Lou Decruss wrote:

> I'm not disputing the quality. We don't have cable at our cottage
> because we're not there enough. We've got a nice 36 inch tv there
> that's only about 6 years old and without the converter it's useless.
> We're still waiting for our coupons but from what I understand they
> won't cover the whole cost of the converter. Having to spend money to
> make something work that's only 6 years old is bullshit.

I think that I have been spoiled with a large screen LCD TV. We moved
the old TV and satellite receiver to the guest room, and when I watch
that one now I wonder how we ever got by on that setup. A few weeks
before Christmas our neighbours invited us over to watch a DVD.They had
an old 25 inch sceen, and sitting half way across the room I couldn't
help but think what a small image it was, and their family room was so
big that a large screen TV would fit nicely.

After Christmas they invited us over to watch another DVD, but this time
on their new 52" plasma and blue ray. It was not a blue ray disk, but
even an ordinary DVD on that system looked pretty good.

It's a bitch having to cope with standards, but we have the option of
setting an standard or having a bunch of incompatible standards.
European televisions used to have better resolution than NA TVs because
they had more scan lines. They have more efficient electrical systems
because they use a higher voltage than us. A hundred years ago we
decided to standardize with 110 and 60 cycle AC. As things progress,
standards change, and as long as it is an improvement, it's probably a
good thing.