The cost of small pleasures
7 August 2006 | 18:16 | Administration, General, Linux | No Comments
After reading this article linked to from slashdot (and popular enough to be backslashed), I realised that I too would be happy spending a number of hours reconfiguring my home network just to screw with anyone who had the poor judgement to try and use my wifi.
This as an alternative to leaving my network managed by my routers and its wifi secured with WPA seems like a good use of my time. Sure I need to reconfigure my whole network into multiple segments, install and configure a DHCP server, and setup rules for iptables - but dude - upside down images!
What is it that causes the (admittedly small) pleasures achieved by messing with people - regardless of whether or not you are able to see the effects directly - have such a high personal value that pretty much any effort seems well worth the time and cost it involves?
Maybe it’s just me.
Plasma vs LCD
19 July 2006 | 19:19 | Entertainment, General | 3 Comments
Whilst trying to discover the “correct” new TV for myself, I found I had to wade though lots of information in order to verify (or debunk) myths and identify the distinguishing points.
My conclusions are based on researching the following:
Plasma:
Panasonic VIERA TH-42PV60A
Hitachi 42PD8900TA
LCD:
Sony BRAVIA KLVV40A10
Samsung LA40R71BD
Myths:
1) Plasma TVs have better viewing angles.
It seems that current plasma and LCD TVs both have viewing angles in the range of 170 - 180 degrees.
2) Plasma TVs have less motion blur during fast moving footage.
While this is still correct, good LCD TVs tend to have at most 8ms response times, so this is only noticeable to the most attentive viewer.
3) LCD TVs have a longer lifespan.
This too is generally true but it is becoming much of a muchness. Good plasma TVs boast a comparable 50 - 60,000 hour lifespan these days; are you really going to be watching the same TV in 20 years time?
4) LCD TVs have higher native resolutions.
This is only sort of true. An HD plasma TV is likely to have a resolution such as 1024 x 768 or 1024 x 1080. Competing LCD TVs would have a resolution more like 1366 x 768. In pixels there is not much between the 1024 x 1080 plasma and the LCD, and even if there was this would only be noticeable if you are connecting a non-video source (such as a computer) to it. They will generally both handle 720p and 1080i content and more likely that not also handle 1080p.
Truths:
1) Plasma is susceptible to screen burn.
This is true, but can be mitigated with good management. Try not to leave static images on your screen for more than an hour, and don’t pause a DVD (for example) for more than 20 minutes. This is particularly important during the first 200 hours while the phosphors are still fresh. Try to watch 4:3 content in full screen so you have no black bars to burn in.
2) LCD is more expensive.
Once you reach the 42″ size, this is still true, however sometimes you can get a good deal on a 40″ LCD which brings it to a price comparable with a 42″ plasma.
3) Plasma has better colour/contrast.
This is generally true and people who like bright screens should see the next point. Common plasma contrast ratios range between 4,000:1 and 10,000:1 where LCD is more likely to give you between 1,000:1 and 5,000:1. Plasmas also tend to have more uniformity (evenness) in brightness and colour from corner to corner.
4) LCD’s provide better daylight viewing.
Both the fact that LCD’s are generally brighter than plasma’s and don’t have plasma’s reflective screens make LCD’s easier to see and less prone to screen glare than plasma.
5) LCD’s consume less power.
This would be truer if phrased as “LCD’s consume MUCH less power”. LCD’s generally consume anywhere between 30-50% less power than plasmas. As an additional consequence, plasmas get hotter than LCD and generally have cooling fans - some that are quite audible.
I’m confused - is there a winner?
In order to find the one that’s right for you, you need to do 2 things:
1) Compare the technologies
2) Identify the model with the features you need
Comparison Points:
Picture:
Are you likely to watch much in daylight? Do you generally watch with lights on that would reflect on the screen? If so you have to lean towards LCD - but remember you are sacrificing the colour and contrast when you are watching in optimal conditions. Would you rather the experience is great while watching in daylight/lights on and average in low light or average in daylight/lights on and great in low light?
Price/Cost:
Plasma is generally cheaper than LCD at the 40″ (LCD) - 42″ (plasma) size. This gap is even greater if you want to go to bigger (such as 50″). If price is a consideration (and let’s be honest - when isn’t it?), this should be acknowledged as a factor. Don’t forget that the price isn’t the whole cost though - with an LCD using 50% less power you may find this cost saving a factor.
Resolution:
Are you going to be using the TV to do more than watch video content such as act as a computer monitor? If so, this should only be a factor if you find an LCD TV with a much greater resolution.
Features:
Inputs/Outputs:
Does the TV have all the connections you need? Does it have HDMI? If so how many?
Tuner:
Do you need a tuner (i.e. are not going to feed it from a cable box/digital stb/media center)? If so what type (analogue/standard digital/HD digital)? Do you “NEED” 2 tuners?
Conclusion
These are just the facts. Personal perceptions and tastes should always weigh more heavily than technical differences.
For most people I believe it should be a simple 3 step process:
1) Identify the features you NEED from the Features list above
2) Determine how much you can afford / are happy to spend
3) Go to as many stores are you can and look at the TVs within your budget that have the features you need
I’m sure you will not be disappointed - and if you are it’s because your budget was set to low 