I won't be switching to HD any time soon. In the USA the adoption of HD has been a heck of a lot better mainly because they came from a TV format which never showed the same color (NTSC) which has about the same quality has a 5 year old VHS tape.

I know that HD looks amazing but for the little time that I actually watch TV it just aint worth it. The TV's are majorly expensive not to mention the additional fees to receive the HD signal and the new set top box. So I'll just wait a little while and stick to good old normal digital tv.

And for HD downloads..... well my xbmc isn't fast enough to play the really nice stuff.. so why bother downloading it

Its not real HD so i wouldnt bother yet anyway

---

by KaTiEStar
Its not real HD so i wouldnt bother yet anyway

---

Just curious what you mean by that.... yes it isn't 1080p but than again the hardware that support 1080p is insanely expensive anyways or is that not what you mean with "real HD".

My TV is smaller then my computer screens... but then again, I hardly watch TV anyway. So I'll stick to my old TV.

Its just not real HD, thats not coming in till 2012

---

by KaTiEStar
Its just not real HD, thats not coming in till 2012

---

think youre getting HD mixed up with the switch-over to an all-digital tv signal, which should be completed by 2012.
HD is here now, and while the various standards arent supported to the same degree by every tv, they are all HD.

But its not

And no im not.

---

by KaTiEStar
But its not

---

But can you clarify please what you mean by it isn't real HD as I'm now majorly confused as what SKY offers on certain channels is (as far as I'm aware) a real HD signal similar as you would get in for example the USA

Sky offer at the highest, a 1080i output I believe.

This has broadly been adopted as the 'broadcast HD' format of choice, while next gen DVD plumps for the higher 1080p, this has significant bandwidth implications for the TV content poviders.

Also of course the vast majority of current HD TVs can neither display a 1080p picture, nor actually accept a 1080p signal, then reduce it to 1080i.

Im aware that there are other competing standards on the horizon, most if not all of the major electronics manufacturers are bosting about development of some kind of super-multi-ultra-HD set which will supposedly make even 'Full HD' look like a 10 year old VHS.

However their adoption is speculation right now, and their advantage over current HD standards is limited to much larger sets than most of us own. Its debateable if you can tell the difference between 1080p and 1080i on a 32" screen for example.

If whatever turns out to be the final true standard isnt due till circa 2012, Im still glad I bought now, thats 5 years at least of bigger, wider, more detailed TV that my 21" CRT can provide!

I got my new 42" HD flat screen tv with surround sound system last week. It's wicked !!! Still working out how to play with it (like the picture-in-picture facility !!) Played Tekken 5 on it the other day and it blew my socks off!

I've watched Sky-HD round friends', and it is head-and-shoulders above regular TV (625 line PAL). Much crisper with sharper/deeper colours: detail is amazing. Sports and films look the best, but big-budget dramas and doccos like Planet Earth also look amazing. Very much like looking through a window. (Albeit with less chavs than is the norm round here.)

I haven't switched myself, partly because I can't justify the expense, but also because the HD-DVD market hasn't taken off yet. It's in the middle of a format war. VHS/Betamax mk 2, in the form of Blueray v. HD-DVD, looks set to drag on for several years yet. I wouldn't be surprised if they were both trumped by the next-next gen format before one slugs it out on top.

So if you've got the cash and don't mind the lack of DVDs, it could be the way to go.

---

by ChamblerIn the USA the adoption of HD has been a heck of a lot better mainly because they came from a TV format which never showed the same color (NTSC) which has about the same quality has a 5 year old VHS tape.

---

My 5-year-old VHS tapes are perfectly watchable.

While it's true analogue NTSC is often bootleg-quality (not that I'd know, of course), Region 1 DVDs look very similar to PAL DVDs in quality. And there's no PAL speed-up, so you get to hear everyone's voice at the correct pitch.

Of course HD blows the lot of 'em out the water (or it would if the HD fleet wasn't busy fighting amongst itself).

I'm fully HD already (apart from sky, because it's crap..), PS3/Blu-Ray/Surround/HD LCD = Heaven

No terrestrial HD until 2012 though as there's not enough space in the spectrum for 1080 freeview until analogue is killed off, so I'll make do with offline media

We have recently got the Samsung 40" HD 1080p set, and it looks amazing. We don't really watch TV so I can't comment on that side of things but 360 gaming is out of this world. We have also just got the HD-DVD add on for the 360 and Serenity HD, for example, is unreal; you can tell the difference to the DVD version for sure.

We have downloaded some HD shorts too, of things like 'in the ocean' and that kind of thing like you get at the Imax theatres, that really show the telly off.

It's expensive but I think it's worth the investment and if you spend a bit more then it's more future proof I suppose.

I get my TV tomorrow

Sky HD and Toshiba 42in LCD 1080i exact scan (1080x1920) resolution.
Thinking of getting one of the LG blu-ray/HD-DVD combined players but they are still too expensive.
But at least the local HMV is now selling the blu-ray and HD-DVD films.


PS: "Full" or "Real" HD is just a marketing scan by Sony for their 1080p panels.