TV3 RWC coverage

First Up

gordongekko wrote: »

If you can't see the difference you probably need a new tv.

Or more important things to worry about.

gordongekko

First Up wrote: »

Or more important things to worry about.

Like?

First Up

gordongekko wrote: »

Like?

Like what is happening in the game you are watching.

Of course I can see the difference; it just isn't that big a deal in watching an activity like rugby or any other fast moving sport.

LaGlisse

People who spend big money on expensive HDTVs and Sky HD see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The 4K or is it (8K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

bucketybuck

Its amazing how nobody ever enjoyed watching sport on TV before HD came along. Poor bastards back in the 80's and 90's never even knew how bad they had it.

First Up

LaGlisse wrote: »

People who spend big money on expensive HDTVs and Sky HD see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The 4K or is it (8K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

I have a expensive HD (and 3D) Smart TV and I enjoy it. But I can also tell the difference between what matters and what doesn't.

gordongekko

LaGlisse wrote: »

People who spend big money on expensive HDTVs and Sky HD see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The 4K or is it (8K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

bucketybuck wrote: »

Its amazing how nobody ever enjoyed watching sport on TV before HD came along. Poor bastards back in the 80's and 90's never even knew how bad they had it.

Maybe we should just go back to black and white tv's so??

LaGlisse

gordongekko wrote: »

Maybe we should just go back to black and white tv's so??

No because there is an actual difference between colour and TV, not just marketing guff

ThisRegard

LaGlisse wrote: »

People who spend big money on expensive HDTVs and Sky HD see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The 4K or is it (8K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

LaGlisse wrote: »

No because there is an actual difference between colour and TV, not just marketing guff

You seriously believe any of that ?

LaGlisse

ThisRegard wrote: »

You seriously believe any of that ?

Yes, ihave a normal tv i spent E300 on. I go over to friends. relatives houses sometimes for a match and they have whizzbang E1000+ HD tvs and it makes NO difference whatsoever to my viewing enjoyment. Suckers

gordongekko

LaGlisse wrote: »

No because there is an actual difference between colour and TV, not just marketing guff

LaGlisse wrote: »

People who spend big money on expensive HDTVs and Sky HD see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The 4K or is it (8K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

People who spend big money on expensive colour tvs and satellite tv see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The hd or is it (4K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

LaGlisse

gordongekko wrote: »

People who spend big money on expensive colour tvs and satellite tv see what they want to see. Its like the emporers new clothes. They have to lie to themselves and others that the viewing experience is better because the alternative is that they are gullible fools who came down in the last shower. The hd or is it (4K now?) shysters will be along soon to lighten their wallets even more

Glad to see youve come around to my way of seeing things mate

gordongekko

LaGlisse wrote: »

Glad to see youve come around to my way of seeing things mate

I've seen the black and white and its the future

LaGlisse

gordongekko wrote: »

I've seen the black and white and its the future

There nwas a quantifiable improvement in the jump from black and white to color. The jump from SD to HD is nowhere near as significant. Its a con

First Up

LaGlisse wrote: »

There nwas a quantifiable improvement in the jump from black and white to color. The jump from SD to HD is nowhere near as significant. Its a con

It is better, just not enough to get so excited about.

gordongekko

First Up wrote: »

It is better, just not enough to get so excited about.

LaGlisse wrote: »

There nwas a quantifiable improvement in the jump from black and white to color. The jump from SD to HD is nowhere near as significant. Its a con

Ah seriously what tv's have ye?

LaGlisse

gordongekko wrote: »

Ah seriously what tv's have ye?

I dont even know the brand, spent E300 on it,does the job. Its color btw

First Up

gordongekko wrote: »

Ah seriously what tv's have ye?

Samsung 48" Smart 3D Full HD LED TV

bucketybuck

First Up wrote: »

It is better, just not enough to get so excited about.

Is it better? Probably, there probably is some benefits to the HD craze (and a few negatives as well)

What the fans don't seem to get is that it didn't actually matter. Ten years ago you could sit and watch a movie on your TV and enjoy it perfectly well. You could marvel at the experience and walk away thoroughly entertained. Today? Today you can sit and watch a movie on your HDTV and enjoy it perfectly well. You can marvel at the experience and walk away thoroughly entertained.

Thousands spent and in the end, your enjoyment level is same as it ever was.

Come next week I could watch the rugby on my SDTV, and you could watch it on your HDTV, and there won't be one difference in the viewing experience for each of us, we will both be equally content.

First Up

bucketybuck wrote: »

Is it better? Probably, there probably is some benefits to the HD craze (and a few negatives as well)

What the fans don't seem to get is that it didn't actually matter. Ten years ago you could sit and watch a movie on your TV and enjoy it perfectly well. You could marvel at the experience and walk away thoroughly entertained. Today? Today you can sit and watch a movie on your HDTV and enjoy it perfectly well. You can marvel at the experience and walk away thoroughly entertained.

Thousands spent and in the end, your enjoyment level is same as it ever was.

Come next week I could watch the rugby on my SDTV, and you could watch it on your HDTV, and there won't be one difference in the viewing experience for each of us, we will both be equally content.

More importantly, the result will be the same too.

I'm less interested in seeing every individual blade of grass, than what is taking place on top of them.

gordongekko

LaGlisse wrote: »

I dont even know the brand, spent E300 on it,does the job. Its color btw

First Up wrote: »

LED TV

That answers that

ThisRegard

bucketybuck wrote: »

Thousands spent and in the end, your enjoyment level is same as it ever was.

Big shop windows where you are?

Never realised there were so many luddites around.

bucketybuck

ThisRegard wrote: »

Big shop windows where you are?

Never realised there were so many luddites around.

I'm far from a luddite.

LaGlisse

ThisRegard wrote: »

Big shop windows where you are?

Never realised there were so many luddites around.

Not a luddite,just like to get bang for my buck. I'm not getting 700-1300 euro worth of extra value if I upgrade to a high end TV,my experience improves marginally extremely marginally.
Don't mind spending money when it's worth it,dropped a fair bit of coin on a decent suit recently 1k+, because you can see and feel the difference versus a 300 euro one.
That's not the case with HD v SD but sure enjoy counting the blades of grass on the pitch in Cardiff on Sunday. I'll be watching the match

First Up

gordongekko wrote: »

That answers that

So what do you recommend?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

This is what happens when there's 2 days with no TV3 coverage to moan about.

lunarhog

HD TV's aren't expensive nowadays. In fact, I got mine (Samsung, 37") from Argos about 4 years ago for £299 and its still going strong. Had the full HD package along with sports with sky for a while but far too expensive to justify it, so downgraded to normal package but still get BBC and ITV HD channels.

Theres not a big pile of difference but you do notice it best for nature documentaries, some movies etc.

ThisRegard

LaGlisse wrote: »

Not a luddite,just like to get bang for my buck. I'm not getting 700-1300 euro worth of extra value if I upgrade to a high end TV,my experience improves marginally extremely marginally.

That's my point about the big shop windows, you can spend half of what you're quoting as the lower limit as an entry level to get a reasonably good TV these days.

Socialist Serenade

Who is the presenter? He's bloody hopeless

efb

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/tv3-takes-a-long-ad-break-and-we-miss-a-pivotal-moment-in-irish-rugby-history-1.2392046

Times take on it