I haven't had the problem either. But you must have a DVI computer port on the Tv. This shows one of the major imitations of HDMI.
It's not a technological limitation, it's an implementation issue. Television commonly uses overscan (still does as a matter of fact, although the reasons for that are somewhat dated in a digital age). The television's had both HDMI and DVI. They all exhibit the same overscan behavior. They are first and foremost TV's and designed for that media. Even the set that I have with a VGA connector, which is a PC only connector, can't even put a full screen output without huge borders or overscan. They simply aren't designed first and foremost for a PC output.
It's encouraging to hear that the issue may be fading, but it's certainly not a standard or a thing of the past.
It's not a technological limitation, it's an implementation issue. Television commonly uses overscan (still does as a matter of fact, although the reasons for that are somewhat dated in a digital age). The television's had both HDMI and DVI. They all exhibit the same overscan behavior. They are first and foremost TV's and designed for that media. Even the set that I have with a VGA connector, which is a PC only connector, can't even put a full screen output without huge borders or overscan. They simply aren't designed first and foremost for a PC output.
It's encouraging to hear that the issue may be fading, but it's certainly not a standard or a thing of the past.
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
I think this is typical: You have been bashed throughout 120 posts, and you consider that a "hint".
That's really an understatement. How much more direct can the anti-teckstud posts be?
Nobody should be bashing him, merely debating him. If anyone's bashing him, the mods should step in and keep in check before things look like a youtube comments page.
Honestly, how does bashing someone win an argument?
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
I hooked my computer up to my parent's 52" samsung and played cod4. It. was. BEAUTIFUL. I can only imagine 61 freakin inches!
Nobody should be bashing him, merely debating him. If anyone's bashing him, the mods should step in and keep in check before things look like a youtube comments page.
Honestly, how does bashing someone win an argument?
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
You do realize that HDMI is just DVI with additional copy protection and audio? They are the same interface, same signals. HDMI supports audio, but the video piece is pretty much identical other than the physical connectors.
I hooked my computer up to my parent's 52" samsung and played cod4. It. was. BEAUTIFUL. I can only imagine 61 freakin inches!
Yeah. But unfortunately, we sit almost 14 feet away, so that even that size results in our not seeing 1080p, but more like 700p. We'd need a 103" diag screen to see 1080p at that distance.
Yeah. But unfortunately, we sit almost 14 feet away, so that even that size results in our not seeing 1080p, but more like 700p. We'd need a 103" diag screen to see 1080p at that distance.
Actually, for 14 feet, 52 inches would be fine. It's on the low side, but perfectly acceptable.
You do realize that HDMI is just DVI with additional copy protection and audio? They are the same interface, same signals. HDMI supports audio, but the video piece is pretty much identical other than the physical connectors.
DVI can have the same copy protection HDMI does, and often does. HDCD is available on both.
My Tv's have had their DVI inputs labeled as "computer input", and indeed they were. No overscan. As has been said, it's implementation.
These companies have designed the interface to see a computer non overscanned signal, and project it so.
Actually, for 14 feet, 52 inches would be fine. It's on the low side, but perfectly acceptable.
Not for 1080p. For that at 14 feet, you need that 100" screen. At 14 feet, the best you can do is a bit under 700p with a 61" screen. You can barely see better than 480p with a 52 at that distance.
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there..
As I said, the signaling is the same. You seem to be implying that they are fundamentally different. They are in fact the same. I agree it's all about implementation, but stating that an HDTV is basically a computer display is false. I can guarantee a computer display will display edge to edge properly hooked up to a computer. The same cannot be said for a TV.
Not for 1080p. For that at 14 feet, you need that 100" screen. At 14 feet, the best you can do is a bit under 700p with a 61" screen. You can barely see better than 480p with a 52 at that distance.
Wrong. There are minimum and maximum suggested screen sizes. For 14', they range from 50" on the minimum side, to 112" on the MAX side.
They might fudge an inch or 3 between the various guides, but they are all essentially the same. You do not need a 100+ inch TV for a 14 foot viewing distance.
As I said, the signaling is the same. You seem to be implying that they are fundamentally different. They are in fact the same. I agree it's all about implementation, but stating that an HDTV is basically a computer display is false. I can guarantee a computer display will display edge to edge properly hooked up to a computer. The same cannot be said for a TV.
Where did I say that an HDTV is basically a computer display? I said the opposite.
But, a large number of Tvs do have DVI ports labeled as computer in. That doesn't mean that the Tv is MAINLY a computer monitor. And ALL Tvs I've ever used that had a port with at label, DIDN'T overscan. Even my Sony broadcast monitors have a DVI port labeled for computer use. They don't overscan through that port either.
They also have a switch on the rear that turns overscan off for Tv signals. It's a small matter for the Tv to have this as part of the DVI computer input.
