Mitsubishi Promise Module - Have a copy??? - AVS Forum
Rear Projection Units > Mitsubishi Promise Module - Have a copy???
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 10:07 AM 08-08-2006
Does anyone have a copy of Mitsubishi's statement regarding the Promise Module? With DVD players that only upconvert via HDMI and Blu-Ray and HD-DVD having the flag for analog, I think it's time I file a false advertising claim with the Federal Trade Commission.

I am also actively seeking a technology lawyer to file a class action lawsuit against Mits.

Any information you can provide would be fantastic.

Thanks!

Ragnarok's Avatar Ragnarok 10:13 AM 08-08-2006
What the hell are you talking about??
HoustonPerson's Avatar HoustonPerson 01:14 PM 08-08-2006
I thought the Promise Module (like from 4 years ago) was to provide - originally at no cost - the digital turners to the HD "ready" TV's that did not have the tuners. Then when Mit's finally came out with it, about 2 years late, they wanted about $1,000 for it, to attach a digital tuner to the back of the TV set. Of course most folks recognized you could buy a Samsung digital tuner STB for about $250 at the time.
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 01:45 PM 08-08-2006
The Promise Module was, in fact, a product, but I'm more specifically looking for the statement that Mits released in their product brochures, collateral, etc. It stated something like they "promised to release new technology hardware" for their HDTV's if it were to become outdated in the "near future". I'm looking for the exact wording or a copy of the advertised statement.

They released this type of statement to get people to purchase their HDTV's during a time when consumers thought they would be out-dated quickly. It was a false reassuranceto their potential customers that they would support future technologies. Well, DVI came about. HDMI came about. And Mits NEVER came out with an upgrade board to accept these digital formats. And they refuse to do so.

So, I can't, LEGALLY, get DVD upconverted to HD nor can I get full-res HD (using component outputs) from a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player if a AACS flag is enabled.

The very next year, after I purchase my Mits, the new models had DVI inputs. You could argue that I should have known better, but I had done a LOT of research concerning HDTVs and I was "baited and switched" (by false advertising) into believing that I wouldn't have to worry about near future technologies. And if you think I'm alone, do a search. I'm not.
JimP 07:20 AM 08-09-2006
Chet,

I know exactly what you're talking about. There was a lot of heartburn over the "promise".

I think you'll find yourself in the position of having to prove that that you can't get 1080i over component and even then argue the phrase "near future". What exactly is "near future"?

I think you're fighting a loosing battle. Save your energy for something more productive like finding the best coffee. (that would be me) lol
Forceflow's Avatar Forceflow 10:09 PM 08-09-2006
I did not purchase a Mits set in 2000 despite the "Promise Module" and instead went with a Toshiba with the "DVI Upgradeable" promise. Both seem to have not panned out well (although Toshiba says I can get DVI with HDCP, they are just outta parts right now, whatever that means). I would fight the cause because I vividly remember Mitsubishi making claims about future compatability and not being left without access to the latest High Def material. I don't recall it solely being about internal tuners (which few if any had). They promised and failed to deliver.
pilotbiffster's Avatar pilotbiffster 12:44 AM 08-10-2006
You know, the best way to register your dissatisfaction with Mitsu is to NEVER buy a Mitsu TV again. That's what I'm doing; they could have a frickin holographic VR tv set and I wouldn't buy it . My outmoded Mitsu HD set is already two televisons past.
ThePrisoner's Avatar ThePrisoner 05:40 AM 08-10-2006
You may want to go over to The Home Theater Spot Forum. They have a huge Mitsubishi Forum and alot of Mits owners who were upset over the Promise Module. I bought a Mits 46805 RP HDTV in Dec. 1999, my first. I remember Mits stating that the TV was upgradable to future formats. There is a member there who is ISF trained who is working on a module that has a DVI input that will hook-up to older Mits models. I would check out Home Theater Spot.
JimP 05:48 AM 08-10-2006
Something else that might be of interest to you.

All digital connections are not created equal. The DVI input on my 3 year old Sony converts the digital signal to analog early in the circuit. Consequently, in terms of picture quality, there is no difference between DVI and component .

Although you might get a way to input a HDCP image over DVI, don't expect the image to be any different than what you are already getting.
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 08:10 AM 08-10-2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbiffster View Post

You know, the best way to register your dissatisfaction with Mitsu is to NEVER buy a Mitsu TV again. That's what I'm doing; they could have a frickin holographic VR tv set and I wouldn't buy it . My outmoded Mitsu HD set is already two televisons past.

I plan to never buy a Mitsubishi product ever again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrisoner View Post

You may want to go over to The Home Theater Spot Forum. They have a huge Mitsubishi Forum and alot of Mits owners who were upset over the Promise Module. I bought a Mits 46805 RP HDTV in Dec. 1999, my first. I remember Mits stating that the TV was upgradable to future formats. There is a member there who is ISF trained who is working on a module that has a DVI input that will hook-up to older Mits models. I would check out Home Theater Spot.

Yes. I've been there and I am participating in that thread. I plan to purchase this upgrade from Craig as soon as it's available. Also, if Craig can do this, why can't Mits? After all, they did promise us.

Craig's innovation doesn't excuse Mits from false advertising.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post

Although you might get a way to input a HDCP image over DVI, don't expect the image to be any different than what you are already getting.

I know that component can handle full 1080p bandwidth. I don't have any doubt that component looks every bit as good as a digital connection. That's not my argument. If an HD-content provider chooses to do so, they can block the HD signal over component. That would render the component output at a lesser quality than the digital output. In fact, without buying a cracked DVD player, I can't upconvert my current DVDs via component output. So, you could say that component inputs are already inferior to DVI or HDMI.
JimP 08:27 AM 08-10-2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckenisell View Post


If an HD-content provider chooses to do so, they can block the HD signal over component. That would render the component output at a lesser quality than the digital output.


Until content providers block the HD signal from component, you don't have cause of action. How are you damaged until then?? If they eventually do block content, all Mits is going to say is that it wasn't near future enough.

If anything, when you bought your display you should have asked yourself how likely Mits was going to complete their promise and if they did, what cost were associated to it. What if they came out with a HDMI connection for $3,000. Sure they kept their promise, but who would spend $3,000 to update a 4 or 5 year old TV when they can buy a new one for that??

I agree in principle with what you are saying. At the same time, I think its unlikely that you'll win.
nakedeye's Avatar nakedeye 12:48 PM 08-27-2006
I know there are quite a few people with this issue. I am one as well. I think there may be something in this....
scooby's Avatar scooby 03:28 PM 08-27-2006
In the same boat with a WS-55511. I'll never pay Mits another penny because of this. I need to dig out my documentation and find exactly what it says. I made sure to get it in writing.
ExCavTanker's Avatar ExCavTanker 05:26 PM 08-27-2006
I'd gladly settle for a 65831 as settlement in a class action lawsuit over the promise module to replace my non-HDMI 55805 , but the reality is I get HD satellite over component, HD XBOX 360 over component and if I wanted to add a HD-DVD player to my system I could get that over component as well considering the ICT flags are not in place, the ONLY thing I give up is the ability to legally upconvert SD DVD's (though there are players that did upconvert over component).

At this point while I would love to have a new tv (read larger screen), when it comes time to replace this one I'll go with whatever is the best for me AT THAT TIME. Right now it looks like the 07 Mits may be a home run in the DLP catagory and if this is the year I replace the 805 would I 'cut off my nose to spite my face' to punish Mits for not delivering the 'promise' module, nah, but the great thing about a Democracy is you certainly have that right to vote with your dollars.
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 11:28 PM 08-27-2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooby View Post

In the same boat with a WS-55511. I'll never pay Mits another penny because of this. I need to dig out my documentation and find exactly what it says. I made sure to get it in writing.

I have the 55511 too. I think there are a lot of people banning Mits from here on out because of this broken "promise".
EdL's Avatar EdL 06:38 PM 09-04-2006
They got me as well. I purchased a 55807 & waited on the promise module. Now here I am 5 years later without a HDMI input. I have voted with my pocket book & those of my friends by making sure that they all stay clear of Mits.

