• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Is Television the best method of watching Television?

S

ssetta

Okay, by reading the title of this thread, you probably think that's a crazy statement. I'm sure a lot of you are saying "What on Earth are you talking about? That makes absolutely no sense! What other method is there? Television is Television!!"

And now, I will explain it. As a lot of you know, TiVo is becoming extremely popular. And a LOT of major network programs are available for viewing online. And with TiVo, you can watch a program at a later time, and I don't know who would want to watch the commercials if they didn't have to. The same is true with online viewing. And also, back in the old days, I've heard people say that a TV schedule used to be somewhat like a job, or even a prison. In other words, the only time to watch the program was WHEN IT was on. You didn't get a choice. And if a network pushed a show an hour earlier, or later, you would have to change your entire schedule to revolve around the TV show. And also, back in the day, TV shows used to be about 26 minutes excluding commercials, and now, they're about 20 minutes. And even so, they usually have like a million pop-up ads for upcoming shows, some of them not even airing on that same day! And I don't think ANY network shows full-screen credits anymore, at least not very often.

So, this is what brings us to the question. Since we have TiVo, and online viewing, I bet that by the year 2100 (maybe even sooner), TV schedules will be a thing of the past. So, here is the question one more time:

Is Television the best method of watching Television??
 
Yes. Television is the best method for watching TV. The internet can't compete with the quality of a television set. At least not yet. Ask this question in 10 years and the answer may be different.
 
Skynet74 said:
Yes. Television is the best method for watching TV. The internet can't compete with the quality of a television set. At least not yet. Ask this question in 10 years and the answer may be different.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Especially with HD now, I have no desire to watch a TV show on my 15" laptop screen.
 
Americans have shown they will give up quality for convenience, provided it's not too bad. For instance cell phones and mp3s.

HDTV is problematic, because older shows are simply upconverted, so why pay more for something not in HDTV and the newer shows HDTV is irrelevent unless it's a nature show or football game.

I love WLS-TV bragging their news is HDTV, like that somehow makes it better? It does nothing to improve the news.

It was funny on last night's "Simpsons" they addressed this issue, the companies accused Marge of stealing TV cause she skipped the commericals with her TiVo.

It's not the networks but the advertisers that mind TiVo, basically because ads have become so targeted it makes it hard to find out who is watching what? The networks don't care what you watch as long as you watch them, but the advertisers only want the audience that is going to buy their products.

I do wonder if we'll go back to the days like in radio where ads were incorporated into plots like on "Burns and Allen," and "Jack Benny."
 
Programs on HDTV are much better quality. Even older shows that are unconverted. It's all about the quality signal you are getting from the TV station. No snow, no static. Just a perfect image no matter what you are watching.
 
Skynet74 said:
No snow, no static. Just a perfect image no matter what you are watching.
Click to expand...

No Snow, No Static, No Show. Remember, with an analog signal, you can still get and watch a show with some snow or static, but with digital, it's either there or you have black.

Of the two, I prefer to watch a snow with a little static or snow, than miss the whole show due to digital breakup.

In away, I see HD being the saving grace to television vs. internet war. Like back when the movie theatres were fighting with television, they came out with “widescreen,” which saved movie theatres from becoming a dinosaur. Television comes out with HD, because of quality and size that you can’t get on the internet (yet.)
 
With a good HDTV tuner the signal reach should be just as good as Analog and it will lock onto the picture so that it shouldn't drop out. I just bought a new HDTV and the built in digital tuner sucks. I can get all the local HDTV signals in Providence. But it doesn't pull in the Boston HDTV signals (40 miles away) at all. However most others get these without a problem from my location. Once again, my tuner sucks!

So I'm planning on purchasing the the Samsung digital tuner model number DTBH260F to add on to my new TV. This tuner is supposed to be among the best and pull in everything.
 
Ahhh...Is Radio the best method of listening to Radio?

Is IMAX the best method of watching IMAX?

Sorry, I couldn't pass that up!
 
Actually radio may not be the best method for listening to radio. With internet live streams, podcasts, mp3's etc, there are alternatives. i think the original poster has an excellent point. If we no longer need a radio to listen to radio, why not watch "TV" on an appliance other than a TV set. The technology is not quite there yet but it will be.
 
For right now, yes watching TV on TV is the best way. I've got a nice 32 inch flat panel HDTV at home, I wouldn't trade that for a 18 inch(14 inches on my laptop) computer monitor. But this answer might change in the future. But for right now, the TV set is better.
 
