To: norwaypinesavage
"if it is, it looks like the future will be damn expensive." That's exactly WRONG. Agreed. However, the future looks darned silly. I have absolutely no interest in an 84-inch 4K TV. The only reason I upgraded to digital TV (without dish or cable) was to watch the rare major events worth watching, and I didn't need to see the Dems booing God in HD - analog would have been just fine, and I certainly don't want an 84 inch version of that image. Why bother upgrading TV to show higher resolution that serves no purpose?
6 posted on
09/09/2012 5:47:44 AM PDT by
Pollster1
(Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
To: Pollster1; All
"... Why bother upgrading TV to show higher resolution that serves no purpose?...."
Roger that. What used to cost upwards of $10K can now be had for $1300. LG has a smart TV, 60",in 3-D, that directly connects to the Internet and/or all kinds of apps in addition to a TV feed; available at Costco for $1299.
13 posted on
09/09/2012 7:21:43 AM PDT by
Victor
(If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
To: Pollster1
Agreed. However, the future looks darned silly. I have absolutely no interest in an 84-inch 4K TV. The only reason I upgraded to digital TV (without dish or cable) was to watch the rare major events worth watching, and I didn't need to see the Dems booing God in HD - analog would have been just fine, and I certainly don't want an 84 inch version of that image. Why bother upgrading TV to show higher resolution that serves no purpose?
It's interesting but I have no place for an 84 incher either. Heck, I'm the resident guy here who still uses a 1982 Zenith. B-)
20 posted on
09/09/2012 11:56:37 AM PDT by
Nowhere Man
(June 28th, 2012, the Day America Jumped The Shark.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson