Btw, what I meant earlier by saying that I didn't follow what types of TV technology are out there, I meant to say that I don't follow display monitor technology which is an entirely different subject than broadcast television standards.
To answer C.I's question about when more content/channels will become available, that's hard to say. I think I may have a link or 2 at work that lists all of the channels in North America and even HD launch dates for certain networks. I'll try to post it when I get a chance.
The reason why HD hasn't taken off is because it's not cost effective for the broadcasters. They have to broadcast 2 signals. A Standard Def signal that all NTSC/normal televisions can reproduce and an HD signal that HDTV's can reproduce. There's really no money in it for them yet, particulary because advertisers aren't doing their commericals in HD yet. I will tell you this though. I have been working in HDTV land for 4 years. Every major Cable/Satellite box/TV manufacturer is now switching to HD in their products. My company hasn't made money yet from HDTV, but we are busier than ever, even in this economy.
As for CJ talking about how 720P is better than 1080i in some respects, this is true. The reason why is that 720P means 720 "Progressive" scan. The "i" in 1080i means "interlaced" scan.
I will try to explain this. When video is being displayed as "interlaced" it is done like this. The first field of video is displayed, and then 15 milliseconds later the second field of video is displayed. Because of this time difference between the 2 fields, it can create bleeding between 2 parts of an image in the video, flickering, and aliasing on text.
With Progressive scan, both video fields are displayed almost simultaneusly, therefore you do not have the issues that 1080i has. However, to be honest, I could not tell you which is which if I did a blind test. They both look fantastic.
The reason why Progressive TV's cost more is because of the higher scan rate/speed at which they need to be able to display the video fields. FYI, computer monitors use Progressive scan too.
Where Progressive really shines is at a pseudo-HD resolution called 480P. It is really just a standard definiton resolution but it scans progressive, so it can make flickery NTSC television look a lot better.
C.I.- CJ is right. If you have an HDTV at home but are not receiving HD broadcasts/decoding HDTV signals, your HDTV really is not doing anything for your picture. You might as well have a cheap SDTV.
CJ- Just to be clear. A lot of networks are broadcasting in HD. That is correct. However, like I said before, most of the source material is SD being upconverted, therefore it looks no different. Sure it's digital and sure it looks clean, but the detail isn't there. However, if you're a huge sports fan like me, you got to watch The Stanely Cup in true HD, and the Super Bowl in true HD. I haven't seen DiscoveryHD but I'd bet a lot of their nature shows are in true HD. I would suggest trying to find PBS HD. LIke I said, they broadcast true HD 24 hours a day, and much of it is from really cool landscapes from around the world.
One last thing. What makes HD even better is that the audio is always Dolby Digital/AC3, which is great if you have surround sound in your home. The combination of the video/audio is quite incredible. If you ever want to talk surround sound, I know quite a bit about that too.
Sorry if I'm rambling but you're talking to a guy who's been working with this stuff for years, and it's rare that I get to "show off" because frankly not too many people give a flying you-know-what about it.
Btw, I finally got sick of Abuzz and that's why I'm here. It seems like the extremists have taken that site over and it seems to go completely unmoderated.