Official Panasonic VT50 owners thread - Page 174

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

2. Amazing quality. The streaming 1080p is extremely sharp. I seriously don't know why any of you pay for cable anymore.

Originally Posted by Michael2000 

Because the available content is much more limited.
Michael

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

2. Amazing quality. The streaming 1080p is extremely sharp. I seriously don't know why any of you pay for cable anymore.

Originally Posted by Adamd 

Is there any vt50 owners here that went from a st to vt? If so how do u compare them?

Originally Posted by Famouss 

I think i will drop Dish Network soon because I find myself rarely ever using it. I mainly watch Blu Ray movies or Netflix and Hulu. I could always just torrent my favorite tv shows anyways, then again I will have to since dish dropped AMC, so no Walking Dead.

Originally Posted by rogo 

We are clearly stupid and are more interested in the actual content we want to watch over some ethereal search for picture quality.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

No, you're not stupid. Just ignorant of what's possible with a Roku/AppleTV/etc. The coverage you get with Hulu+, Netflix, and local channels (which we all get if we pay for cable internet) is amazing, and the quality is tangibly *better* than anything that gets pooped out of a cable box, which matters a lot for giant plasmas like the 65" VT50.
Your response wasn't surprising in the least. This is definitely an age/demographics thing. I work in the tech industry, and virtually no-one that I know under the age of 35-40 pays for cable. Everybody has setups involving some sort of on-demand IP-based content. We think you'd be crazy to pay $100+/mo for a crapload of channels, only to have 90% of them be terrible. The broadcast model is dead too- nobody wants to watch anything live anymore, so they become slaves to their DVR. However, ask someone above 40, and they have no idea how we can live without it, despite the rampant price fixing, terrible content/$ ratio and nasty channel packaging practices, and overly-compressed video. They pay for it because it's what they're used to- that's it. It's a business model that will ultimately die with a generation of people. It's already long dead with mine.
Anyway, sorry to go so off-topic. It sort of ties in here with the complaints that the VT50 doesn't handle processing of garbage video well- I predict that with the death of traditional broadcast TV (as we know it), "televisions" as we know them today will die off. Instead, we'll be likely be buying "monitors" that perform virtually zero processing. And I can't wait for this to happen.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

No, you're not stupid. Just ignorant of what's possible with a Roku/AppleTV/etc. The coverage you get with Hulu+, Netflix, and local channels (which we all get if we pay for cable internet) is amazing, and the quality is tangibly *better* than anything that gets pooped out of a cable box, which matters a lot for giant plasmas like the 65" VT50.
Your response wasn't surprising in the least. This is definitely an age/demographics thing. I work in the tech industry, and virtually no-one that I know under the age of 35-40 pays for cable. Everybody has setups involving some sort of on-demand IP-based content. We think you'd be crazy to pay $100+/mo for a crapload of channels, only to have 90% of them be terrible. The broadcast model is dead too- nobody wants to watch anything live anymore, so they become slaves to their DVR. However, ask someone above 40, and they have no idea how we can live without it, despite the rampant price fixing, terrible content/$ ratio and nasty channel packaging practices, and overly-compressed video. They pay for it because it's what they're used to- that's it. It's a business model that will ultimately die with a generation of people. It's already long dead with mine.
Anyway, sorry to go so off-topic. It sort of ties in here with the complaints that the VT50 doesn't handle processing of garbage video well- I predict that with the death of traditional broadcast TV (as we know it), "televisions" as we know them today will die off. Instead, we'll be likely be buying "monitors" that perform virtually zero processing. And I can't wait for this to happen.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 


No, you're not stupid. Just ignorant of what's possible with a Roku/AppleTV/etc. The coverage you get with Hulu+, Netflix, and local channels (which we all get if we pay for cable internet) is amazing, and the quality is tangibly *better* than anything that gets pooped out of a cable box, which matters a lot for giant plasmas like the 65" VT50.

Your response wasn't surprising in the least. This is definitely an age/demographics thing. I work in the tech industry, and virtually no-one that I know under the age of 35-40 pays for cable. Everybody has setups involving some sort of on-demand IP-based content. We think you'd be crazy to pay $100+/mo for a crapload of channels, only to have 90% of them be terrible. The broadcast model is dead too- nobody wants to watch anything live anymore, so they become slaves to their DVR. However, ask someone above 40, and they have no idea how we can live without it, despite the rampant price fixing, terrible content/$ ratio and nasty channel packaging practices, and overly-compressed video. They pay for it because it's what they're used to- that's it. It's a business model that will ultimately die with a generation of people. It's already long dead with mine.

