HDTV bargain at Big W (81cm w/ HDMI under 1k)
- pilonv1
- Eels - regular season champions
- Posts: 19049
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 11:08 am
- XBL ID: pilonv1
- PSN ID: pilonv1
- Steam ID: pilonv1
HDTV bargain at Big W (81cm w/ HDMI under 1k)
81cm LG/Phillips LCD, HDMI, 1600:1 contrast, 8ms response time, under a grand. Ridiculous!
- pilonv1
- Eels - regular season champions
- Posts: 19049
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 11:08 am
- XBL ID: pilonv1
- PSN ID: pilonv1
- Steam ID: pilonv1
I bought one of the AWA ones 18 months ago and it's been fine. I paid $1500 for mine, and it was only 66cm, but it does have VGA/DVI. There's nothing wrong with these manufacturers.westical wrote:While it's all well and good that the screens are made by big electronics companies, I still worry about the rest of the components made by companies such as "Aiko".
- K.T.Shoe[BMs]
- Still a rookie
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: 07 Jul 2006 11:05 pm
- XBL ID: MrSlow88
- PSN ID: MrSlow88
- Location: Victoria, Australia
- westical
- Lockyer's Lovechild
- Posts: 8118
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 11:30 pm
- XBL ID: westical
- Location: Brisbane
At least I'd heard of AWA before they started selling TVs at Big W.pilonv1 wrote:I bought one of the AWA ones 18 months ago and it's been fine. I paid $1500 for mine, and it was only 66cm, but it does have VGA/DVI. There's nothing wrong with these manufacturers.westical wrote:While it's all well and good that the screens are made by big electronics companies, I still worry about the rest of the components made by companies such as "Aiko".
- GreyWizzard
- Boundless Generosity
- Posts: 18671
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 07:51 am
- XBL ID: GreyWizzard
- PSN ID: Grey_AU
- Location: Brisbane
-
- Member
- Posts: 359
- Joined: 07 Jul 2006 08:53 am
Yep, to watch HD TV you'd need a HD-STB. The best resolution for this display would undoubtedly be 720p.Dan Syndrome wrote:Forgive my dumbarse questions, but you'd still need an HD tuner box to go with it yeah? And what would that screen display? 1080i? 720p?
I think a new TV could be my christmas present to myself..
- mxlegend99
- I don't watch Rugby League
- Posts: 5257
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 05:55 pm
- XBL ID: mxlegend
- Location: Penrith
- Contact:
-
- Choc #2
- Posts: 8277
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 11:28 pm
- Location: Froggy's basement faking being in the United States
- Contact:
And that is why 768p panels should die a horrible, horrible death along with 16:9 1024x768 panels.mxlegend99 wrote:1366x768 - So neither 720p nor 1080i would display natively on it...
What kind of retarded does it take to make something so utterly stupid? Do they wake up and go "ok... we're going to get a 16:9 1024x768 panel because that will display absolutely NOTHING at its native res and make PC input look distorted to boot!"
- mxlegend99
- I don't watch Rugby League
- Posts: 5257
- Joined: 04 Jul 2006 05:55 pm
- XBL ID: mxlegend
- Location: Penrith
- Contact:
I've got nothing against 768p displays. Atleast they're proper 16:9 / 16:10 displays.Talez wrote:And that is why 768p panels should die a horrible, horrible death along with 16:9 1024x768 panels.mxlegend99 wrote:1366x768 - So neither 720p nor 1080i would display natively on it...
What kind of retarded does it take to make something so utterly stupid? Do they wake up and go "ok... we're going to get a 16:9 1024x768 panel because that will display absolutely NOTHING at its native res and make PC input look distorted to boot!"
Those 16:9 1024x768 TV's though, i wouldn't touch one of them. Stretched pixels FTL