Video Asylum

TVs, VCRs, DVD players, Home Theater systems and more.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Re: TV ?'s, 16:9 vs. 4:3, etc...

Posted by Pete J on July 29, 2000 at 14:19:24:
I think any signifcant outlay for less than a set with native 16:9 capability is a sheer waste of money. Unless you must have a set now save your money and get the best set you can afford at a later date. Things are just in their infancy right now and so are very pricey. I just got Panasonic top-of-the-line RPTV with full HDTV 16:9 480P 720P and 1150?i native capability. The bad news is that it lists for $5499. The good news is that I got it for $3499 new at an auction. Thus the markups must be very substantial. Remember that the TV is only part of the stuff you need for full bore home theater. There will be lots of costs for all the necessary speakers, the progressive scan capable receiver and dvd players. But that is where things are going and you will kick yourself every time you have to look at a movie with all those raster lines if you spend over a few hundred bucks.