This looks like the TV i've been waiting for! Read the Press Release. With support for 1080p, native 1080 lines and 2 HDMI inputs it looks ideal. I've placed my order for Sky-HD which installs in May. Shame the set is not due to launch till September.

Due to Wembly stadium not being complete in time, the Robbie Williams concert has now been canceled. Hopefully it will be moved (nearby?) else some of my family are going to be very disappointed. Its not just the software industry that cant keep to a deadline or budget!

 

I feel the need to revisit a topic that I've already written about. In this case, the subject is HDTV resolution, and 1080p resolution in particular. This seems to be on everyone's minds as we approach the Sky HD launch and we're faced with more HDTV buying choices than ever before. Not a day goes by without someone asking whether they should just buy a "standard" 720p/1080i set or step up and pay the extra cash for a higher-resolution 1080p set. Or what it all means. And so, I've tried to condense the whole discussion into a neat, little cheat sheet. Read on for the quick and dirty lowdown on 1080p.

 1. 1080p defined
1080p resolution--which equates to 1,920x1,080 pixels--is the latest HD Holy Grail. That's because 1080p monitors are theoretically capable of displaying every pixel of the highest-resolution HD broadcasts. On paper, they should offer more than twice the resolution of today's 1,280x720, or 720p, HDTVs. Some companies, such as LG, refer to these super-high-res of sets as ultra-HD, while others prefer to substitute true or full for ultra.

 2. Why 1080p is theoretically better than 1080i
1080i, the former king of the HDTV hill, actually boasts an identical 1,920x1,080 resolution but conveys the images in an interlaced format (the i in 1080i). In a tube-based television, otherwise known as a CRT, 1080i sources get "painted" on the screen sequentially: the odd-numbered lines of resolution appear on your screen first, followed by the even-numbered lines--all within 1/30 of a second. Progressive-scan formats such as 480p, 720p, and 1080p convey all of the lines of resolution sequentially in a single pass, which makes for a smoother, cleaner image, especially with sports and other motion-intensive content. As opposed to tubes, microdisplays (DLP, LCoS, and LCD rear-projection) and other fixed-pixel TVs, including plasma and LCD flat-panel, are inherently progressive in nature, so when the incoming source is interlaced, as 1080i is, they convert it to progressive scan for display.

 3. What content is available in 1080p?
Really, nothing at this point. Today's high-def broadcasts are done in either 1080i or 720p, and there's little or no chance they'll jump to 1080p any time soon because of bandwidth issues. Meanwhile, some newly announced DVD players from Denon and NeuNeo (who?) are claiming to upconvert standard DVD movies to 1080p resolution, but that's a far cry from native high-def content. More promising is the post-DVD future. There's been a lot of chatter over whether the new breed of high-def movie players, Blu-ray or HD-DVD, as well as the upcoming Sony Playstation 3, will output in 1080p. Allegedly, they will, but those players and recorders will be very expensive at first, and they probably won't hit more modest price levels until 2007 or even 2008. The PS3, on the other hand, is designed to be more of a mainstream product; we hope that means a price tag in the neighborhood of £300. It's unclear, however, exactly what it will output in 1080p--games, Blu-ray movies, or both--or neither.

 4. How much extra does a 1080p TV cost
Not surprisingly, you'll initially have to pay a premium to get the latest and greatest technology. If you take a look at the product lines of Sony, Samsung, and Mitsubishi, you can see that, on average, you can expect to pay about at £600 extra for the bump in resolution. Eventually, of course, the gap will narrow, but it'll take a couple of more years for 1080p displays to become the standard.

 5. Why you should buy--or not buy--a 1080p set
While I havent read many review for 1080p sets, I have read about some US sets, some of them are early, nonshipping units. These include HP’s MD6580N, a 65-inch 1080p DLP, and Sony’s KDS-R60XBR1, a 60-inch LCoS (SXRD) set that brings the technology from Sony's highly regarded Qualia 006 down to a more-affordable price point. After seeing 1080p in action, I’ve come to some conclusions.

Obviously, the quality of the source material you're viewing is very important, but so are screen size and how far you're sitting from your TV. Indeed reports that the extra sharpness afforded by the 1080p televisions that have seen is noticeable only when watching 1080i sources on a larger screen. Comparing a 50-inch 1080p DLP set to a 50-inch 720p DLP set, for example, you'll be hard-pressed to notice more detail with 1080i sources, especially from farther than 8 feet away. Even if you can see the difference, it will be much less obvious than, say, the difference between DVD and 720p HDTV. Of course, performance will vary from set to set, and we'll know more when everyone has a chance to thoroughly test more 1080p televisions.

