HDMI or Component

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:05:59 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@no.com> wrote:
>
> | If you don't know, then pose a question or do some research. Making
> | statements that are just speculation can mislead people and get ideas
> | started that can affect the understanding others have of the technology.
>
> You think that having an analog connection does NOT expose you to some
> potential distortion, noise, and interference? People who have learned
> this stuff and known it for decades don't need to research to understand
> the obvious.

You used the word "potential" in a place that counters the meaning you
may intend to impart. Here is a hint "Potential != Actual".

> | You made a statement in response to a post about this unit that seemed
> | unlikely, based on my knowledge. If you don't know, be more careful about
> | what you post.
>
> I suggest you just stick with digital connections. You do not appear to
> understand the limitations of analog and just want to bicker with anyone
> who tries to explain it to you.
>

HOWLS OF DIRISIVE LAUGHTER!!@!!!!

--
Matthew

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of
people" -- Alexander Bullock ("My Man Godfrey" 1936)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

You said that a particular set converts digital to analog. I asked if you
had some information regarding this that I did not.

Your post implied that it did not matter whether the signal was digital
because the set converts it anyway.

Now you want to lecture me on the value of digital connections? I never
engaged that debate at all. I simply tried to find out if you knew
something that I did not about the Panasonic PDPs. You then proceeded to
atttack my understanding of the technology and to argue a point that your
own post contradicted.

If you want to play these games, look for someone else, but expect to first
be called on your BS before I terminate the conversation.

Look back to the posts and see if you can figure out what I was asking and
find where I said that an analog connection does not afford potential for
distorting the signal. It is simply not there.

Leonard

<phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
news:dfsb0r21mtl@news3.newsguy.com...
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:05:59 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@no.com> wrote:
>
> | If you don't know, then pose a question or do some research. Making
> | statements that are just speculation can mislead people and get ideas
> | started that can affect the understanding others have of the technology.
>
> You think that having an analog connection does NOT expose you to some
> potential distortion, noise, and interference? People who have learned
> this stuff and known it for decades don't need to research to understand
> the obvious.
>
>
> | You made a statement in response to a post about this unit that seemed
> | unlikely, based on my knowledge. If you don't know, be more careful
> about
> | what you post.
>
> I suggest you just stick with digital connections. You do not appear to
> understand the limitations of analog and just want to bicker with anyone
> who tries to explain it to you.
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/
> http/ham.org/ |
> | (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/
> http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[David]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

<phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
news:dfsb0r21mtl@news3.newsguy.com...
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:05:59 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@no.com> wrote:
>
> | If you don't know, then pose a question or do some research. Making
> | statements that are just speculation can mislead people and get ideas
> | started that can affect the understanding others have of the technology.
>
> You think that having an analog connection does NOT expose you to some
> potential distortion, noise, and interference? People who have learned
> this stuff and known it for decades don't need to research to understand
> the obvious.
>
>
> | You made a statement in response to a post about this unit that seemed
> | unlikely, based on my knowledge. If you don't know, be more careful
> about
> | what you post.
>
> I suggest you just stick with digital connections. You do not appear to
> understand the limitations of analog and just want to bicker with anyone
> who tries to explain it to you.
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/
> http/ham.org/ |
> | (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/
> http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Unbelievable. Why don't you go do some research on "GOING AWAY"?!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Leonard Caillouet wrote:
> You said that a particular set converts digital to analog. I asked if you
> had some information regarding this that I did not.
>
> Your post implied that it did not matter whether the signal was digital
> because the set converts it anyway.
>
> Now you want to lecture me on the value of digital connections? I never
> engaged that debate at all. I simply tried to find out if you knew
> something that I did not about the Panasonic PDPs. You then proceeded to
> atttack my understanding of the technology and to argue a point that your
> own post contradicted.
>
> If you want to play these games, look for someone else, but expect to first
> be called on your BS before I terminate the conversation.
>
> Look back to the posts and see if you can figure out what I was asking and
> find where I said that an analog connection does not afford potential for
> distorting the signal. It is simply not there.
>

I knew it would only be a matter of time. phil-news appears to get off
pontificating on usenet. Yawn! Him and few 10s of thousands of others.
You have given him more than enough opportunity to actually post
something useful but he followed his muse.

By the way, great use of top posting. This is one of the very few times
in which top posting can be correctly used.

