|
|
|
date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:16:23 -0000,
group: uk.media.home-cinema
back
Monitor or TV?
I don't need to replace it yet but if one wanted to replace a CRT TV that is
currently getting input from a media PC, a separate Freeview box, a VCR and
a DVD. Should I be looking at monitors or TVs? I don't need MASSIVE as I
have a projector for that.
I find the current (28"ish) TV to have too low a resolution (600x800) for
the PC but otherwise it's OK - (like to view the media).
Slatts
date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:16:23 -0000
author: Sla#s
|
Re: Monitor or TV?
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:16:23 -0000, "Sla#s"
wrote:
>I don't need to replace it yet but if one wanted to replace a CRT TV that is
>currently getting input from a media PC, a separate Freeview box, a VCR and
>a DVD. Should I be looking at monitors or TVs? I don't need MASSIVE as I
>have a projector for that.
>I find the current (28"ish) TV to have too low a resolution (600x800) for
>the PC but otherwise it's OK - (like to view the media).
An interesting question, and one that recently exercised me. I use my
home cinema amp as a video switchbox. My TV is only ever used as a
monitor for the one output video signal. Its tuner, amplifier and
speakers are never used. Thus, when the CRT died a few weeks ago,
buying a monitor seemed like a possibility worthy of consideration.
But I ended up buying a TV (albeit with redundant features) because it
offered features that I wanted but are, AFAIK, not available on
monitors (well, none that I've seen):
- remote control
- aspect ratio switching
- multiple inputs (I only use component input now, but I can see that
HDMI will be preferable in a year or two, and I *might* want to plug
something in directly by SCART at some stage).
The remote control includes a pile of things that can be pretty
awkward on a monitor without r/c.
I also think you'll find that economies of scale might well mean that
you can get a better TV than monitor for the price - absurd as that
sounds initially! (As a guide, I've just paid £1000 for a 37"
Panasonic LCD - and know that I could have bought it more cheaply.)
Peter.
date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:13:15 +0000
author: Peter
|
Re: Monitor or TV?
Peter wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:16:23 -0000, "Sla#s"
> wrote:
>
>> I don't need to replace it yet but if one wanted to replace a CRT TV
>> that is currently getting input from a media PC, a separate Freeview
>> box, a VCR and a DVD. Should I be looking at monitors or TVs? I
>> don't need MASSIVE as I have a projector for that.
>> I find the current (28"ish) TV to have too low a resolution
>> (600x800) for the PC but otherwise it's OK - (like to view the
>> media).
>
> An interesting question, and one that recently exercised me. I use my
> home cinema amp as a video switchbox. My TV is only ever used as a
> monitor for the one output video signal. Its tuner, amplifier and
> speakers are never used. Thus, when the CRT died a few weeks ago,
> buying a monitor seemed like a possibility worthy of consideration.
>
> But I ended up buying a TV (albeit with redundant features) because it
> offered features that I wanted but are, AFAIK, not available on
> monitors (well, none that I've seen):
> - remote control
> - aspect ratio switching
> - multiple inputs (I only use component input now, but I can see that
> HDMI will be preferable in a year or two, and I *might* want to plug
> something in directly by SCART at some stage).
>
> The remote control includes a pile of things that can be pretty
> awkward on a monitor without r/c.
>
> I also think you'll find that economies of scale might well mean that
> you can get a better TV than monitor for the price - absurd as that
> sounds initially! (As a guide, I've just paid £1000 for a 37"
> Panasonic LCD - and know that I could have bought it more cheaply.)
>
Thanks - that's the direction I was heading :-)
Seen any advice (URLs) about this sort of stuff?
Ta
Saltts
date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:36:31 -0000
author: Sla#s
|
Re: Monitor or TV?
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:36:31 -0000, "Sla#s"
wrote:
>Thanks - that's the direction I was heading :-)
>Seen any advice (URLs) about this sort of stuff?
Sorry, no offers.
But I remembered that the subject was discussed here a year or two
ago. You might find it interesting/helpful to see that old thread. See
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.comp.sys.mac/browse_thread/thread/c82cda26259dade2/ffb1bb3c0b926483?q=lcd+tv&lnk=ol&
if you're interested.
Peter.
date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:38:11 +0000
author: Peter
|
Re: Monitor or TV?
In article <fl343h$1c7q$1@energise.enta.net>,
Sla#s wrote:
> I don't need to replace it yet but if one wanted to replace a CRT TV
> that is currently getting input from a media PC, a separate Freeview
> box, a VCR and a DVD. Should I be looking at monitors or TVs? I don't
> need MASSIVE as I have a projector for that. I find the current
> (28"ish) TV to have too low a resolution (600x800) for the PC but
> otherwise it's OK - (like to view the media).
If by a monitor you mean a computer one, they need an add on box to accept
'broadcast' signals - and a decent one is expensive. Widescreen switching
is likely to be a problem too.
If anyone knows of a good quality add on box that does this too I'd like
to hear of it.
--
*Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all?"
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 10:20:25 +0000 (GMT)
author: Dave Plowman (News)
|
|
|