Anyway, sorry to go so off-topic. It sort of ties in here with the complaints that the VT50 doesn't handle processing of garbage video well- I predict that with the death of traditional broadcast TV (as we know it), "televisions" as we know them today will die off. Instead, we'll be likely be buying "monitors" that perform virtually zero processing. And I can't wait for this to happen.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

No, you're not stupid. Just ignorant of what's possible with a Roku/AppleTV/etc. The coverage you get with Hulu+, Netflix, and local channels (which we all get if we pay for cable internet) is amazing, and the quality is tangibly *better* than anything that gets pooped out of a cable box, which matters a lot for giant plasmas like the 65" VT50.
Your response wasn't surprising in the least. This is definitely an age/demographics thing. I work in the tech industry, and virtually no-one that I know under the age of 35-40 pays for cable. Everybody has setups involving some sort of on-demand IP-based content. We think you'd be crazy to pay $100+/mo for a crapload of channels, only to have 90% of them be terrible. The broadcast model is dead too- nobody wants to watch anything live anymore, so they become slaves to their DVR. However, ask someone above 40, and they have no idea how we can live without it, despite the rampant price fixing, terrible content/$ ratio and nasty channel packaging practices, and overly-compressed video. They pay for it because it's what they're used to- that's it. It's a business model that will ultimately die with a generation of people. It's already long dead with mine.

Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma 

You know, you get over 100 channels and yet it seems like nothing good is on to watch from time to time.

Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma 

You know, you get over 100 channels and yet it seems like nothing good is on to watch from time to time.

Originally Posted by DLCPhoto 

I'm interested in the specific details of the setup you use - the devices, subscriptions, services, cost, etc., that enable you to get what you want without Cable.
I'm over 60, but still a geek at heart, so have no problem 'entertaining' new notions of how to get my entertainment content. So what are you able to get, at what cost, and how do you get it? And what, if anything, are you not getting, that is available through Cable?
I'm currently with TWC, and now have Netflix with my VT50, an Amazon Prime subscription, use VuDu occasionally, etc. But I'd have no qualms about getting rid of TWC if I can still get what I want, when I want it (live viewing options under your system?), at cheaper cost.
Thanks.

Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma 

You know, you get over 100 channels and yet it seems like nothing good is on to watch from time to time.

Originally Posted by robnix 

I'm over 40, and I'd love to get rid of Dish and got OTA+streaming, I've tried. I tried Roku, ATV, WDTV devices. Those three all had drawbacks that kept me from being completely happy with them. I ended up going with an HTPC with XBMC + Viera apps. That gave me Netflix, Hulu+, Amazon Prime and Rhapsody plus local playback of my BR rips along with a ton of streaming services on the XBMC.There's a few problems that get in the way of it being a complete solution though:
1) I can't get three of our local sports teams without a subscription to a cable/sat network. MLB.TV blacks out local games when they're live, there's ZERO NFL Streaming, and PAC-10 hasn't figured out how to offer streaming services that are worth a crap. I have a family, so sitting in bars all weekend to watch sports is not an option anymore.
2) I can't get an OTA signal. The nearest tower is 70 miles with trees and hills in the way. Even with a 50' mast the signal is weak out here.
The funny part is I can get some serious bandwidth, so I COULD stream to every TV in the house if I wanted to.
Glad it works for and your friends though, call me when you have a solution for me. You'll have to speak loudly though, us old folks are a little hard of hearing.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

Yes, you definitely make solid points for the hardcore sports fan. As I said in another post, the solution for the cord-cutter (for now) is to embrace sports bars and meeting up with friends more often. I've actually really enjoyed this. If you're desperate though, you can often find live streams of games, though their legality is questionable.
One day sports will be streamed in HD. There is no technical reason why they can't today. It's all business models. When television ad revenue for games begins to plummet, we'll see the inevitable move to online streaming. It's not a matter of if, but when.

Originally Posted by TopperMcFly 

Ignorance is abundant as of late. There are no grouping of streaming services that would accommodate many of our wants in terms of content that we may like to view, regardless of your opinion as to what is considered "good" content. Sure, I can wait a year or two and hope that they add season 5 of Breaking Bad to Netflix, or I can just watch it........ um.... now. Apple TV is quite good in some respects, but it is still subscription driven, pay per view driven and also still quite limited. While something like it may be the future, it is definitely not ready to take over the world. While I applaud your forward thinking, you are still a couple of years ahead of yourself. Plus anything that requires the use of itunes can go take a flying you know what IMO. I have a phobia about anything Apple because many users are just like Jeep owners that all have to wave as they drive by each other with " I hate Bush" bumper stickers.
I may be inclined to call someone out-gunned for not having every available content at their disposal. I enjoy everything that you do. But I still have Directv. I find Roku, Netflix, Amazon, and to an extent apple TV to be convenient novelties with extremely limited selection. And the claim of 100% superiority in terms of PQ is not accurate as an across the board statement. I find your claims of streaming superiority to be exaggerated and naive. And please do not speak for me by saying "we" as an under 40 person that works in the tech industry. I am happy to wax intellectual about tech any time you like.
But once the old "people" finally die (40 is coming up for me), you will be able to make the world a better but limited content streaming only world.
BTW, I do not pay $70 (not over $100) for hundreds of crap channels. I pay $70 for a hand full of excellent channels that are not mimicked (for free) in the streaming world.
While I am watching my Denver Broncos in quite good HD while also having PIP for the other games, you can watch re-runs of Scrubs on Netflix.
I have an idea, let's actually respect other forum members choices and share ideas instead.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 


You can of course pay a huge premium to watch shows on premium channels, like Breaking Bad, but that doesn't change the fact that I think you're crazy for throwing money away like that. I recently discovered Breaking Bad on Netflix, and I've still got a huge list of episodes to work through. I've never been the kind of person who has to see a movie on an opening night, either. But hey, PLEASE keep paying an excessive premium for mediocre content. You're quite possibly helping keep their industry afloat for the rest of us.