--
Matthew

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of
people" -- Alexander Bullock ("My Man Godfrey" 1936)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Matthew L. Martin" <nothere@notnow.never> wrote in message
news:11i3f35p6nb4ib4@corp.supernews.com...
> Leonard Caillouet wrote:
>> You said that a particular set converts digital to analog. I asked if
>> you had some information regarding this that I did not.
>>
>> Your post implied that it did not matter whether the signal was digital
>> because the set converts it anyway.
>>
>> Now you want to lecture me on the value of digital connections? I never
>> engaged that debate at all. I simply tried to find out if you knew
>> something that I did not about the Panasonic PDPs. You then proceeded to
>> atttack my understanding of the technology and to argue a point that your
>> own post contradicted.
>>
>> If you want to play these games, look for someone else, but expect to
>> first be called on your BS before I terminate the conversation.
>>
>> Look back to the posts and see if you can figure out what I was asking
>> and find where I said that an analog connection does not afford potential
>> for distorting the signal. It is simply not there.
>>
>
> I knew it would only be a matter of time. phil-news appears to get off
> pontificating on usenet. Yawn! Him and few 10s of thousands of others. You
> have given him more than enough opportunity to actually post something
> useful but he followed his muse.
>
> By the way, great use of top posting. This is one of the very few times in
> which top posting can be correctly used.
>
> --
> Matthew
>
> "All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of
> people" -- Alexander Bullock ("My Man Godfrey" 1936)

I know, you all warned me...

Thank you, Matthew.

You see Phil, Matthew can be civil and gracious. I could have taken his
comment as baiting, given that he is well aware of my preference fo top
posting and that I bottom post mostly in this group because most people
prefer it here. I did not. We have had healthy debates, but do show each
other respect. We also read the posts and respond to what is actually said,
not some dream state.

Leonard

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Leonard Caillouet (no@noway.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> I know, you all warned me...

Well, it had to happen sometime. He seems to want to contradict everything
here.

> Thank you, Matthew.
>
> I did not. We have had healthy debates, but do show each
> other respect.

Agreed. I know I've been over the top lately, but after 30-40 posts of
trying to be helpful but getting passive aggressive responses, I finally
blew.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/FoxTrot/GutterBall.gif

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:26:44 -0400 Matthew L. Martin <nothere@notnow.never> wrote:
| phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:05:59 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@no.com> wrote:
|>
|> | If you don't know, then pose a question or do some research. Making
|> | statements that are just speculation can mislead people and get ideas
|> | started that can affect the understanding others have of the technology.
|>
|> You think that having an analog connection does NOT expose you to some
|> potential distortion, noise, and interference? People who have learned
|> this stuff and known it for decades don't need to research to understand
|> the obvious.
|
| You used the word "potential" in a place that counters the meaning you
| may intend to impart. Here is a hint "Potential != Actual".

Installed and protected properly, with good shielded cable, and good
interface circuits on each end, with correct impedance matching, then
the potential for problems will not be realized. Otherwise it is a
matter of degree.


|> | You made a statement in response to a post about this unit that seemed
|> | unlikely, based on my knowledge. If you don't know, be more careful about
|> | what you post.
|>
|> I suggest you just stick with digital connections. You do not appear to
|> understand the limitations of analog and just want to bicker with anyone
|> who tries to explain it to you.
|>
|
| HOWLS OF DIRISIVE LAUGHTER!!@!!!!

Well, at least you can be entertained.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 13:06:12 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@noway.com> wrote:

| I know, you all warned me...
|
| Thank you, Matthew.
|
| You see Phil, Matthew can be civil and gracious. I could have taken his
| comment as baiting, given that he is well aware of my preference fo top
| posting and that I bottom post mostly in this group because most people
| prefer it here. I did not. We have had healthy debates, but do show each
| other respect. We also read the posts and respond to what is actually said,
| not some dream state.

Maybe he can be civil and gracious. But "can" does not mean he actually
does. And he has not ever been so here, with any postings of mine. Lots
of other people have disagreed with me before on many matters, but they
do not act uncivil as Matthew (and Jeff) did. If you think I am wrong,
just point at specifically what is wrong. I'll do the same. If we don't
end up liking each other's answer, we should simply just drop it and
leave it civil.

But if I get attacked personally, I will respond in kind.

As for top posting vs. bottom posting, I prefer bottom posting, but I
can live with top posting. But if you top post, I'll skip reading the
article enclosed unless you also say there are some inserted comments
therein. So if you top post _and_ bottom post in the same post, please
do say so, so things are not missed (I'm not accusing you of having
done that).

You obviously had a different perspective in this thread, focusing on the
particulars of a given model, whereas my perspective is focusing on the use
of analog vs. digital connections. Digital is always better than analog
in general, but very innovative engineers can manage to totally screw up
either.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

<phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
news:dfsjg9123jq@news2.newsguy.com...
> You obviously had a different perspective in this thread, focusing on the
> particulars of a given model, whereas my perspective is focusing on the
> use
> of analog vs. digital connections. Digital is always better than analog
> in general, but very innovative engineers can manage to totally screw up
> either.


