Jump to content

wilsact

Member
  • Posts

    738
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wilsact

  1. If anyone has the latest edition of Sound & Vision check out the editor Rob Sabin piece on the current state of tv tech. He is fairly highly regarded with all things image quality. To quote him 'Panasonic's departure will leave a huge hole where affordable, state of the art picture quality used to live. Ultra HDTV lcd displays, which are helping to push plasma off the stage now, combine inferior image quality with additional pixels that are of questionable value at screen sizes less than 75 or 80 inches. OLED's sets hold greater promise, but at a cost so high as to be unattainable by most consumers for what will surely be several years.' Basically he goes on to say grab a Panasonic plasma while you still can. Interesting comments.
  2. Would this help with something like the ridiculous free to air channel logos such as the solid pink ones used by gem and go in regional areas? I know these normally only cause image retention (not burn in), but have noticed it can take weeks to fade even on current model plasma's. The cnet link photos appear to show clear image retention on the OLED screens seen.
  3. Umm isn't the article from August 2013? Outdated?
  4. Curved screen mentioned here. Seven problems with current OLED televisions: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57598963-221/seven-problems-with-current-oled-televisions/
  5. Hey, After an Emotiva XPA-2 (or possibly 2 x UPA-1's) if anyone is looking at selling/upgrading. Cheers
  6. Agreed. The quality of the free to air channels (as has been discussed in detail on here) is terrible. Thank all those new shopping channels. Don't even start on the huge solid go and gem logos they have introduced. I avoid win as much as possible. If they didn't have the NRL rights would not watch at all. Mind you prime (7) is quickly following them, the quality of the sd (luckily usually HD) broadcast of the AFL last week was woeful.
  7. Hey guys, If anyone is looking at upgrading to the new gen 2 amps, or just selling.....please let me know. In the ACT, but will pay post. UPA 5 UPA 7 XPA 5 XPA 2
  8. Agreed. I avoid the channels like win go and gem with their huge solid colour watermarks. They are so over the top, and very distracting! I know plenty of others feel the same, and have complained to win. All a waste of time it seems. It is one thing to protect your property, but this is getting ridiculous! When it starts becoming a big annoyance and viewers change the channel or turn off, you have to wonder what advertisers think? Might have to add prime to the list now. No wonder more and more people are simply downloading tv shows.
  9. sarah@emotiva.com Have always received a reply within 24 hours. Cheers
  10. Thanks for the link. I like the way they do these tests. Forget specs and all the jargon, just put people in a room (both experts and novices) and see which sets come out on top.
  11. Yeah definately agree with this. Especially with the rubbish SD footy nine put out!
  12. Haha here we go again, another plasma v lcd thread. I wouldn't use the newspapers in Australia or polls they run to offer any credibility to ones view though. I stand by what I posted earlier...... What a load of rubbish. This is more an issue of the Korean giants hurting the traditional Japanese makers rather than the actual products they are producing. Sony is also bleeding money and posting huge losses with their LCD TV division, so is that technology also doomed and a mistake for them to invest in? http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/13657274/sony-posts-record-loss-but-aims-to-halve-tv-losses/ Unfortunately for both Panasonic and Sony (and other Japanese companies) the big Koreans like Samsung and LG (who both also sell plasmas as well as LCD) have been able to discount and still make big profits. Regardless it is true it doesn't really matter which tech is superior as 95% of people will not pay extra for a better picture, build, or overall quality, as Pioneer sadly found out
  13. What a load of rubbish. This is more an issue of the Korean giants hurting the traditional Japanese makers rather than the actual products they are producing. Sony is also bleeding money and posting huge losses with their LCD TV division, so is that technology also doomed and a mistake for them to invest in? Unfortunately for both Panasonic and Sony (and other Japanese companies) the big Koreans like Samsung and LG (who both also sell plasmas as well as LCD) have been able to discount and still make big profits. Regardless it is true it doesn't really matter which tech is superior as 95% of people will not pay extra for a better picture, build, or overall quality, as Pioneer sadly found out.
  14. I think people are missing the point here. Maybe it is more that people have not seen how bad these new watermarks really are, if they are not in a regional area (regional area watermarks are much different to what they use in the city areas). For starters these watermarks are very distracting as a viewer. Whilst it is fine for companies to protect their property, do they really need such large and annoying logos? The win go and gem watermarks look massive on a 50" plasma, hate to think what they are like on even larger screens!!! Sad to see ten have followed, though their solid logo is still half as bad as what win is doing. Also I have a 2011 Panasonic plasma. With these new watermarks they may not cause permanent burn-in, but the image retention is quite bad and long lasting. They seem much worse than I have seen on most video games, probably due to being more noticeable when changing channels or ad breaks come on. The win go logo or gem logo is so large, solild coloured, and bright, that it retains onscreen for ages. It really stands out and I have had many people comment on it. So it isn't just a little image retention, but enough to cause dramas with viewing quality. Not a good look!!! I now avoid watching these channels due to it.
  15. I hope as many people as possible email free to air Australia and wintv etc to complain about WINS ridiculous distracting watermarks. Wintv are definately the worst. Huge, solid, colour watermarks. Their watermarks are a joke, not to mention a big image retention issue to plasma owners. Email: contact@freetv.com.au http://www.wintv.com...ional/contactus I have stopped watching Win, Go and Gem due to the ridiculous watermarks they are using. I am just not going to risk my expensive plasma! And I know I am not the only one, friends and family have expressed the same. I know it is probably a waste of time complaining, but atleast they might realise this is costing viewers and as a result advertising dollars!
  16. I hope as many people as possible email free to air Australia and Wintv etc to complain about WINS ridiculous distracting watermarks. Wintv are definately the worst. Huge, solid, colour watermarks. Their watermarks are a joke, not to mention a big image retention issue to plasma owners. Email: contact@freetv.com.au http://www.wintv.com...ional/contactus I have stopped watching Win, Go and Gem due to the ridiculous watermarks they are using. I am just not going to risk my expensive plasma! And I know I am not the only one, friends and family have expressed the same. I know it is probably a waste of time complaining, but atleast they might realise this is costing viewers and as a result advertising dollars!
  17. I hope as many people as possible email free to air Australia and wintv etc to complain about this. Win are definately the worst. Their watermarks are a joke. Email: contact@freetv.com.au http://www.wintv.com.au/national/contactus I have also stopped watching Win, Go and Gem due to the ridiculous watermarks they are using. I am just not going to risk my expensive plasma! I know it is probably a waste of time complaining, but atleast they might realise this is costing viewers and as a result advertising dollars!
  18. The win go and gem logos are disgraceful. Huge, bright, distracting. Even prime sometimes does the same. Stuff free to air too annoying to watch now!!!
  19. Hey, I know that, but I am not sure why it is an unfair comment. It is just a fact. Either way you still have to pay for the tbox whether it is monthly or upfront if you wish to view foxtel. So the cost must be factored in. In comparison foxtel regularly has offers that INCLUDE the equipment required and installation at no cost. See below: OFFER 2 - FREE* INSTALLATION (VALUE $100) on Sports with our Starter Pack. For just $61* per month on a 12 month plan including FREE* installation you’ll get: 12 dedicated sports channels, including FOX FOOTYFOX FOOTY Plus 45 popular FOXTEL channels I am not trying to be an advertising agent for regular foxtel here, either way Telstra are a 50% owner in foxtel anyway, so they win if you sign up via tbox or the normal way. Just comparing the two options for those that might not have had the chance to do so. People see the $49.95 advertised and might think it is a cheaper easier option, when clearly it is not. Also the point I was making about it being an internet stream is not that there is any further costs involved, only that whilst your tbox is running it is using bandwidth which will limit other users in your home when they are using the net. This is fairly relevant to people who are on adsl2 connections and not cable. It most certainly is a sellers market, and I still cannot see why anyone would pay the same price for lower video quality, less channels, etc. Also I highly doubt tbox would hold any advantages to people in poor reception areas. It is currently only available to people with cable or adsl2 regardless, where foxtel/austar is via satellite so covers a much much larger area. I do have a tbox (friend gave it to me as he didn't want it) and have been trying out the foxtel option for a few months to test out quality, operations etc. So I am well aware of what it offers and its bugs etc. I have also previously had regular foxtel. The nail in Telstra tbox foxtel option coffin to me is that it is virtually the same price as normal foxtel! No way around this fact.
  20. I am more interested in what will happen with the NRL rights down the track- I just know many people who were hoping that this would be a cheaper and easier way into foxtel footy. Considering that this is foxtel lite, with just a few channels and lower video quality, it should be much cheaper. I also note they advertise it on their website for $49.95 not including the actual tbox costs. Sure it is somewhere in the fine print though. To make this even more comical I have friends who have 'proper' foxtel with high def channels and the full sports package for only $70 a month. They also get IQ2 dual channel recording capabilities in this price after negotiating with foxtel!!! Wonder how much negotiating on price Telstra will allow? Very little I suspect.
  21. I know they have to get back what they paid for the big dollars they forked out for the internet rights (which is up in the air as it is), but I just cannot see anyone paying that sort of money for foxtel lite internet streamed sport. Especially with all the shortcomings of the tbox. Maybe if it was half the price of normal standard foxtel, but at near price parity. Hilarous really.
  22. Looks like Telstra have announced their tbox foxtel afl package. Talk about a RIPOFF!!! So basically- Tbox: $11 a month or $299 outright Basic starter foxtel pack: $19.50 Extra sports package: $10 Extra AFL package: $20 So works out $60.50 A MONTH or $50.50 if you get the $10 off multiple services bundle discount. So pretty much the same price as a normal foxtel with sport package, but a fraction of the channels and quality? Not to mention putting up with the t-box's operating quirks and faults and that the tbox foxtel feed is a limited quality internet stream (have to wait for channel loading, and the poor quality stream really struggles with fast motion and pans.) Sure disadvantages that can be worn if it is alot cheaper, but at the same prices or close to what is the advantage? If the prices on the website are a true indication of what is coming, this will have to end up a much hyped flop. Just way to expensive for the limited channels you get, especially when you can get full foxtel with sport (47 odd channels) for $61 A MONTH, and that is before you even see what deals they have going. I will be amazed to see if anyone actually signs up for this ripoff.
×
×
  • Create New...
To Top