Ultimately, you're still are paying that $70/mo. for hundreds of crap channels, whether you like it or not. If TV channels were offered a la carte, this would be a completely different conversation. Give me all of my local channels, HBO, ShowTime, ESPN(s), History Channel and Discovery, AMC, etc. and I'd probably pay $30/mo. for just that. Even still, I'd probably be on the fence since an 100% IP, on-demand model is long overdue.

I suppose the other big difference with my generation and demographic (and especially with kids just coming into their 20's now) is that we watch a hell of a lot LESS TV. Again, most of it is crap. I can pay almost an order of magnitude LESS for my content and have wayyyyyyy more than enough to keep me entertained.

One huge sticking point (IMO) is the quality (or lack thereof) of streaming content and the interfaces on most devices. The built-in apps on the VT50, IMO, are terrible. The UI stinks. Samsung and LG are not much different. The only two that I've seen get it right are the Apple TV and the Xbox 360. The apps are fluid, reliable, fast, and pump out beautiful 1080p without a hiccup. The rest of the pack has a long way to go to catch up.

Originally Posted by mnc 

I guess now that they have fixed the VT50 there is nothing more to talk about here.

Originally Posted by wmwilker 

Wow this place has really gone in the crapper.
Now we have members telling us how to spend our money and if we don't spend it the way they think we should then we're "crazy".
This community used to be about people helping people. Now I see so much bigoted, judgmental, and intolerant people telling others how to live their lives.
Supposedly this is AVS Forum. It's about audio visual sciences.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 


Wow, a little hyperbolic don't you think? Topper's feathers tend to get ruffled easily and things tend to spiral out of control. Tons of people were complaining about the quality of their cable signal on the VT50, and I make one comment about how it's difficult for me to understand how you guys pay for something that you complain about so much. Garbage in, garbage out.

Originally Posted by JewDaddy 

Wow. I'm surprised to hear you guys saying that. Not sure where you saw the movie or what screen it was on but I went to an IMAX to watch it and the picture looked incredible. There are two types of IMAX Screens from what I understand. The regular size IMAX (which is still huge) and the really big IMAX screen, which are only located in certain areas. I drove four hours out of my way to see it at a huge imax screen in Nashville and it was AMAZING. I will agree though on the non-imax scenes, the picture was a little muddled and soft. But once it switched over to the scenes filmed with IMAX Cameras, it looked incredible. Better than any home display I've yet to see. Color, Clarity, Black Levels, Shadow Detail, everything. For those of you who haven't seen it in IMAX yet, please do yourself a favor and get the full experience that Christopher Nolan intended.

Originally Posted by Tempest261 

Wow, a little hyperbolic don't you think? Topper's feathers tend to get ruffled easily and things tend to spiral out of control. Tons of people were complaining about the quality of their cable signal on the VT50, and I make one comment about how it's difficult for me to understand how you guys pay for something that you complain about so much. Garbage in, garbage out.

[Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxme

You guys crack me up.
Got an observation that some may have made previous. My P55VT50 is about 350 hours old and get better every day. But the dithering thing you guys were discussing is noticable on my AT&T U-verse STB, moreso on some broadcasts than others (Zero sharpness setting, all output in 1080i, for both component and HDMI inputs; I use both on occassion).
Well, okay, I'm getting use to it since I know this VT50 can do so much better. For example, HBO's Game of Thrones is SPECTACULAR, while local HD primetime broadcasts are not so much. And, of course BD is totally awesome, as is most SD DVD material.

Hope that made sense. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

From Ice that Jaw:
Where you watching it in HD? I have the first season on DVD and it's looks as good as any mid-tier blu-ray transfer upscaled to 1080p. Boardwalk Empire on DVD is the same. I'm sure the Blu-ray version are even better but I was pretty damn amazed at the DVD quality on this TV./QUOTE]

Yes, all 1080i HD signals form the AT&T STB. One other observation I made when watching the Today Show the other day, switching to the attic antenna eliminated 99% of the dithering or softness. Seriously, I don't think this an issue with the set itself and at its worst, the picture from all sources is lightyears better than any other sets in my experience.

Originally Posted by TopperMcFly 

Yeah, I do that. It is quite bad manners. I still think you were overly judgemental, and I find myself oddly and overly protective of Rogo . But I will take my licks for adding C4 to the conversation. My feathers are fully de-ruffled. I would have a beer with ya anytime. We could talk tech smack and hoot it up.
I used to own a Jeep and waved at other jeeps. But if you tell anyone, I will flat out deny it.