Revenge is sweet, I've helped atleast 8 friends, soon to be 9 next week and none of them have purchased a MIts.

EdL
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 09:52 AM 09-05-2006
So instead of making money (by manufacturing an HDMI promise module and selling it to us), they're losing money on this whole deal. ID10T's.
Theynine's Avatar Theynine 11:22 PM 12-30-2006
I recall that one of the selling points of the mits widescreen I purchased way back when, was the promise that mits would upgrade the inputs if necessary to comply with the latest technology. Im going to go hunting for the brochure to get the exact wording, but that was the 'promise' made back then. Unless there is some small print somewhere stating that " well sooner or later we are gonna give up on that" I would sign on for a class action suit for false advertising.
ThePrisoner's Avatar ThePrisoner 06:55 AM 12-31-2006
I remember buying my first 16:9 HDTV, Mitsubishi WT-46805 back in Dec. 99'. I also remember Mits stating that their HDTV's were upgradable. Did anyone ever buy the Promise Module?
i.m. beldar's Avatar i.m. beldar 06:59 AM 12-31-2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckenisell
Does anyone have a copy of Mitsubishi's statement regarding the Promise Module? With DVD players that only upconvert via HDMI and Blu-Ray and HD-DVD having the flag for analog, I think it's time I file a false advertising claim with the Federal Trade Commission.

I am also actively seeking a technology lawyer to file a class action lawsuit against Mits.

Any information you can provide would be fantastic.

Thanks!
here it is.

THE PROMISE
We will engineer and manufacture the upgrades necessary so the HD-upgradeable television you purchase today can be made compatible with near-future advances in digital technology and digital interconnectivity. Specifically, we promise that you will be able to have your television upgraded, at a reasonable cost, to include an off-air HDTV tuner, a cable TV tuner (for unscrambled programming), an IEEE 1394 (Firewire) connection, HAVi system control and 5C copy protection.

 

PromiseModuleFactSheet.pdf 466.951171875k . file

 

promiseTV.pdf 120.8740234375k . file

 

the promise.pdf 339.4296875k . file
ranger999's Avatar ranger999 09:16 AM 12-31-2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by i.m. beldar View Post

here it is.

THE PROMISE
We will engineer and manufacture the upgrades necessary so the HD-upgradeable television you purchase today can be made compatible with near-future advances in digital technology and digital interconnectivity. Specifically, we promise that you will be able to have your television upgraded, at a reasonable cost, to include an off-air HDTV tuner, a cable TV tuner (for unscrambled programming), an IEEE 1394 (Firewire) connection, HAVi system control and 5C copy protection.

Yep, I have a 2002 Mitsubishi RPTV with this wording as well. I don't think anyone will have any luck suing them, as they use the term "near future" and they specifically talk about reception of TV signals, not high-def DVDs. In order to sue, we have to show damages. You need to produce a list of Image Constraint Token-activated titles that get downrezzed to 940x540 on your system (there aren't any yet), and then tie our inability to watch them into the above language. No where in the above language do I see anything about the ability to view non-existent technologies (in 2000) like HD-DVD and Blu-ray, only some vagueness about "digital interconnectivity" which is going to be hard to stretch to cover prerecorded media.

Edit: Also, rumor has it that ICT implementation is postponed until 2012. No way in hell we will win a cause of action with that as the "near future." As for upconversion of standard DVDs over component, since there are various licensing restrictions that have led to restrict upconversion to VGA or HDMI, I don't think that's a win either. If anyone finds a lawyer crazy enough to pursue this, just wait until the MPAA brings in video experts to mock the upconversion angle with frequency graphs, analysis of line pairs per scanline and so forth to undermine the claim of "damages" because we cannot use a better scaler in a newer DVD player than the scaler built into the set. I don't see anything in the language of the Promise about better scaling of SD signals, which is what defendants' lawyers will cast the issue as, not the failure to get what they'll deride as "phony high-def" signals. And I do believe you can buy a scaler for $2000 that upconverts component anyway. The court isn't going to view the remedy for expensive scalers as forcing Mitsubishi to give us new, better Promise modules.
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 11:10 AM 12-31-2006
I wouldn't call "digital interconnectivity" vague at all. In fact the year after I purchased my 1080i-component-only Mits, the same model was released with DVI inputs. Only two or three years after my purchase, HDMI was standard on any HDTV on the market. I believe two or three years is considered "near future" since the frequency of purchasing a new TV for an average consumer is probably less than one every ten years.

