Why do new televisions have a rectangle screen?

[Fleet]

I am curious as to why new televisions have a rectangle screen. I am talking about the flat-screen TVs.

I have a regular TV which is about 7 years old and it has a square viewing screen. I don't know if I could get used to a rectangle screen. What is the purpose of it?

[AKA]

Progress.

http://www.audioholics.com/education...part-i-history

[LUNCH]

They have a rectangular screen because the picture on high definition programs is wider and fits the screen of flatscreen TVs.--The only problem is the older TV shows (programs made 10-15+ years ago) were not filmed in high definition and were not made for those newer TVs and in my opinion(perhaps I'm in the minority here) -look better on regular TVs.Personally I still prefer CRT TVs or in other words the regular TV sets.

[tiredmike59]

I once had an antique tv set from the 40s that had a round screen. The thing was heavy even though the screen was only about 6 inches.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by tiredmike59

I once had an antique tv set from the 40s that had a round screen. The thing was heavy even though the screen was only about 6 inches.

Yes, the old TVs were heavy!

[AKA]

Fleet, if you don't already have one, I'd advise you to get a nice antenna. Depending on your location, you should be able to get plenty of crystal-clear HD channels free via good, old-fashioned rabbit ears or a roof antenna. If you don't live in a good signal area, you can subscribe to HD service from your cable/satellite company, usually at an extra charge. Standard-definition to high-definition really is as big a difference in quality as color was to black and white.

AntennaWeb is a good resource for finding out what over-the-air channels are available from your home.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by Brad

Fleet, if you don't already have one, I'd advise you to get a nice antenna. Depending on your location, you should be able to get plenty of crystal-clear HD channels free via good, old-fashioned rabbit ears or a roof antenna. If you don't live in a good signal area, you can subscribe to HD service from your cable/satellite company, usually at an extra charge. Standard-definition to high-definition really is as big a difference in quality as color was to black and white.

AntennaWeb is a good resource for finding out what over-the-air channels are available from your home.

I have cable. Standard cable. I can always call the company and ask about HD.

[robyrob]

i've tried 3 different antennas and at least 2 different digital boxes, and we can't get more than 2 or 3 local channels.

my theory on the rectangular screen is marketing;they need to change what is working perfectly fine every so often to force you to buy new stuff.

...next they will tell us that an oblate rhomboid is ABSOLUTELY necessary for the next-generation 3D-HD TV's

[AKA]

Originally Posted by Fleet

I have cable. Standard cable. I can always call the company and ask about HD.

Even if you choose not to subscribe to HD service, you can still decide to get an antenna so you can watch ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox; etc. in HD. I know a few people who subscribe to cable or satellite, but still receive their local stations over the air.

Originally Posted by robyrob

i've tried 3 different antennas and at least 2 different digital boxes, and we can't get more than 2 or 3 local channels.

Yeah, I live in a small town that relies on out-of-town signals and translators. Even with a roof antenna, I can only reliably get two stations. One drawback to digital television is that you either receive the signal or you don't. There's no such thing as a "fuzzy" picture anymore; only crystal-clear or no picture at all.

Originally Posted by robyrob

my theory on the rectangular screen is marketing;they need to change what is working perfectly fine every so often to force you to buy new stuff.

The "rectangular" screen is hardly new, though. The move to 16x9 HDTV has been in the works since the 1980s (after a few false starts the preceding decades), and HD sets have been on the market for about 15 years.

And widescreen just makes more sense than the old analog 4x3 standard: it more closely mimics our own field of vision, and catches television up with the film industry, which has mostly produced their product in one widescreen format or another since 1954.

I'm kind of surprised that you don't seem to be a fan of HD technology.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by Brad

The "rectangular" screen is hardly new, though. The move to 16x9 HDTV has been in the works since the 1980s (after a few false starts the preceding decades), and HD sets have been on the market for about 15 years.

And widescreen just makes more sense than the old analog 4x3 standard: it more closely mimics our own field of vision, and catches television up with the film industry, which has mostly produced their product in one widescreen format or another since 1954.

I'm kind of surprised that you don't seem to be a fan of HD technology.

Perhaps TV manufacturers changed to rectangular so they would look more like the screens at movie theaters?

It would give people the impression that they have a theater-type screen at their own homes?

[robyrob]

Originally Posted by Brad

I'm kind of surprised that you don't seem to be a fan of HD technology.

really? I've tried my best to come across as a grumpy old crank whenever new-fangled gizmos are bandied about...

I don't have a problem with HD technology per se, but the way they've implemented it with multiple hardware standards, no singular standard resolution for digital transmission, and the way that basically everything they have done benefits the big companies like Sony at the expense of consumers.

[AKA]

Originally Posted by Fleet

Perhaps TV manufacturers changed to rectangular so they would look more like the screens at movie theaters?

It would give people the impression that they have a theater-type screen at their own homes?

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. And really, if you think about it, going wide is an evolutionary step from the old square ratio for reasons I mentioned above.

Originally Posted by robyrob

really? I've tried my best to come across as a grumpy old crank whenever new-fangled gizmos are bandied about...

That's true. I just thought you'd be on board with HDTVs for some reason. Maybe it's because of the fact that your a TV fan and your reputation as the computer fix-it guy.

Originally Posted by robyrob

I don't have a problem with HD technology per se, but the way they've implemented it with multiple hardware standards, no singular standard resolution for digital transmission, and the way that basically everything they have done benefits the big companies like Sony at the expense of consumers.

I do agree that they should have done a better job coming up with a broadcasting standard. The fact that some channels broadcast in 720p and most others in 1080i bothers me, and annoys me when I flip around and my TV has to switch resolution between channels.

Still, I'm happy with the change. I'm a big fan of high-definition and rarely watch SD channels anymore.

[Fleet]

I am still researching TVs. May go with a Samsung.

I found something strange... amazon.com has a 37" Samsung LCD TV for $497 and a 40" for $477. Why would the smaller one cost less?

[LUNCH]

Maybe the smaller one is a newer and UN-improved model,it's anybodys guess.--Unless you are really interested in high definition,which if you ask me is over-rated,if your regular TV still works well,why look for a new TV.

[AKA]

Originally Posted by LUNCH

Maybe the smaller one is a newer and UN-improved model,it's anybodys guess.--Unless you are really interested in high definition,which if you ask me is over-rated,if your regular TV still works well,why look for a new TV.

You do realize you're in the minority, right? You're the technological equivalent of a cranky old man yelling out the window at the damned kids on his lawn.