Others also say that the main real-world advantage of 1080p is not the extra sharpness you'll be seeing, but instead, the smaller, more densely packed pixels. In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or screen door effect. This advantage applies regardless of the quality of the source.

Another thing to consider: even if the display has a native resolution of 1080p on paper, it can't necessarily display all 2 million-plus pixels in the real world. For example, the Sharp LC-45GX6U, a 1080p 45-inch flat-panel LCD, actually wasn't as sharp as it claimed to be; it couldn't resolve every line of a 1080i-resolution test pattern.

Finally--and this may sound weird--but many 1080p televisions don't accept 1080p sources at all. In our experience, only the aforementioned HP can handle 1080p via its HDMI inputs--all other current 1080p HDTVs cannot. Instead, they upconvert 720p and 1080i sources to 1080p.

Oh, and I would be remiss not to mention computer connectivity. Those of you thinking of running your PC through a 1080p set should be aware that you may not necessarily get to use all that extra resolution--even if you have the right high-end graphics card. For instance, the Sharp set allows you to max out at only 1,280x1,024 resolution while the less-expensive Westinghouse LVM-37W1, along with Samsung’s 1080p RPTVs and one series of high-end sets from Mitsubishi, accept true 1,920x1,080 resolution from a PC. I expect most 1080p HDTVs announced in 2006 to handle 1080p sources, but for now, that capability is rare.

The bottom line: if you're thinking of going big, really big (a 60–inch screen or larger), the extra resolution may make it worth the difference--as long as you have a pristine, 1080i HD source to feed into the set. As to whether true 1080p sources from PS3, a Blu-ray deck, or an HD-DVD player look better--we'll have to wait until late 2006 to find out. Of course, it's probably a good idea to buy--or wait for--a set that can accept a 1080p signal so that you'll be able to make that judgment.

 

 

Xbox's Director of the Game Technology Group, Scott Henson, has his doubts about Sony's claim that PS3 games will feature 'full HD' (1080p resolution): "I think 1080p, just to address that directly, will be basically impossible. I think if you talk to any developer they will tell you that they will not have a performing game at 1080p."

Henson also addressed the backlog of requests focused on improving the Xbox 360's Dashboard functionality — specifically, improving the music player and implementing background downloading. While Henson declined to give clear-cut answers we've all been waiting for, he did confirm that "the capability [to upgrade these features] is there." Henson also added that the Xbox team has considered adding video streaming capabilities for non-Media Center users. Hopefully this means DivX?

[Read the full article here]

[Via AllHeadline News]

March 19, 2006 12:00 p.m. EST

Joanna Wypior - All Headline News Staff Reporter

London, England (AHN) – An apparent shortage of high definition television sets have upset viewers who want to prepare for this summer’s World Cup tournament with the best of what is offered in high quality entertainment.

According to the BBC, the tournament had been expected to showcase HDTV but a Screen Digest study says a decoder chips shortage means the opportunity will be "partly missed".

HDTV provides a sharper image than the current standard television picture.

Analyst Vincent Letang, who lead the Screen Digest study says the delay is only short-term.

He says: "The World Cup in Germany was supposed to be the perfect kick-start for HD in Europe and its full thrust will be partly missed, but this does not jeopardize the introduction of HDTV."

The World Cup, the world’s largest soccer tournament, kicks-off in Germany June 9th with billions of worldwide television viewers expected to watch the games.

If you are like me and are really fussy about audio and video equipment then you probably have been also trying to decide if now is the best time to buy a new TV ready for HDTV (and your Xbox 360). Now I'm convinced that everyone should wait for a 1080 set but most sales people disagree and look at me like I dont know what I'm talking about. But at last the media has picked up on their con. Here's an extract for this weekends news coverage:

FAMILIES who have splashed out thousands of pounds on plasma and LCD televisions claiming to be 'HD-ready' face disappointment.

Sets being sold as equipped to deliver the crystal-clear images offered by high definition television are not in fact capable of showing the full detail promised by the new technology. High definition is being hailed as the future of broadcasting. Sky and the cable company Telewest have announced its launch on some channels in the past week and the BBC will offer the format in the World Cup in June. The terrestrial commercial channels are also planning to launch the technology. But most of the large screens currently being sold claiming to be equipped for the switch are only capable of offering less than half the clarity the technology has the potential to deliver. HD broadcasts offer up to two million pixels -, the tiny dots which make up a television picture. But 99 per cent of the 'HD-ready' screens sold to British homes can show only 921,600 pixels, just 44 per cent of the full potential.