Also, this has nothing to do with upscaling SD DVDs. In fact, I have Blu-Ray now and have no problem watching 1080i via component. Looks great. I'm guessing, but probably 90% of all HD sources manufactured within the year have HDMI outputs. The promise states, "We will engineer and manufacture the upgrades necessary so the HD-upgradeable television you purchase today can be made compatible with near-future advances in digital technology and digital interconnectivity." Nowhere does it say, "An ICT flag must be enabled in order for this to be effective and you must be limited to watching SD-DVD at 480i."

Fact is, Mitsubishi dropped the ball on this one NO MATTER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT! It would be a simple solution for them to manufacture too. It's just that they WON'T!
soonerhart's Avatar soonerhart 01:17 PM 01-13-2007
I have a ws-65611. Just haveing DVI or HDMI connections would be wonderful. I won't buy another Mitsubishi, but I hope this one last another 10 years.
801greg's Avatar 801greg 05:04 AM 01-24-2007
[quote=ckenisell] The promise states, "We will engineer and manufacture the upgrades necessary so the HD-upgradeable television you purchase today can be made compatible with near-future advances in digital technology and digital interconnectivity." Nowhere does it say, "An ICT flag must be enabled in order for this to be effective and you must be limited to watching SD-DVD at 480i."

I have one of these TV's too, and wish I could upgrade it to accept HDMI/DVI. Unfortunately, you are ignoring the second sentence of the promise, which, from a legal perspective, is the dispositive sentence. It begins with, "Specifically . . . ." In a legal document, where there is one general sentence, and then the next sentence begins with "specifically," that's the only sentence that counts. Mitsubishi's specific legal promise was to provide a firewire connection and HDTV on-air tuner, etc. There is no HDMI promise. So, as long as they offer (and I would argue still offer) the original promise module, they've fulfilled their legal obligation.

Also, please realize that if someone were to bring a class action, the lawyers would get tons of money if it were successful, and we would all get something like a discount certificate for 75 dollars towards a new television set with HDMI. So, while a lawyer might take the case, it wouldn't help us at all.
ckenisell's Avatar ckenisell 07:52 AM 01-24-2007
[quote=801greg]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckenisell View Post

The promise states, "We will engineer and manufacture the upgrades necessary so the HD-upgradeable television you purchase today can be made compatible with near-future advances in digital technology and digital interconnectivity." Nowhere does it say, "An ICT flag must be enabled in order for this to be effective and you must be limited to watching SD-DVD at 480i."

I have one of these TV's too, and wish I could upgrade it to accept HDMI/DVI. Unfortunately, you are ignoring the second sentence of the promise, which, from a legal perspective, is the dispositive sentence. It begins with, "Specifically . . . ." In a legal document, where there is one general sentence, and then the next sentence begins with "specifically," that's the only sentence that counts. Mitsubishi's specific legal promise was to provide a firewire connection and HDTV on-air tuner, etc. There is no HDMI promise. So, as long as they offer (and I would argue still offer) the original promise module, they've fulfilled their legal obligation.

Also, please realize that if someone were to bring a class action, the lawyers would get tons of money if it were successful, and we would all get something like a discount certificate for 75 dollars towards a new television set with HDMI. So, while a lawyer might take the case, it wouldn't help us at all.

Fine by me. I'll see if I can get a kick-back from the lawyer I hire. Plus, if we won, it would cost a lot of money to Mitsubishi and put them all over the news.
ranger999's Avatar ranger999 08:22 AM 12-02-2007
I feel like engaging in thread necromancy today.