I asked a simple question in response to your post. The question was very
clear and simple. You did not answer it and you went on to argue the above
point, which the post that you made that I questioned actually contradicted.
You are being obtuse and argumentative. I have criticized Jeff and Matthew
for their hositle attitude toward you, but I am beginning to see why they
got so frustrated. Enough. I will not respond on the matter any further.

Leonard

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 13:17:19 -0400 David <davey@home.net> wrote:
| <phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
| news:dfsb0r21mtl@news3.newsguy.com...
|> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 07:05:59 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@no.com> wrote:
|>
|> | If you don't know, then pose a question or do some research. Making
|> | statements that are just speculation can mislead people and get ideas
|> | started that can affect the understanding others have of the technology.
|>
|> You think that having an analog connection does NOT expose you to some
|> potential distortion, noise, and interference? People who have learned
|> this stuff and known it for decades don't need to research to understand
|> the obvious.
|>
|>
|> | You made a statement in response to a post about this unit that seemed
|> | unlikely, based on my knowledge. If you don't know, be more careful
|> about
|> | what you post.
|>
|> I suggest you just stick with digital connections. You do not appear to
|> understand the limitations of analog and just want to bicker with anyone
|> who tries to explain it to you.
|>
|> --
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|> | Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/
|> http/ham.org/ |
|> | (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/
|> http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| Unbelievable. Why don't you go do some research on "GOING AWAY"?!

Maybe I'll do some research on making you go away. I'll reserve about
5 minutes of time for that.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

(phil-news-nospam@ipal.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> | Unbelievable. Why don't you go do some research on "GOING AWAY"?!
>
> Maybe I'll do some research on making you go away. I'll reserve about
> 5 minutes of time for that.

Hopefully, even you can understand that it's not just a couple of people who
see how moronic you are.

You are welcome here if you can post intelligently and not assume you know
more than every person here. Otherwise, please go away. We could killfile
you, but then unsuspecting newbies might see your drivel and believe it is
true.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/UserFriendly/SPAMOurCustomers.gif

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:29:53 -0400 Leonard Caillouet <no@noway.com> wrote:
|
| <phil-news-nospam@ipal.net> wrote in message
| news:dfsjg9123jq@news2.newsguy.com...
|> You obviously had a different perspective in this thread, focusing on the
|> particulars of a given model, whereas my perspective is focusing on the
|> use
|> of analog vs. digital connections. Digital is always better than analog
|> in general, but very innovative engineers can manage to totally screw up
|> either.
|
|
| I asked a simple question in response to your post. The question was very
| clear and simple. You did not answer it and you went on to argue the above
| point, which the post that you made that I questioned actually contradicted.
| You are being obtuse and argumentative. I have criticized Jeff and Matthew
| for their hositle attitude toward you, but I am beginning to see why they
| got so frustrated. Enough. I will not respond on the matter any further.

What I posted about and what you posted about were on different divergent
paths for the original question. But I guess I could not make it clear to
you the scope of what I was talking about.

All they had to do was actually read what I posted. Typically about 1% of
Usenet readers post w/o reading. Seems to be a much higher percentage in
the "alt" groups.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <dfmv1d631fa@news4.newsguy.com>, phil-news-nospam@ipal.net
wrote:

> | Theoretically, HDMI should give a better picture because it avoids
> | the digital to analog to digital conversion, but I can't see it.
>
> It gets converted to analog in the display at some point, anyway.

Does it with DLP? The signal flips mirrors; so each mirror has an on
and an off state, so they're binary. Where does the analog come in?
I'm not trying to be sarcastic; if there is an analog portion of the
signal path, I'm curious as to where it is because I thought it was
digital all the way with HDMI.

-- Michelle

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:05:32 -0400 Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:
| (phil-news-nospam@ipal.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
|> | Unbelievable. Why don't you go do some research on "GOING AWAY"?!
|>
|> Maybe I'll do some research on making you go away. I'll reserve about
|> 5 minutes of time for that.
|
| Hopefully, even you can understand that it's not just a couple of people who
| see how moronic you are.

I will admit that THIS newsgroup has more of you idiots than any other
single newsgroup I have participated in, with the sole exception of one of
the anti-spam newsgroups that gets frequented by spammers and dummies who
let spammers use their networks and wonder why thousands of other networks
block them. But none of them have been so persistent about saying things
you know nothing about as you (and Matt). And that is how all of this
started: YOU made a statement that was factually incorrect, and for which
you have no way of knowing the facts because you simply were never here to
observe them. And then you are doing the same thing all over again about
my monitor. You have absolutely no basis to say it cannot have happened
because you simply were not here.


| You are welcome here if you can post intelligently and not assume you know
| more than every person here. Otherwise, please go away. We could killfile
| you, but then unsuspecting newbies might see your drivel and believe it is
| true.