The number of pixels is key, because the more there are, the greater the detail of the image. The issue was highlighted by broad- cast electronics expert Brian Robertson who said: 'People are being misled. It is clear to me that the sales people pushing these TVs do not know about this issue themselves. "Most people don't have the time or inclination to investigate the technical specifications of a TV: They see a label on a set such as "HD Ready" and will trust that. However, I think many people will feel conned. They may have paid more than £2,000 for a set which does not deliver the real clarity promised by HDTV:'  The result could be that manufacturers and retailers cash in twice from the arrival of HDTV; because soon they will begin advertising the benefits of 'full' HDTV sets which are capable of showing all the two million pixels. Currently there is only one such set widely offered in the UK - the 37in Philips 37PF9830, which sells for around £2,800. Sets from Sharp and others are becoming available. HD pictures are broadcast in 1,080 lines, with 1,920 pixels per line, giving a total of 2,073,600. However, most 'HD-ready' sets sold in Britain have a maximum of 720 lines with 1280 pixels per line, a total of 921,600. Vincent Letang, a broadcast analyst at Screen Digest, confirmed that viewers with 720-line sets will not reap the full benefit of the broadcasts. , "People are not aware of the distinction. I don't think manufacturers will mention it very loudly,' he said. 'The HD-ready label effectively describes an entry-level high definition television. If you don't have a 1080-line television you won't see high definition broadcasts in all their glory.' He said he believed that most people buy the latest slimline LCD and plasma screens as a space-saving fashion accessory. They enjoy the appearance of the box, rather than the quality of the image. Currently, more than 80 per cent of new large TV sets are the slim LCD or plasma screens rather than the old-fashioned big box cathode ray tubes. Dixons has suggested the old fashioned sets will be gone by the end of this year. Many of these sets cost more than £1,500, though the most popular purchases are £800 plus. Last night, Dixons insisted that most consumers would not be able to tell the difference between images on 720-line and 1280-line sets. '

"Our technical experts would defy anyone to see a difference in the clarity,' said a spokesman. He said the difference would only be seen on a new generation of huge 65in TVs which are about to become available. A spokesman for Telewest, which is the first company offering HDTV; said demanding viewers might want to opt for a 1,080- line TV.

 

I am waiting for more 1080 sets to become available. The Philips & Sharp sets mention do have 1080 lines but there other features fall behind the better 720 sets, things like number of scarts etc...

 

Anyone who tells you that you cant tell the difference between the two types of telly are either lying or more likely they just havent ever seen the 1080 in action. I know that most of the TV sales guys in the high street havent.

 

How can losing 56% of the signal detail be a good thing?

If you receive "Cannot generate SSPI context" when trying to connect to SQL Server using Integrated Security grab yourself a coffee, find a comfy seat and prepare yourself for several hours of hardcore debugging.

First read thru this article: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=811889

If you not familar with Kerberos or NTLM you might just want to give up now!

The solution I'm about to supply is for one of many problems that may cause this error message. It might sound simple when I list it out but believe me this is the result of many hours wasted in front of my laptop.

Firstly my sql connections were working fine. Then after a reboot - nothing but "Cannot generate SSPI context" errors.

Nothing had changed. Honest.

After a lot of debugging I realised that when it worked i was connected (via VPN) to my office's domain. Therefore I could see and communicate with the DC. Something that is required for Kerberos.

After the reboot I did not reconnect to the VPN, therefore Kerberos was not used. I believe that cached credentials are no good.

Therefore NTLM was being used this time around. By why wasnt this working?

Again many hours passed before I realised that the NT LM Security Support Provider service was not running on my box.

Starting this and performing a reboot to pick up new token got my application working again.

Sigh. Now for some real work.

[Update: 1 hour later!] I'm still having "issues". I'll post more if I figure this bugger out!

If anyone ever see strange dialogs (that look fairly unprofessional) appearing behind normal installation dialog during an install, here the explanation: your using Terminal Services. Atleast thats the best explaination I can find at the moment. Check out this thread for more details.

The MPAA is suing yet another P2P site, this time its my favourite: isohunt.com They plan to fight the action and need our help. Please show your support by visiting the site and doing your bit. Lets convince the MPAA that P2P is the new VCR and they have nothing to fear.