AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Which one of the following changes would you rather see make it to market FIRST:


1. 1280 x 720 DLP projectors (HD1 or HD2 chips) for $3000.00 US dollars.


2. 1920 x 1080 resolution DLP projectors for $30,000.00 US dollars.


Please vote.


Thank You
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,092 Posts
QQQ,


Interesting results. This IS the high-end projector forum.


BTW, I think your estimates are probably accurate for a year or so down the road if TI strongly went after both implementations.


-Mr. Wigggles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,460 Posts
So, only DLP?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,250 Posts
It'd be neat if this weren't an anonymous poll. It'd be interesting to see who voted for which option.


Tryg, which one did you vote for? :D


BTW, I voted for 1280x720 @ $3000, which was my first line in the sand to pick up a FP (that slowly moved to 720P DLP @ $5000). Since that isn't out yet it looks like I'll probably be going with one of the Samsung DLP RPTVs if they look any good.


-phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by PhilB
Tryg, which one did you vote for? :D
As of this moment there are 7 votes for 1920 x 1080. I suspected Tryg would try something tricky and I have proof. I put Tryg in my buddy list so I can see when he was online. The moment he viewed this thread the first vote for 1920 x 1080 came in. A few minutes later he logged off and shortly thereafter 6 other "members" mysteriously appeared and voted for 1920 x 1080. Could it be any more clear ;) :D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,209 Posts
Rumor has it that Epson and possibly Sony will be manufacturing 1920x1080 LCD projectors within the next year. I bet that they will be priced under $10,000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
This poll is indicative of the possibility that the person initiating it did not realize there's a competing technology, by its absence as an option.


Perhaps it's off-topic, but I personally would never sink large amounts of money into a projector that has glaring visual artifacts, lower resolutions and an otherwise inferior image vs. its LCOS counterparts (among other considerations; I didn't even bring up the lack of non-60Hz refresh rates).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
Colmino,


This poll is indicative of what the author of the thread is clearly asking. He clearly asks those who view the thread to choose one of the two DLP scenarios listed in his poll. I'm also certain that the author of the thread knows and understands the LCOS technology.


As for your post, it is very off-topic, to say the least. If you don't have anything nice to say about DLP technology, why say anything at all?

Quote:
glaring visual artifacts, lower resolutions and an otherwise inferior image
Please understand that this comment is one made by you without basis. There happens to be just a few people on this forum (me included) that would have trouble with your statement simply because of its condescending tone.


In closing, if you're just misinformed about what's happening in the PJ market nowadays and you haven't kept up with the advances in DLP's, then I guess I understand your ignorant remarks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Victor:


Thanks.
Quote:
Originally posted by Colmino
This poll is indicative of the possibility that the person initiating it did not realize there's a competing technology, by its absence as an option.


Perhaps it's off-topic, but I personally would never sink large amounts of money into a projector that has glaring visual artifacts, lower resolutions and an otherwise inferior image vs. its LCOS counterparts (among other considerations; I didn't even bring up the lack of non-60Hz refresh rates).
Colmino:


I do appreciate you making us all aware of the existence of LCOS and how bad DLP sucks.


p.s. Yes you did bring up the lack of non-60HZ refresh rates (if you look really hard you will find it in parantheses in your last sentence but don't hurt yourself).


p.s.s. Now go visit the CRT forum so you can turn fun a thread about CRT into a delusional rant about LCOS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,092 Posts
Colmino,


Many DLP's support 48Hz refresh rates instead. I am assuming your are talikng about 24fps film playback.


The Marantz 12S1 does mention specific support for this in their manual.


-Mr. Wigggles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
He probably likes to feed his DILA with 72 HZ which is not converted to 60 on the DILA panels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,769 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by QQQ


As of this moment there are 7 votes for 1920 x 1080. I suspected Tryg would try something tricky and I have proof. I put Tryg in my buddy list so I can see when he was online. The moment he viewed this thread the first vote for 1920 x 1080 came in. A few minutes later he logged off and shortly thereafter 6 other "members" mysteriously appeared and voted for 1920 x 1080. Could it be any more clear ;) :D.
Please Q,


Your paranoia is getting the best of you. I hate to discredit you Q, but your take on this is TOTAL NONSENSE. I just logged on right now and saw this poll that is trying to prove some point?!?. What I dont understand is why people are trying to convince me that bringing a native rate HD projector to market is gonna be $30k. I have news for you...


ITS GONNA HAPPEN WITHIN A YEAR. and it's NOT gonna be $30k.


yes, I just voted for 1920 x 1080 option. $30k is ludicrous. There IS a demand. TI needs to WAKE UP and smell the coffee. No, actually TI's customers need to wake up and smell the coffee... then start demanding higher standards. You do this by not buying their rainbow makers.


It's pathetic that some have been led to believe that a 1920 x 1080 chip over a 1280 x 720 would change the price tag of a projector $25k. GET A GRIP! and please, use your head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
> Please understand that this comment is one made by you without basis. There happens to be just a few people on this forum (me included) that would have trouble with your statement simply because of its condescending tone.

> In closing, if you're just misinformed about what's happening in the PJ market nowadays and you haven't kept up with the advances in DLP's, then I guess I understand your ignorant remarks.


You can read what frame of mind you want into my statements, but I might recommend being a little less hypocritical with your posts. I doubt, for example, you could say that I utilized a personal attack, as above.


