+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? (/showthread.php?tid=71977)
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - Black - 02-09-2009
Panopticon wrote:
FWIW,
The Panasonic 42" (720p) VIERA PLASMA; Model TH-42PX80U is again on sale @ Sears.
$569.99 ($599.99 - $30 Sears 'cash back' MIR*.)
Sears also sent out an email advertising a "Midnight Madness Sale" tonight... Subj: Tonight Only: Extra 10-25% OFF Online, 6PM-6AM!
No info on discounts for Electronics provided, just states "Super Savings".
[quote *Sears Terms-]
USE YOUR SEARS CARD AND CHOOSE: 12 MONTHS NO INTEREST, NO PAYMENTS OR 5% CASH BACK VIA MAIL IN REBATE ON TOTAL ELECTRONICS PURCHASES OVER $299. YOU MUST DECLINE THE FINANCE OFFER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE CASH BACK OFFER. EXCLUDES VIDEO GAMES, GAME SYSTEMS, COMPUTERS, AND GREAT PRICE ITEMS. ONLINE/SEARS.COM PURCHASES ONLY.
Choose In-Store Pick Up to avoid shipping charges.
Availablity is by ZIP Code, so it's available only in a few areas!
as always, YMMV :coffee:
Thanks for your perseverence.
I tried a Target and a Best Buy today-- Target apparently doesn't carry the 32" 1080p Vizio except online, so nothing to check out there (but I did find a picture frame in a size I needed).
Best Buy was completely depressing . . . Very slim selection; I spent a little time comparing a random 32" Samsung to a random 32" Toshiba and at least in these two examples the Toshiba sound quality still blew the Samsung away; tried to see what the remotes were like but they didn't feel like looking for them.
This TV is for a bedroom that's about 8'x13'-- 37" would be my absolute limit- 42" would be firmly into silly territory.
I spent some time at the Sears site earlier and confirmed that two stores within my reach have the 1080p 32" Vizio in stock; the offer above is only when you use a Sears card, no?
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - Black - 02-09-2009
LyleH wrote:
Do you realize that when viewing a 32" 16:9 HDTV in 4:3 mode it is equivalent to a 26.1" CRT?
This link will let you calculate other sizes: http://www.cavecreations.com/tv2.cgi
LyleH
Fine with me. The current set is a 27" CRT and it's just about perfect, size-wise.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - Black - 02-09-2009
Quick survey with my EyeTV suggests about 1/3 to 1/2 of Chicago stations' digital feeds are not HD.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - LyleH - 02-09-2009
AlphaDog wrote:
[quote=kj]
I'm surprised it's that big, but why would you watch anything in 4:3 anymore? kj.
Well, maybe because that's how some stations continue to broadcast? I have two 16:9 sets - as a matter of fact the one right next to me is on, and I have it set to display the picture as "Normal" (4:3) because both of the other settings stretch the picture. I don't have HD service with my cable, so there are only a couple of stations I can get in HD through the QAM tuner, and those display automatically in 16:9. From my point of view, I'd much rather watch the unstretched version of non-HD broadcasts.
I agree with watching unstretched versions of non-hd broadcasts. When we first got my 50" Panasonic plasma HDTV a year ago we stretched the 4:3 programs. But the people were just too distorted (fat), so we now watch them in 4:3. I was also concerned about burn-in because of the borders on the sides of the 4:3 image, but I have yet to see any signs of burn-in.
LyleH
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - Black - 02-09-2009
LyleH wrote:
[quote=AlphaDog]
[quote=kj]
I'm surprised it's that big, but why would you watch anything in 4:3 anymore? kj.
Well, maybe because that's how some stations continue to broadcast? I have two 16:9 sets - as a matter of fact the one right next to me is on, and I have it set to display the picture as "Normal" (4:3) because both of the other settings stretch the picture. I don't have HD service with my cable, so there are only a couple of stations I can get in HD through the QAM tuner, and those display automatically in 16:9. From my point of view, I'd much rather watch the unstretched version of non-HD broadcasts.
I agree with watching unstretched versions of non-hd broadcasts. When we first got my 50" Panasonic plasma HDTV a year ago we stretched the 4:3 programs. But the people were just too distorted (fat), so we now watch them in 4:3. I was also concerned about burn-in because of the borders on the sides of the 4:3 image, but I have yet to see any signs of burn-in.
LyleH
Are you sure you weren't just watching "Biggest Loser?"
BTW the deal in question is gone-- BIN was $450, my offer was $400, seller countered with $425, and sold to someone else at $412.50.
No huge regrets.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - vision63 - 02-09-2009
Bought a 47" Vizio from Costco for $1299 which now goes for $899. And that was since last June. Sounds and looks great plus Costco adds an additional year to the warrantee. When I peek at the internals with a flashlight, I can see "LG" on some component.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - Black - 02-09-2009
vision63 wrote:
Bought a 47" Vizio from Costco for $1299 which now goes for $899. And that was since last June. Sounds and looks great plus Costco adds an additional year to the warrantee. When I peek at the internals with a flashlight, I can see "LG" on some component.
Well, with 100 employees, I figured they couldn't all be hand-made in California. I guess I'll have to try to get to Sears to check the sound out for myself, although it's really hard to stay interested in TV sets very long.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - deckeda - 02-09-2009
The other option is simply to replace your old CRT with another old CRT if it's cheap enough, either new or used. But wait --- didn't you say you fixed your current set with a b!tch slap on its side?
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - kj - 02-09-2009
AlphaDog wrote:
[quote=kj]
I'm surprised it's that big, but why would you watch anything in 4:3 anymore? kj.
Well, maybe because that's how some stations continue to broadcast? I have two 16:9 sets - as a matter of fact the one right next to me is on, and I have it set to display the picture as "Normal" (4:3) because both of the other settings stretch the picture. I don't have HD service with my cable, so there are only a couple of stations I can get in HD through the QAM tuner, and those display automatically in 16:9. From my point of view, I'd much rather watch the unstretched version of non-HD broadcasts.
All we have is over-the-air, and the only program I can think of that we've seen that is 4:3 is one local news. So HD and 16:9 is basically synonymous? We were thinking about getting a super basic cable deal since we'll be losing the non-digital ota channels, but if all the channels are 4:3, no way. kj.
Re: LCD TV deal-- should I bite? - AlphaDog - 02-09-2009
kj wrote: So HD and 16:9 is basically synonymous? We were thinking about getting a super basic cable deal since we'll be losing the non-digital ota channels, but if all the channels are 4:3, no way. kj.
I don't know if my experience matches those of others, and I haven't checked all of the channels. I'm talking about the ones I view most, which happen to be primarily cable channels (Lifetime, A&E, TNT) and the local network affiliates for ABC, NBC, and CBS. I can get HD for only ABC and NBC (CBS might be buried somewhere, but I haven't found it.) Not all of the programs on those two networks are even broadcast in HD. I can check to see which are by putting my zip code in the search function of titantv.com For example, right now, the only two are NBC, which is broadcasting Today in HD, and CBS has That Price is Right in HD, but I can't get that signal.