Any luck finding a lawyer aggressive (or foolish) enough to take this "case" on? We might win $200 coupons good towards the purchase of a new Mitsubishi TV. If the lawyer were to be paid in proportion to the number of coupons redeemed (per the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005), instead of a large fixed fee off the top, of course, that'd be even less incentive to go after the case.
MurrayDecay's Avatar MurrayDecay 10:51 AM 01-06-2008
I have an 8 year old Mitsubishi 73903 that I'm embassased to say I paid almost 10K based on their promises. The advertised "PROMISE" back then was that it was "engineered with futurability," "guaranteed upgradability to future technologies not on the market yet." "will continue to provide unparalleled performance even as your children grow to have families of their own." What a line of crap!
Can't view HD DVD, Blue Ray, PS3, or use HDMI or DVI.
They shouldn't be able to get away with this.
regularwhiteguy's Avatar regularwhiteguy 01:11 PM 06-18-2008
I took them to task on their promise and ended up getting a 1080P DLP exchanged for my WS65315. I had DVI on my CRT Mits so there was no problem there however I couldn't hook up a "digital connection" for my computer and that was the only thing I was all stressed out over.

In the end I maintain that for standard t.v. / DVD & comcast high-def viewing the CRT Mits was BETTER then the DLP.
Mr Bob's Avatar Mr Bob 08:40 PM 11-08-2008
This is not the only way I see Mit as having let down its constituents.

In the Bay Area, we are seeing coolant damage all over the place, from leaky seals that allow coolant to fall on circuit boards, which are now NLA (no longer available). The left 2 as you look in are single sided - under the red and green guns - and can always be repaired, but the multi-layer board under the blue gun is usually toasted completely by the coolant invading it.

What Mit does in this case is to give you a proration based on a 7 year lifespan. Which is insulting. 10 years easy, for a well cared for CRT RPTV, of any brand.

I am currently looking for a replacement Signal board - the multi-layer one - for a WT 46805. It doesn't have any coolant leakage on it, but for some reason has gone intermittent, and I have not yet been able to pin down why or where on the board it's happening except that symptoms indicate it's either in the Signal or the RGB board. Or how to remedy it. A new board is in order, but they don't make them anymore. And Mits's remedy of proration just doesn't cut it for me.


On another note, back to the central theme of this thread -

If you want to upconvert your HDMI signal to component so you can keep viewing upconverted 480i->1080i on component for SD DVDs - and on my WS 73517 component delivers a screamin' picture, you can see one of those pictures on cover page of my website, component is even BETTER than HDMI on my display, which IS equipped for HDMI - see the bottom of my website, where you'll find a link to the same converters that the guys with the big ceiling pjs use. They transcode HDMI to component without any HDCP worries or limitations and are not expensive - only several hundred, markedly cheaper than a Mit ATSC tuner woulda been at the time.

We don't need to worry about not having HDMI as standard equipment anymore on our older CRT RPTVs, a great converter has already happened. See the link -


Mr Bob
Mr Bob's Avatar Mr Bob 09:55 AM 11-28-2008
Just finished adding another shim to my CRT array, a la (thanks!) Owen, for a total of 2.25" - 3 shims of 3/4" each, 4 of them - to my 73" Mit. I added a spot of white glue between the shims and under them, for stability. This makes half again the amount of shimmage I had before today, with just 2 shim thicknesses each x4, for 1.5" of shimmage for the last few months -

Took this opportunity to reclean the lens tops, it had been a year or so since last time, made a noticeable difference. Mit's HDreadys don't need the deeper optics cleaning, they don't allow an air gap between the lenses and the coolant covers, like the Elites do.

I think my shots are being compromised by being in jpeg, which I have heard reduces the res automatically. I checked my cam and can't find any way to redo any of that inside the cam, so it must by the automatic Windows uploading from my cam. Any input welcome on that. Kodak Z712 IS.

After redoing the focus, geometry and convergence - grayscale and colorations stayed the same as before, basically all by eye on the colorations - here's the results -



[/url]

Slightly overexposed, but appropriate to the brilliance of the runway
[/url]

[/url]

Hard to get the crowd shadow details and still have the diamond sparkle without it white crushing out
[/url]

[/url]

Slight movement blur on this one, mostly on her outfit
[/url]

Blur on this one only on her right shoe and at the top of her rack (no not that one, the one she's WEARING...!)
[/url]
Up
Mobile  Desktop