Is HDTV worth the money?

[jakefrep]

I'm having great difficulty seeing just what some think is so great about HDTV. I just bought a TV a few years ago, and I don't watch a lot of TV. I'm not anxious to have to shell out more money for a TV that doesn't offer a significantly better picture.

[GOPisEvil]

1. My suggestion is go to a store and check it out for yourself.

Only you can decide if the increased resolution is worth the added expense.

[kick-ass-bob]

2. When do we HAVE to go to digital TV's?

Did they move that date?

[GOPisEvil]

3. I think the date was pushed back.

I want to say originally it was 2006 or 2007.

[LSK]

8. you can get a convertor thing for normal TVs

[kick-ass-bob]

12. I know, but I don't think I'm going to do that.

Our "main" TV is a 19" that was bought about 13 years ago. :o

I'll be updating to something real - and so I'll get a digital one. (Unless I find something el cheapo on Craigs List or something)

[LSK]

17. i was using a 15 year old 20" until recently someone gave me a used 27

But the picture has a yellow patch on it so now I might bite the bullet and get a new 27". No HDTV thou.

[jakefrep]

4. Thing is...

..I have been to the stores and checked them out. I just didn't think what I was seeing was worth the price charged.

[GOPisEvil]

5. Well then, there's your decision.

If you don't watch a lot of television anyway, it's probably not worth the expense. However, if you watch a lot of television, it might be worth it.

[mopinko]

11. i didn't see it in the store.

it is better at home. although i could still care less, myself. hubby bought it. but it is better. it'll be kinda cool when movie dvd's start coming out. (for all i know they already are.)
movies are about the only thing i like about the wide screen. i rarely watch tv. but the kids like discovery hd, which is a good thing. spoiled kids, i admit.

[GrumpyGreg]

6. N0 ! I can't think of a thing that is on TV that is worth seeing

with more clarity. Not a thing.

It's a bragging rights thing,that's all it is. There is a sucker born every minute.

[LSK]

7. if you are anal about having a perfect picture and want to brag

Then go for it. IMO its a waste of money.

[Orsino]

9. I find myself watching only a few channels...

...and not feeling the need of a higher-res signal, even on a 57-inch TV. HDTV is pretty, but it doesn't excite me.

[mattomjoe]

10. If you don't have a non-HDTV comparison alongside the HDTV

you really can't appreciate how much more crisp HD is. I don't have a HDTV myself, but through our digital cable, we can watch the HD feeds on our 27" set and it's amazing the difference when you go back and forth. Now, whether that difference is worth shelling out a couple of grand for, that's another thing. But there IS a difference!

[GOPisEvil]

13. Where are you getting that HDTVs are a couple grand?

You can get an HD-ready set for quite a bit less than $1000. Now the flat screen, LCD, DLP, etc...those cost a ton. But you can get a normal tube TV that is HD-ready for a lot less.

[mattomjoe]

14. Sorry, should clarify: the ones *I* would like to get are a couple grand

:evilgrin:

[GOPisEvil]

15. Ahhhhhh...I see.

I almost bought a floor model Sony 32" HD-ready TV for the cheaps. I don't even have digital cable so it would have been pointless, but it was so purty. But I managed to stave off the urges. :)

[caty]

16. I've looked at HDTV

in stores, and it just doesn't look real to me. Real life isn't that sharp.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. There's a rather large difference.

It's like watching everything with DVD quality. If you watch sports, HDTV is VERY worth it. Otherwise, maybe not, but it's all in what you value.

[Greyskye]

21. t's even more than that

Hi-Def is much higher quality than DVD is. Current DVD players (there are 2 new hi-def DVD formats on the horizon) only play in 480i (interlaced). Hi Def resolution is (I believe) up to 1080p (progressive). This is a huge difference! Basically, the difference is much greater between DVD and Hi-Def than it is between analog TV and DVD.

Of course, I'm a cheapskate, so I'm waiting for the 15+ year old 27" analog TV to DIE before I can justify to myself buying a fancy Hi-Def wide-screen flat panel!

(But my sound system rocks! :evilgrin: )

[Reverend_Smitty]

23. I agree

watching sports on an HDTV is amazing the picture is so crisp and bright. In fact it takes me a few minutes to adjust to watching "regular" TV after watching the HD picture.

[Taverner]

19. Eh. I have one. How much do you watch TV?

It is clearer, and it is nice watching the panoramic stuff the play on the HDTV channels. And I will admit it's nice for watching widescreen DVDs

But if you don't watch a lot of TV, its kind of a waste.

[maveric]

20. My son has a 62" HDTV. Its obscene but cool.

Only certain channels broadcast in that format and the picture is fantastic. You see many fine details and shadows that you normally dont see on regular TV. Very crisp! But the channels that dont broadcast in HDTV, the picture seems choppy and undefined. I dont know if its the discerable difference in comparison, or without the HDTV broadcast, the TV itself can not project a good picture.

The other problem is that sometimes the HDTV channel goes out and you have to switch back to the regular broadcast for a while till it comes back online. Then you get a crappy picture.

I beleive that they are working bugs out of the system and soon most channels will broadcast in HD.

BTW, he paid $4,500.00 for this monster. He's a video gamer and ells me that its a "moving experience", playing his games on that set.

I go over to watch the football games and you definately notice the difference when the commercials come on(not in HD).

[bikebloke]

22. Too early yet

Once the Blue-Ray and HDTV format war is resolved and the players drop in price, then folk will move towards the fancy tellies. My regular set sits in the closet until I want to watch a DVD film during the weekend. I'll wait and save my money, because we might soon be in the Second Great Depression.