[f300v10]

Well like many folks here I was tired of waiting for information on the 46 and 56 HD2+ HLPXX77W series "Tantus" tabletop sets. So I took a chance and emailed Steve Panosian of Samsung directly. To my surprise he responded within 2 hours, with the info I needed. Below are my email, and his response:


My email:


Steve,


Sorry to email you directly, but could you provide any

information on the 2004 Tantus tabletop models with

the HD2+ DMD chip? I have been waiting for shipping

dates/cost information on the 46" set since they were

first announced at the CES show in Feb. Also, I am

just an impatient consumer, not a dealer. Thanks for

any info.


Joe


His reply:


The final product model number will be HLP4677W. It will incorporate

an Integrated DTV Tuner with the new CableCARD feature. Price will be

$3800 and availability in Sept/Oct. Delay is a result of making the

decision to incorporate the DTV Tuner. The suffix digit "7" in our TV

line denotes this feature that complies with the FCC DTV Tuner mandate.

We are choosing to follow the government's direction most pro-actively as

we need to meet a quota percentage attainment by the end of June 2005.


Unfortunately, the product is delayed as a result of this initiative.


Hope this helps.


S


--------


So there you have it, still Sept/Oct. On the plus side, the $3800 is the same as the old model, and includes the HD2+, 7 segment color wheel, and built in tuner/cablecard. Come on September!

 

[tjk]

This sucks. Sept/Oct. based on Samsung's track record really means Dec./Jan.


Why hold up production for something a lot of consumers don't even want (and are now forced to pay for)? Why not just make a product without the tuner and get it on the shelves. At this pace, football season will come and go without the 77 series. And for anyone with HD cable or DirecTV (most of us, I assume), this is a real kick in the ass.

 

[savagexp]

Because the FCC says they have to.

 

[wsmithjr]

First, I'll admit to being a very green newbie. That said ...


I've never really understood why HDTV came *without* tuners. What was the reasoning behind that, just to keep prices down? If all HDTVs had them, the HD cable boxes and satellite tuners wouldn't even exist. I'm probably missing something obvious, so will appreciate any comments to correct my understanding.


Warren

 

[f300v10]

I think Sept/Oct will be the true time frame, not Dec/Jan. These sets were initially due out in May/June, like the other HLP sets (which turned into June/July for the sets that will not have the built in tuners). Samsung obviously chose to put the built in tuners into the thin bezel (Tantus) models, hence the slight delay. For me the best news is the lack of a price increase with the tuner/cablecard.

 

[MNBugeater]

Quote:

Originally posted by wsmithjr First, I'll admit to being a very green newbie. That said ... I've never really understood why HDTV came *without* tuners. What was the reasoning behind that, just to keep prices down? If all HDTVs had them, the HD cable boxes and satellite tuners wouldn't even exist. I'm probably missing something obvious, so will appreciate any comments to correct my understanding. Warren

That's interesting, I have always thought just the opposite. As in, why would an HDTV come WITH a tuner? Why would you want to by a TV that determines what your source HAS to be? It seems to me you have more flexibility without a builtin, allowing you to choose a settop box.


I live in an area where my ONLY option is Sat TV. I guess my options are D*TV, Dish, Voom, etc. ? But the point is, a built in tuner is useless to me. In addition, if I lived in area where I had choices like HD Cable. Then I certainly wouldnt want a built in. I would want the choice of adding a set top.


Just my editorial...


Warren in MN

 

[anthonymoody]

By the by Steve P also said in a recent release that sets ending in the '97' designation will incorporate the upcoming xHD3 chip...


TM

 

[lorenzow]

Quote:

Originally posted by MNBugeater That's interesting, I have always thought just the opposite. As in, why would an HDTV come WITH a tuner? Why would you want to by a TV that determines what your source HAS to be? It seems to me you have more flexibility without a builtin, allowing you to choose a settop box. I live in an area where my ONLY option is Sat TV. I guess my options are D*TV, Dish, Voom, etc. ? But the point is, a built in tuner is useless to me. In addition, if I lived in area where I had choices like HD Cable. Then I certainly wouldnt want a built in. I would want the choice of adding a set top. Just my editorial... Warren in MN

Nothing's stopping you from adding a set top box. I don't think they removed the input jacks.

 

[luebster]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't current analog sets have tuners? The reason HDTV sets have tuners is because the FCC requires it. They have madated all stations broadcast in HD by 200x. It's actually rare to find ANY TV (not monitor) without an integrated tuner.


Yeah, it blows that you have to "pay" for the integrated tuner, but you've always done that.

 

[htwaits]

Quote:

Originally posted by luebster Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't current analog sets have tuners?

Yes. SD tuners not HD tuners. But, they will all have OTA/Cable HD tuners soon.

 

[Merconium]

Quote:

Originally posted by lorenzow Nothing's stopping you from adding a set top box. I don't think they removed the input jacks.

Except that you're paying for something you don't want nor need. As someone else has mentioned, it should be an optional delete, aka, offer a 4674 and a 4677; one with and one without tuner.

 

[MNBugeater]

Quote:

Originally posted by Merconium Except that you're paying for something you don't want nor need. As someone else has mentioned, it should be an optional delete, aka, offer a 4674 and a 4677; one with and one without tuner.

This was my point. I was just commenting that I didnt want to have to pay for a tuner I didnt need.


Warren in MN

 

[Jet Champion]

Guess what? There's this thing called Over the Air. Broadcasting. If you have a tuner you can get it and you don't have to pay anyone for it because as an American you own the airwaves. You don't have to get a license to receive it. You don't need any copyright owner's permission to receive it--totally free and totally yours! So it won't end and you won't be forced to pay for signals the Federal Government has mandated that your TV set have a tuner so you can keep getting these signals for free whether you or the cable companies or the satellite providers or Jack Valenti and the Motion Picture people in Hollywood like it or not. Forced Freedom for the tone deaf who don't want to hear it. I say Let Freedom Ring!