I was viewing HDTV at Best Buy the other day and they had a HDTV with Time Warner Cable HD service on it and I was checking out some HD channels. I noticed that on some shows that on the left and right sides its black or says ESPN-HD or something. I think that is because all the shows aren't in HD yet. Saw CNN HD and it had the black on the sides.
 
That's exactly the reason Ken. I'm in the belief that if a program is meant for a 4:3 screen, I will NOT fill in the sides with my remote. I think the picture looks worse when you do that.
 
I watch some shows over the Internet now, but it is mostly ones that are unavailable on broadcast or cable TV or that I missed when it was on from sources like the networks' websites or You Tube, but I don't make it a habit if it's avaialble on TV though.

I definitely believe that in the future video over the Internet will improve to a point that it will be equal to or better than cable TV or DVDs. I can see a point where a PC can become a video source that will be equal to a cable tuner or DVD player. That will probably open up all kinds of programming on demand that is unavailable by cable or even DVD.
 
Watching TV on a TV is the best way, I think. Even though I am using dial-up (I am just a poor bachelor, ya know... ;o) I can watch TV on the computer but the quality is crap and it ties up my other phone line. That and most of the stuff I would watch on the computer (particularly PBS alternate channels or NASA TV) I can easily get on local ATSC channels or my satellite box, and in far superior quality to what I find on the Internet.

KML-224, I strongly agree with your belief/statement. That's why I don't have a 16*9 set. A 16*9 programme or broadcast can always be letterboxed to fit a 4*3 screen assuming your receiver does this (most do, and still be perfectly viewable that way) but 4*3 programmes should NEVER be "stretched" (or "squashed", depending on your point of view) to fill a 16*9 screen. It just looks like crap that way, I think.
 
I do not watch TV shows online, because the quality is just not there. It's going to be a long time before the Internet can have enough bandwidth to carry broadcast-quality video and audio. And likewise, I find listening to "radio" via the Internet leaves something to be desired.

HD has a place, but for news, it doesn't make one newscast any better than another. I really don't care if I can see wrinkles on the anchor's face. And the way it is advertised is just annoying. I can't get over how WNBC calls itself 4HD. And I wasn't even watching it on an HD set when I was last in New York.
 
fussbudget said:
Actually radio may not be the best method for listening to radio. With internet live streams, podcasts, mp3's etc, there are alternatives. i think the original poster has an excellent point. If we no longer need a radio to listen to radio, why not watch "TV" on an appliance other than a TV set. The technology is not quite there yet but it will be.
Click to expand...

Then that would be the answer IF the question was...Is Radio the best method for listening to music?
 
fussbudget said:
Actually radio may not be the best method for listening to radio. With internet live streams, podcasts, mp3's etc, there are alternatives. i think the original poster has an excellent point. If we no longer need a radio to listen to radio, why not watch "TV" on an appliance other than a TV set. The technology is not quite there yet but it will be.
Click to expand...

I actually think that may be true with radio more than TV. I actually do have a friend who listens to NPR news via Internet stream on a computer at work. And interestingly enough, she does NOT own a radio! And she agrees that online stream is a better method. First off, the sound quality on the computer's speaker system would be a LOT better than just a little clock radio on your desk. But also, she told me that you can actually pause it and rewind, just like TiVo. How long has THAT been around?
 
ssetta said:
I actually think that may be true with radio more than TV. I actually do have a friend who listens to NPR news via Internet stream on a computer at work. And interestingly enough, she does NOT own a radio! And she agrees that online stream is a better method. First off, the sound quality on the computer's speaker system would be a LOT better than just a little clock radio on your desk. But also, she told me that you can actually pause it and rewind, just like TiVo. How long has THAT been around?
Click to expand...

Yeah, definitely depends on the radio. I have a couple really good receivers at home, so maybe I'm spoiled.

Still, my busted old car radio ('97 Intrepid, only one of the four speakers still work) has better sound quality than Internet streams can ever hope for at present.
 
I watch MLB on the net for 19.99 a month. Its about double that on TV. But the qualitry is great on my 19 inch dell flat screen monitor. It really depends on what kind of monitor and video card you have. Both of my TV's are analog. Directtv is hooked up to both and I will probaly keep them even when the new standard goes into effect. Sice directv will work jan 09 with analog sets.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom