HDTV as a Monitor?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

I recently built a media server to hook into my network. I want to use
my existing bigscreen HDTV as the monitor. I got an ATI all-In-Wonder
9600 and an adaptor to give it component video output.

So far, I'm frustrated and disappointed, and am looking for suggestions.

My TV doesn't do 720p. So I can either use 480p or 480i, or I can use
1080i.

None of them seem very satisfactory. 1080i is only at an interlaced 30
Hz refresh rate, and 480 is just so goddamned VGA I can't stand it. I
can't even read a website without having to scroll all over the place.

And am I correct that the standard HDTV formats, 480p and 1080i, are both
widescreen formats exclusively? My TV is a 4:3, so the picture is shrunk
with letterboxing when I use either of these, making the 480p picture
very small.

I can sometimes get fullscreen images, but I'm not at all clear on why or
when that is the case. It has gotten very confusing. I seem to not be
able to get fullscreen 1080i. It seems like no matter what I try, it is
always letterboxed.

I need some help and suggestions. My fantasy was to use the big screen
for some gaming, and for photoshop stuff. But with a 640x480 resolution?


Is my best bet to use S-Video instead of Component video, given that I
can get a higher resolution? Or will it be possible for me to configure
it to have a decent resolution using the component video adaptor?

And what will happen when I try to play games at various resolutions?
Will I be unable to get the TV to sync at anything except 480 or 1080?

Anybody been successful at getting an HDTV to work well as a monitor at
high resolution?

--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> I recently built a media server to hook into my network. I want to use
> my existing bigscreen HDTV as the monitor. I got an ATI all-In-Wonder
> 9600 and an adaptor to give it component video output.
>
> So far, I'm frustrated and disappointed, and am looking for suggestions.
>
> My TV doesn't do 720p. So I can either use 480p or 480i, or I can use
> 1080i.
>
> None of them seem very satisfactory. 1080i is only at an interlaced 30
> Hz refresh rate, and 480 is just so goddamned VGA I can't stand it. I
> can't even read a website without having to scroll all over the place.
>
> And am I correct that the standard HDTV formats, 480p and 1080i, are both
> widescreen formats exclusively? My TV is a 4:3, so the picture is shrunk
> with letterboxing when I use either of these, making the 480p picture
> very small.
>
> I can sometimes get fullscreen images, but I'm not at all clear on why or
> when that is the case. It has gotten very confusing. I seem to not be
> able to get fullscreen 1080i. It seems like no matter what I try, it is
> always letterboxed.
>
> I need some help and suggestions. My fantasy was to use the big screen
> for some gaming, and for photoshop stuff. But with a 640x480 resolution?
>
>
> Is my best bet to use S-Video instead of Component video, given that I
> can get a higher resolution? Or will it be possible for me to configure
> it to have a decent resolution using the component video adaptor?
>
> And what will happen when I try to play games at various resolutions?
> Will I be unable to get the TV to sync at anything except 480 or 1080?
>
> Anybody been successful at getting an HDTV to work well as a monitor at
> high resolution?
>

http://support.gateway.com/s/CsmrEltrncs/DigitalTV/Shared/2517984faq42.shtml
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
> I recently built a media server to hook into my network. I want to use
> my existing bigscreen HDTV as the monitor. I got an ATI all-In-Wonder
> 9600 and an adaptor to give it component video output.
>
> So far, I'm frustrated and disappointed, and am looking for suggestions.
>
> My TV doesn't do 720p. So I can either use 480p or 480i, or I can use
> 1080i.
>
> None of them seem very satisfactory. 1080i is only at an interlaced 30
> Hz refresh rate, and 480 is just so goddamned VGA I can't stand it. I
> can't even read a website without having to scroll all over the place.
>
> And am I correct that the standard HDTV formats, 480p and 1080i, are both
> widescreen formats exclusively? My TV is a 4:3, so the picture is shrunk
> with letterboxing when I use either of these, making the 480p picture
> very small.
>
> I can sometimes get fullscreen images, but I'm not at all clear on why or
> when that is the case. It has gotten very confusing. I seem to not be
> able to get fullscreen 1080i. It seems like no matter what I try, it is
> always letterboxed.
>
> I need some help and suggestions. My fantasy was to use the big screen
> for some gaming, and for photoshop stuff. But with a 640x480 resolution?
>
>
> Is my best bet to use S-Video instead of Component video, given that I
> can get a higher resolution? Or will it be possible for me to configure
> it to have a decent resolution using the component video adaptor?
>
> And what will happen when I try to play games at various resolutions?
> Will I be unable to get the TV to sync at anything except 480 or 1080?
>
> Anybody been successful at getting an HDTV to work well as a monitor at
> high resolution?
>
BEEG PROBLEMO???!!!

The HDTV spec. seems to be very differentin limbo, for Computer vs.
Television!!!

There seems to be two distinct different standards of wiring, and signal
levels, and, more!!!

So, the DVI out of a computer does NOT properly mate with, nor, support,
any DVI TV! And, it isn't just a matter of swapping out the pins in the
DVI cable!

The industry needs to get it sorted out, as we move into the arena of
integrated entertainment using computers. Ergo: FREEVO, Tivo (the
expensive clone of Open Source, Free, FREEVO), and, etc.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

T Shadow wrote:

> "David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
> news:10it2ui5mussjbb@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>
>>
>
> http://support.gateway.com/s/CsmrEltrncs/DigitalTV/Shared/2517984faq42.shtml
>
>
> Any idea how the same resolution(ie:480X704) can be both 16:9 and 4:3?
>
>

The pixels aren't square. No reason why they *have* to be and it's obvious
one can change the rate at which the data goes out on the horizontal line
without necessarily also increasing the scan rate.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, patrick <uce@ftc.gov> wrote:

> So, the DVI out of a computer does NOT properly mate with, nor, support,
> any DVI TV! And, it isn't just a matter of swapping out the pins in the
> DVI cable!