Where did I say that an HDTV is basically a computer display? I said the opposite.
But, a large number of Tvs do have DVI ports labeled as computer in. That doesn't mean that the Tv is MAINLY a computer monitor. And ALL Tvs I've ever used that had a port with at label, DIDN'T overscan. Even my Sony broadcast monitors have a DVI port labeled for computer use. They don't overscan through that port either.
They also have a switch on the rear that turns overscan off for Tv signals. It's a small matter for the Tv to have this as part of the DVI computer input.
It was actually Techstud, however you seemed to be arguing the same case. I should have clarified that.
They might fudge an inch or 3 between the various guides, but they are all essentially the same. You do not need a 100+ inch TV for a 14 foot viewing distance.
Those are almost useless. They don't mention resolution at all. They tell you nothing.
Go here, and move down to the two charts for viewing distance and explanations. These charts are worked up from the known acuity restraints of the normal human eye.
I didn't really have to look at the specs, but thanks. Apple despises cable clutter so I'm sure they wouldn't have intentionally gone with a cable standard (mDP) that wasn't capable of audio.
It's in there somewhere. Just like the space being reserved for the camera in the iPod Touch, it will come. The problem is_ It's hell waiting for these things to happen.
I didn't really have to look at the specs, but thanks. Apple despises cable clutter so I'm sure they wouldn't have intentionally gone with a cable standard (mDP) that wasn't capable of audio.
It's in there somewhere. Just like the space being reserved for the camera in the iPod Touch, it will come. The problem is_ It's hell waiting for these things to happen.
Oddly enough, none of the Apple products currently implement the audio standard, but I'm sure they'll get around to it in the next few years if the DisplayPort gets it's legs.
Comments
I haven't had the problem either. But you must have a DVI computer port on the Tv. This shows one of the major imitations of HDMI.
It's not a technological limitation, it's an implementation issue. Television commonly uses overscan (still does as a matter of fact, although the reasons for that are somewhat dated in a digital age). The television's had both HDMI and DVI. They all exhibit the same overscan behavior. They are first and foremost TV's and designed for that media. Even the set that I have with a VGA connector, which is a PC only connector, can't even put a full screen output without huge borders or overscan. They simply aren't designed first and foremost for a PC output.
It's encouraging to hear that the issue may be fading, but it's certainly not a standard or a thing of the past.
ok- i get the hint
mangia time anyway
I think this is typical: You have been bashed throughout 120 posts, and you consider that a "hint".
That's really an understatement. How much more direct can the anti-teckstud posts be?
It's not a technological limitation, it's an implementation issue. Television commonly uses overscan (still does as a matter of fact, although the reasons for that are somewhat dated in a digital age). The television's had both HDMI and DVI. They all exhibit the same overscan behavior. They are first and foremost TV's and designed for that media. Even the set that I have with a VGA connector, which is a PC only connector, can't even put a full screen output without huge borders or overscan. They simply aren't designed first and foremost for a PC output.
It's encouraging to hear that the issue may be fading, but it's certainly not a standard or a thing of the past.
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
I think this is typical: You have been bashed throughout 120 posts, and you consider that a "hint".
That's really an understatement. How much more direct can the anti-teckstud posts be?
Nobody should be bashing him, merely debating him. If anyone's bashing him, the mods should step in and keep in check before things look like a youtube comments page.
Honestly, how does bashing someone win an argument?
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
I hooked my computer up to my parent's 52" samsung and played cod4. It. was. BEAUTIFUL. I can only imagine 61 freakin inches!
Nobody should be bashing him, merely debating him. If anyone's bashing him, the mods should step in and keep in check before things look like a youtube comments page.
Honestly, how does bashing someone win an argument?
Sometimes he goes overboard with his "arguments".
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there.
You do realize that HDMI is just DVI with additional copy protection and audio? They are the same interface, same signals. HDMI supports audio, but the video piece is pretty much identical other than the physical connectors.
I hooked my computer up to my parent's 52" samsung and played cod4. It. was. BEAUTIFUL. I can only imagine 61 freakin inches!
Yeah. But unfortunately, we sit almost 14 feet away, so that even that size results in our not seeing 1080p, but more like 700p. We'd need a 103" diag screen to see 1080p at that distance.
Yeah. But unfortunately, we sit almost 14 feet away, so that even that size results in our not seeing 1080p, but more like 700p. We'd need a 103" diag screen to see 1080p at that distance.
Actually, for 14 feet, 52 inches would be fine. It's on the low side, but perfectly acceptable.
You do realize that HDMI is just DVI with additional copy protection and audio? They are the same interface, same signals. HDMI supports audio, but the video piece is pretty much identical other than the physical connectors.
DVI can have the same copy protection HDMI does, and often does. HDCD is available on both.