I suggest you limit your posts to things you actually know and see, not
things you figure out using the wrong formula and never validate for
yourself by actual testing.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http/linuxhomepage.com/ http/ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http/phil.ipal.org/ http/ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

(phil-news-nospam@ipal.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
> [troll posting snipped]
>

Please don't feed the troll.

phil-news-nospam@ipal.net will post on any subject, even if he has no
clue about it.

He has been corrected numerous times by a wide variety of other posters,
yet continues to post nonsense.

He will also ask you to do his research for you, then get mad when you
don't do it in the way he wanted you to.

Just ignore him, and he will eventually go away.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/TractorBeam.jpg

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <dfmv1d631fa@news4.newsguy.com>, phil-news-nospam@ipal.net
> wrote:
>
>
>>| Theoretically, HDMI should give a better picture because it avoids
>>| the digital to analog to digital conversion, but I can't see it.
>>
>>It gets converted to analog in the display at some point, anyway.
>
>
> Does it with DLP? The signal flips mirrors; so each mirror has an on
> and an off state, so they're binary. Where does the analog come in?
> I'm not trying to be sarcastic; if there is an analog portion of the
> signal path, I'm curious as to where it is because I thought it was
> digital all the way with HDMI.
>

Don't bother with this troll. He has demonstrated time and again that he
knows little to nothing about the subjects that he posts on. He has been
corrected, many times, by many people. It appears that his sole purpose
in posting here is to make himself feel important. He is wrong in this
case, as he almost always is.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <11i5kosopkhc201@corp.supernews.com>,
"Matthew L. Martin" <nothere@notnow.never> wrote:

> >>| Theoretically, HDMI should give a better picture because it
> >>| avoids the digital to analog to digital conversion, but I can't
> >>| see it.
> >>
> >>It gets converted to analog in the display at some point, anyway.
> >
> >
> > Does it with DLP? The signal flips mirrors; so each mirror has an
> > on and an off state, so they're binary. Where does the analog come
> > in? I'm not trying to be sarcastic; if there is an analog portion
> > of the signal path, I'm curious as to where it is because I thought
> > it was digital all the way with HDMI.
> >
>
> Don't bother with this troll. He has demonstrated time and again that
> he knows little to nothing about the subjects that he posts on. He
> has been corrected, many times, by many people. It appears that his
> sole purpose in posting here is to make himself feel important. He is
> wrong in this case, as he almost always is.

Oh. OK. But is my impression of the digital path correct? I guess
that one could say that the light itself is analog, so at the point when
the light is reflected off the mirror, the signal becomes analog.
(Before the light is reflected off the mirror, the light isn't carrying
a signal, so its state is not a determining factor at that point.)

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Michelle Steiner (michelle@michelle.org) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Oh. OK. But is my impression of the digital path correct?

Yes, it is.

DLP is digital from the HDMI/DVI input all the way to the mirrors. As you
say, only the constant-brightness light is analog (but don't get me started
on quantum theory, which says that light is actually digital at the very
basic particle structure). The light is controlled by the mirrors using a
digital technique (they either reflect toward the viewer or they don't).

--
Jeff Rife |
| http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Peanuts/TenPin.gif

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote:

>
> Oh. OK. But is my impression of the digital path correct? I guess
> that one could say that the light itself is analog, so at the point when
> the light is reflected off the mirror, the signal becomes analog.
> (Before the light is reflected off the mirror, the light isn't carrying
> a signal, so its state is not a determining factor at that point.)
>

Well, in the strictest sense there are no digital signals. but that is
another story.

In almost all cases for fixed pixel displays the final drive is pulse
width modulation of either voltage of current. Most would agree that
this a a analog signal in that a numerical value is translated into a
pulse width. It is not analog in the sense that there is no single
output for each color as in digital to RGB. There is a conversion for
each element of each color triad but that conversion is independent of
the value for horizontally adjacent triads. In the classic sense of a
D/A conversion horizontally adjacent triad values are filtered to
provide a signal that sweeps from one value to the next.

I hope this helps.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <11i8potd2he1l17@corp.supernews.com>,
"Matthew L. Martin" <nothere@notnow.never> wrote:

> In almost all cases for fixed pixel displays the final drive is pulse
> width modulation of either voltage of current. Most would agree that
> this a a analog signal in that a numerical value is translated into a
> pulse width. It is not analog in the sense that there is no single
> output for each color as in digital to RGB. There is a conversion for
> each element of each color triad but that conversion is independent
> of the value for horizontally adjacent triads. In the classic sense
> of a D/A conversion horizontally adjacent triad values are filtered
> to provide a signal that sweeps from one value to the next.
>
> I hope this helps.

If I had the background to understand it, I'm sure it would have helped.
Last time I heard anything about pulse width modulation was in
connection with the Nike Missile guidance system in the 1960s--and all I
recall about that now is that it used pulse width modulation.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.