.

B. No one said you had to throw out your existing player. I've still got a big pile of VHS that I never upgraded for whatever reason.

C. By the time HD media goes mainstream, the price will have fallen to something more resembling the 100-200$ level.

[Ginrai]

And an HD TV and a stupid HDMI cable and a surround sound system...

[JB0]

And an HD TV and a stupid HDMI cable and a surround sound system...

412567[/snapback]

HDTVs are falling in price, and are expected to become the standard in the next few years.

HDMI isn't strictly necessary unless a disk has enabled HDCP.

The sound system is only required if you want the better audio as well as the better video.

[JsARCLIGHT]

The pattern is always the same, today's "enthusiast" technology is tomorrow's mainstream norm. When Radios came out they cost as much as a few months pay for the working man and only the rich had them. As technology marched on soon everyone had a radio. Repeat that process for black and white TV, color TV, VHS, DVD, Record players, 8-Tracks, Cassette Tapes, Reel to reels, Cd's and on and on and on.

The cutting edge is always the bleeding edge and only the wealthy or "enthusiast" folks (like us) will be buying the next gen stuff as it is first made available... but eventually everyone will have it if it's a "good" product.

As for HDTV being "underwelming" all I can say is FOX football coming off the satelite in 720p on a 52" Plasma is pure heaven. If the game is boring I can always count the blades of grass.

[sketchley]

Uhm... some updates from the 'far East':

HDTV is the standard, already. Japan has set the date of 2011

as being the day that ALL broadcast TV in the country will be exclusively HDTV.* NHK (and a few other channels) are already broadcasting in HDTV.

Korean manufacturers, as of a few years ago, were producing HDTV's exclusively, first for the foreign market, and then for the domestic market (much to the chagrin of the locals.)

Perhaps the 'alarming' thing, is that NHK has already proposed the UHDTV (the next generation of HDTV - reportadly 16 times better than HDTV.) So yeah... here comes the future, whether you're ready or not.

Display screen technology has also been leaping ahead. One of the big HDTV pushes in the months before the World Cup was that moving images on the giant sized HDTV screens were clear (if I'm not mistaken, it was a switch from liquid crystal to plasma. I'm not an enthusiast, so I could be mistaken. Keep in mind that these are for the giant sized sets, and not the small ones.)

* http://www.broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers...romCategory=230

I believe that the UK has also set that as their date too...

[JB0]

Uhm... some updates from the 'far East':

HDTV is the standard, already.  Japan has set the date of 2011

as being the day that ALL broadcast TV in the country will be exclusively HDTV.*  NHK (and a few other channels) are already broadcasting in HDTV.

Cutoff for analog in the US is scheduled for 2009, last I heard.

It's been floating, but they think DTV adoption is picking up enough that they won't roll this one back.

[Ali Sama]

Uhm... some updates from the 'far East':

HDTV is the standard, already.  Japan has set the date of 2011

as being the day that ALL broadcast TV in the country will be exclusively HDTV.*  NHK (and a few other channels) are already broadcasting in HDTV.

Cutoff for analog in the US is scheduled for 2009, last I heard.

It's been floating, but they think DTV adoption is picking up enough that they won't roll this one back.

412643[/snapback]

anyone getting satelite or cable already is getting dtv. Though if you want your chanlles without said venues you will need a converter to grab the signals. I am looking forward to dtv. Considering you can get multiple audio, subtitles a few other features. I belive the tvs i have can get it. Not sure about the 27 incher.

http://www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/

Edited July 1, 2006 by Ali Sama

[JB0]

Uhm... some updates from the 'far East':

HDTV is the standard, already.  Japan has set the date of 2011

as being the day that ALL broadcast TV in the country will be exclusively HDTV.*  NHK (and a few other channels) are already broadcasting in HDTV.

Cutoff for analog in the US is scheduled for 2009, last I heard.

It's been floating, but they think DTV adoption is picking up enough that they won't roll this one back.

412643[/snapback]

anyone getting satelite or cable already is getting dtv.

A. There's analog services still.

B. DTV within the context of this discussion SHOULD be understood to mean ATSC spec, not any video which is transmitted in digital format and viewed on a TV.

Digital cable and satellite typically have WORSE image quality than a good NTSC reception, because they're overcompressed to squeeze more bandwidth out.

Though if you want your chanlles without said venues you will need a converter to grab the signals.

Which is getting you something diffrent than digital cable.

And the level of benefit you'll get will vary greatly with actual hardware setup. An upgrade box on a standard NTSC set gets the worst, and a native HD set with integrated ATSC tuner gets the best.

I am looking forward to dtv. Considering you can get multiple audio, subtitles a few other features. I belive the tvs i have can get it. Not sure about the 27 incher.

412933[/snapback]

Multiple audio channels and subtitles are already supported on NTSC via SAP and closed captioning.

Of course, SAP has seen very limited support and closed captioning sucks if for no other reason than it's VERY sensitive to noise.

[Ali Sama]

anyone getting satelite or cable already is getting dtv.