 

[lorenzow]

I would think that if all stations must broadcast in HD that it will follow that cable companies will eventually carry the signals unencrypted on basic cable. That's when having a tuner will really come in handy. Or is this not technically possible?

 

[abierce]

Luebster, you are mistaken FCC mandates all stations have have to be brodacast digitally by 200X not HD.

 

[jimmyv]

Quote:

Originally posted by Merconium Except that you're paying for something you don't want nor need. As someone else has mentioned, it should be an optional delete, aka, offer a 4674 and a 4677; one with and one without tuner.

You also pay for a crappy radio/CD player when you buy a car and no one is even mandating it (they do mandate seatbelts, airbags, anti pollution gear, etc. and who would pay extra for those if they were options?), because by making it standard contains costs. After awhile, it costs more to exclude something than include it (go ahead and order manual crank windows instead of the standard power windows on your next car!)


By making all sets include a tuner, they make it possible for broadcasters to compete providing most of us the option of free media rather than allowing the subscription providers total control of the market. If they didn't, people would continue to be faced with having to pay $300 to $500 for a tuner (which when included in every set will probably add about $10 to UMC) to get OTA instead of subscription TV and it would put the broadcasters out of business forcing everyone to pay to watch commercials.

 

[Merconium]

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmyv By making all sets include a tuner, they make it possible for broadcasters to compete providing most of us the option of free media rather than allowing the subscription providers total control of the market. If they didn't, people would continue to be faced with having to pay $300 to $500 for a tuner (which when included in every set will probably add about $10 to UMC) to get OTA instead of subscription TV and it would put the broadcasters out of business forcing everyone to pay to watch commercials.

I totally agree with the premise, but I don't think that it applies to a $3000+ set. Should the 19" TVs at KMart be required? Surely. But at this level of expenditure, I don't see too many guys being satisfied with 5-7 channels, the inability to timeshift, and the lack of HD sports, programs, and premium channels the subscriber services provide.

Yes, by putting tuners in all TVs, the cost of those tuners will drop. But we're not paying only a $10 premium on these HLP 77s.


Nobody is hurt by the choice to delete the tuner. Consumer choice is good.

 

[King Nine]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jet Champion Guess what? There's this thing called Over the Air. Broadcasting. If you have a tuner you can get it and you don't have to pay anyone for it because as an American you own the airwaves. You don't have to get a license to receive it. You don't need any copyright owner's permission to receive it--totally free and totally yours! So it won't end and you won't be forced to pay for signals the Federal Government has mandated that your TV set have a tuner so you can keep getting these signals for free whether you or the cable companies or the satellite providers or Jack Valenti and the Motion Picture people in Hollywood like it or not. Forced Freedom for the tone deaf who don't want to hear it. I say Let Freedom Ring!

Man I wish there was a way to hear the theme from Patton in the background while reading that!

 

[Auditor55]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jet Champion Guess what? There's this thing called Over the Air. Broadcasting. If you have a tuner you can get it and you don't have to pay anyone for it because as an American you own the airwaves. You don't have to get a license to receive it. You don't need any copyright owner's permission to receive it--totally free and totally yours! So it won't end and you won't be forced to pay for signals the Federal Government has mandated that your TV set have a tuner so you can keep getting these signals for free whether you or the cable companies or the satellite providers or Jack Valenti and the Motion Picture people in Hollywood like it or not. Forced Freedom for the tone deaf who don't want to hear it. I say Let Freedom Ring!

Having HD tuners in TV's are absolutely the right thing to do!! Not all of the future buying public will be AVS savvy consumers. As more and more TV's are built with HD tuners in them, the added price will be a non-factor. I"m definitely in favor of them because where I live the only way to get HD is OTA or via Dish. Being that I'm cheap, I'm unwilling to spend money on a dish and I don't have a credit card to even get the service. I presently have cable, but they don't offer HD in this area and it looks like years before it will be available due to the fact Comcast must totally rebuild the undergound cable infrastructure. So OTA its is for me and and having a TV without it already built in is a good thing, I don't really care for all the boxes on my A/V rack anyway.

 

[Jet Champion]

I think the views toward free OTA reception show the nature of the Forum's posters and how they differ from the general public. I would venture a guess that there are much more posters at the forum who favor the copyright-owners/Motion Picture Industrie's interests than what you would ever find in the general public.


That's OK. This is America and you can support whoever's interests you want to support. I always lean to the consumer's interests.


Every once in awhile I have to post what seems to be on its face ridiculously obvious and true. This place to me at least sometimes tends to get things upside down.


I'm sure that there are alot of people who have worked in broadcasting, motion pictures, cable, satellite, etc. who are interested in Video and post here. There's nothing wrong with that. I just warn people to take things with a grain of salt.


Expecting a majority of people like that to be pro consumer and not pro Video Industry would be as silly as expecting a majority of people who had worked for an electrical power company to be pro utility regulation!


Don't get me wrong. Alot of people--even if they've worked in such Industries are not anti-Video consumer/Pro Video Industry! Maybe some people would rather use a set top box and not have to pay for a tuner. If you're one of those people I'm not trying to offend you or make sterotypical statements about your positions which may not be true.


Just never forget that the views of the Video Industries are represented in a larger proportion here at the AVS Forum than the general public at large and those views which are OK to have and express do not always COINCIDE with the views and interests of the average American Video Consumer!!!