|
|
Posted by Jeff Rife on 10/05/34 11:34
David Levy (d_levy@lifeisunfair.net) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> > The 27" RCA SD
>
> I assume that you meant "HD."
Nope...that's what keeps the price of the set down. They have ATSC
tuners, but don't try to claim to be HDTV monitors...they don't have
the resolution for it.
> > 4:3 sets with ATSC tuners have MSRPs of $549, which should
> > result in street prices of $500 at most (to compare apples to
> > apples).
>
> That's $50 more than the street price of my Samsung 27" 4:3 HDTV
> monitor (without an ATSC tuner), assuming that no discounts have been
> taken.
And, since your Samsung is only slightly better than the RCAs (although
it *tries* to be an HD monitor, and is marketed as such), that pretty
much sets the price of an ATSC tuner at around $50.
> > Not enough extra compared to the cost of an HDTV monitor to
> > be significant.
>
> You stated that an ATSC tuner "needs to be in every TV." Do you wish
> to amend this to include only HDTVs?
For now, it's not as important for *all* TVs to have ATSC tuners...sets
under 15" come to mind, but all TVs that display at HD resolutions *and*
have any tuner should have them *now* (and *should* have had them two
years ago). The FCC should have required that all sets greater than 25"
should have ATSC tuners (assuming they have any tuner) by Jan 1, 2005,
and, by Jan 1, 2007, I think *all* TVs with tuners should be required to
have ATSC tuners.
Since the most compelling thing about digital OTA is HD, and you don't
get much benefit from a small set, so letting manufacturers only have to
put ATSC tuners into HD-resolution sets (which are 80% of the large sets
sold today) wouldn't really slow down the uptake this year and the next...
nearly every new "main" TV would be able to receive ATSC.
The "digital cable ready" ball was really dropped by the FCC, too...they
should have gotten off their butt and forced cable companies to pick a
standard back when ATSC was set as the OTA standard, so that DCR tuners
could have been available for 5 years now. With that, they could have
mandated DCR + ATSC for all large sets this year. I probably won't ever
subscribe to cable again, but I still think that it would have been a
good thing, since eventually digital cable will be like analog today, with
much of it unscrambled if you subscribe at all. And, it would have been
better to mandate DCR + ATSC than just ATSC, as the consumer gets more
and the cost is no different...most chips in "ATSC receivers" also handle
QAM that is used by digital cable...that's just the way the VLSI is made.
> I thought that you wanted "to compare apples to apples." Paying
> approximately the same amount for a product with "more features" is
> tantamount to paying a lower price (especially when one factors the 8%
> inflation experienced between 2001 and now).
In general, the feature sets are about the same in reality, you just get
a couple of extra things that aren't really a big deal (like a universal
remote instead of a more dedicated one) today. Many of them are silly,
though (flash card readers to display photos, digital audio *inputs*,
FireWire *outputs* so you can record from your TV to a D-VHS VCR, etc.),
and a few are even more "dirt cheap" than NTSC tuners (extra video inputs,
etc.).
> > BTW, try to find a cable-ready NTSC tuner for "dirt cheap"
> > sometime...I think you'll find that $25 is easily the least
> > you'll pay.
>
> Are you seriously comparing the cost of an internal component to the
> cost of a standalone device?
Yeah, when the supporting hardware really is that dirt cheap. $25 is
for a unit that is as lowball as they come...most cable TV tuner boxes
are $100 or more.
> > but *with* ATSC tuner for MSRP $549, compare that to the
> > MSRP of the unit you bought,
>
> I ignore MSRPs entirely. The fairest cost comparison is that of a
> particular retailer's regular prices.
No, it isn't, since a retailer can get "perks" for selling a brand, or
might never get the latest stuff, but always gets closeouts (this isn't
as uncommon as you think now that you see 2-3 cycles of "new" from each
manufacturer each year).
> > and you'll see that when those RCA units hit the same
> > "closeout deal" you got,
>
> Who said anything about a "closeout deal"? The regular price is
> $449.99, the special sale price was $427.49, I had a coupon redeemable
> for a 10% discount on any TV or TV monitor costing $399 or more, and
> I'm receiving $12.69 in rebates from FatWallet.com.
That's pretty much a "closeout deal"...i.e., a very special set of
circumstances that lowered the cost of the set by nearly 10%. Best Buy
thinks that 10% off is a *very* big deal on anything but true closeouts.
> And again, I specifically wanted this particular Samsung model. I
> don't know how the aforementioned RCA model compares, because I've
> been unable to locate it on any website (including RCA.com).
Although the RCA website isn't the easiest to navigate, I found it
quite easily (I knew exactly as much as you did when I looked, which was
that it was 27" with an ATSC tuner):
http://tv.rca.com/en-US/ModelDetail.html?MN=27F634T&nav=BySize&PC=BySizeMedium
I guess I was wrong about the MSRP, though...it's $459. You *know* that
it won't sell for more than that, so it's basically the same as your set,
yet has a free ATSC tuner.
--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/SlowInternet.jpg
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|