A. There's analog services still.

B. DTV within the context of this discussion SHOULD be understood to mean ATSC spec, not any video which is transmitted in digital format and viewed on a TV.

Digital cable and satellite typically have WORSE image quality than a good NTSC reception, because they're overcompressed to squeeze more bandwidth out.

yes. the signal your getting is digital even though the source is analog.

they do. But most people can't get scif, hbo etc. off the air.

tape/dvd/ld etc any source readily avalable is allways better then braodcast.

Though if you want your chanlles without said venues you will need a converter to grab the signals.

Which is getting you something diffrent than digital cable.

And the level of benefit you'll get will vary greatly with actual hardware setup. An upgrade box on a standard NTSC set gets the worst, and a native HD set with integrated ATSC tuner gets the best.

i think your confusing digital tv with hd tv.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television

Formats

All digital TV variants can carry both standard-definition television (SDTV) and high-definition television (HDTV).

All early SDTV television standards were analog in nature, and SDTV digital television systems derive much of their structure from the need to be compatible with analog television. In particular, the interlaced scan is a legacy of analog television.

Attempts were made during the development of digital television to prevent a repeat of the fragmentation of the global market into different standards (that is, PAL, SECAM, NTSC). However, once again the world could not agree on a single standard, and hence there are three major standards in existence: the European DVB system and the U.S. ATSC system, plus the Japanese system ISDB. For cable, in addition to ATSC standards, the SCTE standard is used to describe cable out-of-band metadata.

Most countries in the world have adopted DVB, but several have followed the U.S. in adopting ATSC instead (Canada, Mexico, South Korea). Korea has adopted S-DMB for satellite mobile broadcasting. At june, 29, 2006, after long debate, Brazil officially adopted the japanese system. China is devloping yet another standard, tentatively called DMB-T/H, which itself consists of two other standards: ADTB-T (similar to ATSC-T) and a variant of T-DMB.

There could be other specialized high-resolution digital video formats in the future for markets other than home entertainment. Ultra High Definition Video (UHDV) is a format proposed by NHK of Japan that provides a resolution 16 times greater than HDTV.

I am looking forward to dtv. Considering you can get multiple audio, subtitles a few other features. I belive the tvs i have can get it. Not sure about the 27 incher.

412933[/snapback]

Multiple audio channels and subtitles are already supported on NTSC via SAP and closed captioning.

Of course, SAP has seen very limited support and closed captioning sucks if for no other reason than it's VERY sensitive to noise.

412935[/snapback]

yes. i was talking about more then spanish. YOu get a few of them, Also interactive tv. lots of other cool features.

if they do a uniform format and stick with it. It will be much better. I want them to loose this region setting on dvds. Cause it;'s crap and we all know it. I own several region 2's and imporet games. I hate having to go out of my way to play them.

i found this very funny article. lol. Now it needs to show how dumb bush is to the rest of the populas and i'll whole heartedly support it.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/spears063006.htm

[JB0]

yes. the signal your getting is digital even though the source is analog.

Not necessarily. There are still analog cable services and analog satellite services. Those are NOT carrying digital signals.

they do. But most people can't get scif, hbo etc. off the air.

Totally irrelevant to the discussion.

tape/dvd/ld etc any source readily avalable is allways better then braodcast.

Depends on reception, among other things.

i think your confusing digital tv with hd tv.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television

I'm aware of the diffrence.

I COULD have listed every step along the way, but chose to go for the extremes only and specify that there was a range in between.

Personally, I don't think a set should legally be allowed to call itself a DTV set if it's a standard-definition display.

The mass market has no comprehension of the diffrence between DTV(any ATSC source), HDTV(only the higher ATSC resolutions), and non-ATSC digital sources. And while things are better than the early days(when I gather TVs would only display those portions of the ATSC spec that were < or = their native res), I still think an HD resolution should be required after all the hype about superior image quality.

yes. i was talking about more then spanish. YOu get a few of them, Also interactive tv. lots of other cool features.

I've seen some odd uses of SAP before. Got one station that plays the weather radio robot on SAP. If I recall, another keeps a semi-constant newscast running on it.

Interactive TV's been done before too, actually. The early days of cable did it.

I'm not expecting a much better showing on either feature this time around.

if they do a uniform format and stick with it. It will be much better. I want them to loose this region setting on dvds. Cause it;'s crap and we all know it. I own several region 2's and imporet games. I hate having to go out of my way to play them.

Agreed.

The movie industry likes region codes, sadly. And any new video standard initiative has to recieve the movie industry's support.

Far as games go...

Sony's abandoning region coding for games on the PS3, but the system is a joke. 360 sticks with the "publisher's choice" policy from the XBox 1. And publishers choose lockouts.

I don't recall any statement from Nintendo about the Wii, but given the NES STARTED regional lockouts in games, I don't have a lot of hope.

i found this very funny article. lol.  Now it needs to show how dumb bush is to the rest of the populas and i'll whole heartedly support it. 

http://www.tvpredictions.com/spears063006.htm

412937[/snapback]

Ignoring the political angle...

So HDTV reveals to the world what the more intelligent people already knew? Sounds like a plus to me.