My Tv's have had their DVI inputs labeled as "computer input", and indeed they were. No overscan. As has been said, it's implementation.
These companies have designed the interface to see a computer non overscanned signal, and project it so.
Actually, for 14 feet, 52 inches would be fine. It's on the low side, but perfectly acceptable.
Not for 1080p. For that at 14 feet, you need that 100" screen. At 14 feet, the best you can do is a bit under 700p with a 61" screen. You can barely see better than 480p with a 52 at that distance.
Actually, for 14 feet, 52 inches would be fine. It's on the low side, but perfectly acceptable.
I understand this is completely off topic, but I play Uncharted 2 on my 52" HDTV from about 5 feet away. Blows my mind
It's very interesting why they do what they do. I'm very familiar with it.
But, on the other hand, I've had three different Tv's with HDMI and computer DVI ports. All of them overscanned my computer media, but none of the DVI inputs did.
I have friends who use their Tv's for their audio systems as a monitor, and none overscan.
My latest is a Samsung 61", ans the same is true there..
As I said, the signaling is the same. You seem to be implying that they are fundamentally different. They are in fact the same. I agree it's all about implementation, but stating that an HDTV is basically a computer display is false. I can guarantee a computer display will display edge to edge properly hooked up to a computer. The same cannot be said for a TV.
Not for 1080p. For that at 14 feet, you need that 100" screen. At 14 feet, the best you can do is a bit under 700p with a 61" screen. You can barely see better than 480p with a 52 at that distance.
Wrong. There are minimum and maximum suggested screen sizes. For 14', they range from 50" on the minimum side, to 112" on the MAX side.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.htm...cId=1000021501
http://www.cnet.com/hdtv-viewing-distance/
They might fudge an inch or 3 between the various guides, but they are all essentially the same. You do not need a 100+ inch TV for a 14 foot viewing distance.
As I said, the signaling is the same. You seem to be implying that they are fundamentally different. They are in fact the same. I agree it's all about implementation, but stating that an HDTV is basically a computer display is false. I can guarantee a computer display will display edge to edge properly hooked up to a computer. The same cannot be said for a TV.
Where did I say that an HDTV is basically a computer display? I said the opposite.
But, a large number of Tvs do have DVI ports labeled as computer in. That doesn't mean that the Tv is MAINLY a computer monitor. And ALL Tvs I've ever used that had a port with at label, DIDN'T overscan. Even my Sony broadcast monitors have a DVI port labeled for computer use. They don't overscan through that port either.
They also have a switch on the rear that turns overscan off for Tv signals. It's a small matter for the Tv to have this as part of the DVI computer input.
Where did I say that an HDTV is basically a computer display? I said the opposite.
But, a large number of Tvs do have DVI ports labeled as computer in. That doesn't mean that the Tv is MAINLY a computer monitor. And ALL Tvs I've ever used that had a port with at label, DIDN'T overscan. Even my Sony broadcast monitors have a DVI port labeled for computer use. They don't overscan through that port either.
They also have a switch on the rear that turns overscan off for Tv signals. It's a small matter for the Tv to have this as part of the DVI computer input.
It was actually Techstud, however you seemed to be arguing the same case. I should have clarified that.
Wrong. There are minimum and maximum suggested screen sizes. For 14', they range from 50" on the minimum side, to 112" on the MAX side.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.htm...cId=1000021501
http://www.cnet.com/hdtv-viewing-distance/
They might fudge an inch or 3 between the various guides, but they are all essentially the same. You do not need a 100+ inch TV for a 14 foot viewing distance.
Those are almost useless. They don't mention resolution at all. They tell you nothing.
Go here, and move down to the two charts for viewing distance and explanations. These charts are worked up from the known acuity restraints of the normal human eye.
http://carltonbale.com/?s=chart&x=0&y=0
For those that are curious, DisplayPort supports audio as part of it's standard. it's optional, but it's there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort
I didn't really have to look at the specs, but thanks. Apple despises cable clutter so I'm sure they wouldn't have intentionally gone with a cable standard (mDP) that wasn't capable of audio.
It's in there somewhere. Just like the space being reserved for the camera in the iPod Touch, it will come. The problem is_ It's hell waiting for these things to happen.
Audio needs to be changed to mandatory, IMHO.
+ I second that
I didn't really have to look at the specs, but thanks. Apple despises cable clutter so I'm sure they wouldn't have intentionally gone with a cable standard (mDP) that wasn't capable of audio.
It's in there somewhere. Just like the space being reserved for the camera in the iPod Touch, it will come. The problem is_ It's hell waiting for these things to happen.
Oddly enough, none of the Apple products currently implement the audio standard, but I'm sure they'll get around to it in the next few years if the DisplayPort gets it's legs.