If you want to be constructive, enlighten me. I freely admit I have not heard about sub-$15k DLP solutions which 1) boast at least 1365x1024, 2) have zero rainbow artifacts - in practice, as opposed to theory, 3) are not dead set on 60Hz (50 would be nice, 24(x2,3) would be nice). I'm uninformed.


> I do appreciate you making us all aware of the existence of LCOS and how bad DLP sucks.


No problem. But actually the point was to express mild exasperation over the propagation of flawed technology, to what I consider a disproportionate extreme. (Yes, I realize "flawed" is relative in the world of front projectors. Suffice to say, LCOS is the first and only such technology I've judged as worthy of investment.)


> p.s. Yes you did bring up the lack non-60HZ refresh rates (if you look really hard you will find it in parantheses in your last sentence but don't hurt yourself).


No need to be petty. My tidbits of irony are usually psychological in nature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,769 Posts
colmino,


I've never understood why ANYONE would pay over 2k for the rainbow artifact and lower resolution. I'd rather view LCD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Tryg:


Thanks, I needed something to lighten me up. Actually, I don't think I have ever debated this with you or even commented on it (other than having a little bit of fun in the HD2 Chip Update thread). The issues seem so basic to me that I am not sure what there is to debate.


1. Yes I would very much like to see 1920 x 1080 resolution. WHO WOULDN'T?

2. My truthful answer to this poll, all kidding aside would be 1920 x 1080. But the whole point is that my answer is biased towards what I would like to see. It doesn't necessarily reflect the overall market and that is what drives things whether you (and I) like it or not.

3. You keep turning this into a "we have to demand it" from them issue. Fair enough. But you keep talking about how people are "buying" into it (lack of 1920 x 1080) and that is where you lose me a little bit. You yourself own a 1365 x 1024 projector. Does that mean you have "bought" into it. Or is that OK because you bought yours used. If that is your argument please make it, because I will make mince meat of it. I am sure there are some people that are perfectly happy with 1280 x 720 and could never care less if something better comes out but I really doubt/hope that most members of this forum fall into that category.

4. I also hope that JVC will have more reasonable chips out in the within the next year and if they ever really get any momentum going, it will force TI to respond.

5. One of the big issues is that I don't take it literally when TI says they have no plans for a 1920 x 1080 chip. This is common double speak in the corporate world. Believing that is like believing that Intel doesn't have a roadmap for 3 Ghz processors. I remember when I talked to a JVC product trainer many years ago about VCR's. Mitsubishi had a cool feature I always liked on their VCR's where you could hold down the FF button while a tape was already fast forwarding and the VCR would go into fast play until you tok your finger off. The JVC rep ranted about how that would destroy the VCR heads and that is why they didn't have it on the machines. The next generation of JVC VCR's all had it. The point of my story is that I take TI about as seriously as I took that trainer when they tell me there are no plans for 1920 x 1080.


I hope JVC will have 1920 x 1080 at less than 50K within a year. After that I think the price will start to drop. I suspect that TI will take longer but I think it will happen sooner rather than later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,092 Posts
Tryg,


I thought you said you couldn't see the rainbow effect on the TI's new stuff?


And we are talking about DLP. TI couldn't crank the fab up to 1920 * 1080 overnight. Even if they started today, the best they could hope for would be a $30K projector in 2 years.


QQQ's numbers are speculation but I think they are fairly accurate. For JVC's sake I hope your 1920X1080 estimate doesn't come true. They will have a lot $200K QXGA projectors to have to unload


TI is going to get its butt whipped in the resolution department but it won't matter because most people won't care because DLP is superior to LCOS in other areas. Why don't people buy the 5500 over the HD1's? Could it be poorer contrast? Purple blacks? Dead pixels? Dust Blobs? Poor Convergence? Poor pixel-to-pixel chroma and luma uniformity? Poor overall chroma and luma uniformity?


All these problems will plague 3-chip LCOS and LCD and will require plenty of QC to keep from being a problem. Its been 5 years and you still have to send d-ilas out to be calibrated.


Colmino,


Don't sell 1280 X 720 short. With perfect convergence I would definitely take 1280 X 720 over 1366X768 LCOS and with LCD's poor fill ratio it isn't even in the running at 1366X768.


Anamorphically squeezed 1366X1024 LCOS is a toss up over 1280 X 720 DLP, IMO.


-Mr. Wigggles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,769 Posts
Do you guys sleep?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Colmino:


I find it interesting that you somehow assumed I was a DLP proponent. This thread was a poll about what people would like to see from TI, nothing more. JVC already has 1920 x 1080 and has already publicy set a roadmap that shows they are working on less expensive 1920 x 1080 chips. So I chose not to include them in the poll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by Tryg
Do you guys sleep?
I was going to until some guy named Tryg got me typing again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
> I find it interesting that you somehow assumed I was a DLP proponent.


Maybe you should re-read my direct responses to your rhetorically dismissive statements. I don't make such assumptions. I let peoples' comments speak for themselves:


> I do appreciate you making us all aware of the existence of LCOS and how bad DLP sucks.


Now, perhaps you refer to my responses to a different poster's comments, in which I suggest he puts his money where his mouth is and provides the info on artifact-free DLP projectors in a certain price range.
 
1 - 20 of 54 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top