I understand. But that's not my problem, because I don't use a DVI
output.

I use a VGA-to-Component adaptor supplied by ATI.



> The industry needs to get it sorted out, as we move into the arena of
> integrated entertainment using computers. Ergo: FREEVO, Tivo (the
> expensive clone of Open Source, Free, FREEVO), and, etc.


--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

"David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:10iujusmtt5t114@corp.supernews.com...
> T Shadow wrote:
>
> > "David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
> > news:10it2ui5mussjbb@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >>EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
http://support.gateway.com/s/CsmrEltrncs/DigitalTV/Shared/2517984faq42.shtml
> >
> >
> > Any idea how the same resolution(ie:480X704) can be both 16:9 and 4:3?
> >
> >
>
> The pixels aren't square. No reason why they *have* to be and it's obvious
> one can change the rate at which the data goes out on the horizontal line
> without necessarily also increasing the scan rate.
>

Thanks for the info.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:

> > Got it. I suspected as much. I guess I should have been sceptical when
> > the guy at ATI told me how great it would be to use my HDTV as a monitor,
> > if I just upgraded my card.

> Well, it IS great, unless you expect more than what it is.

I haven't yet enable the PVR functions. Is that what is great?

Please let me know. I'm pretty disappointed, because it seems that it
isn't going to do much of anything as a computer. I won't be able to
surf the web or read my mail or even look at my photos (except at low
rez, which kind of defeats the purpose of having a huge monitor). And I
suspect that it will be suboptimal for playing games, too.

So what kind of great stuff do I do with a fuzzy, low rez 36 inch
monitor?


> > So as I see it, I have few choices. Give up on being able to read text,
> > unless I use 640 or 720x480, and scroll my ass off. Use the setup for a
> > PVR, which will not require anything more than 480 anyways. Use it to
> > feed digital sound into my receiver, and find the MP3 player with the
> > most compact controls, so they will fit easily onto the 640x480 screen.

> That's what I do, plus a monitor for 'real' reading because I don't have an
> HDTV to begin with.

OK. Fair enough.

> >
> > Give up on the HDTV adaptor, and see if ATI will accept a return. Use the
> > S-Video output to the HDTV, and use a second (real) monitor for things
> > that require me to actually see what the heck I'm doing. (I can set the
> > resolution for S-Video and VGA seperately with this card, and I can use
> > both at once).

> I spoke too soon. Yeah, as I said, that's what I do.

OK. Looks like I need a "real" monitor in addition to the big screen. I
just wish I had known that before I got started.


--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>Got it. I suspected as much. I guess I should have been sceptical when
>>>the guy at ATI told me how great it would be to use my HDTV as a monitor,
>>>if I just upgraded my card.
>
>
>>Well, it IS great, unless you expect more than what it is.
>
>
> I haven't yet enable the PVR functions. Is that what is great?

Well, part of it. We're talking a HTPC here, or at least I am.

> Please let me know. I'm pretty disappointed, because it seems that it
> isn't going to do much of anything as a computer. I won't be able to
> surf the web or read my mail or even look at my photos (except at low
> rez, which kind of defeats the purpose of having a huge monitor).

Why aren't you using 1080i?

Now, if I remember correctly, there are some HDTVs that have an 800x600
'monitor mode'.

> And I
> suspect that it will be suboptimal for playing games, too.
>
> So what kind of great stuff do I do with a fuzzy, low rez 36 inch
> monitor?

HTPC, if you're not going to use 1080i.

>>>So as I see it, I have few choices. Give up on being able to read text,
>>>unless I use 640 or 720x480, and scroll my ass off. Use the setup for a
>>>PVR, which will not require anything more than 480 anyways. Use it to
>>>feed digital sound into my receiver, and find the MP3 player with the
>>>most compact controls, so they will fit easily onto the 640x480 screen.
>
>
>>That's what I do, plus a monitor for 'real' reading because I don't have an
>>HDTV to begin with.
>
>
> OK. Fair enough.
>
>
>>>Give up on the HDTV adaptor, and see if ATI will accept a return. Use the
>>>S-Video output to the HDTV, and use a second (real) monitor for things
>>>that require me to actually see what the heck I'm doing. (I can set the
>>>resolution for S-Video and VGA seperately with this card, and I can use
>>>both at once).
>
>
>>I spoke too soon. Yeah, as I said, that's what I do.
>
>
> OK. Looks like I need a "real" monitor in addition to the big screen. I
> just wish I had known that before I got started.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:

> Why aren't you using 1080i?

I tried it, and it is letterboxed. So even though the resolution is
greater, the height of the picture is much smaller, and as a consequence,
it is no more legible. Combine that with the 30 Hz refresh rate, and it
didn't seem optimum.

At least at 640x480p, the text is legible.

--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Why aren't you using 1080i?
>
>
> I tried it, and it is letterboxed.

No other way to shove a 16:9 picture onto a 4:3 screen and you'd be in a
heck of a worse pickle if they just chopped off the two ends, as is done
with 'wide screen' movies 'reformatted' for TV.

> So even though the resolution is
> greater, the height of the picture is much smaller, and as a consequence,
> it is no more legible.

You're mixing two things here. At the lower resolution you can't GET that
much on a line so 'legible' is moot. It's not there at all.

When you say 'not legible' do you mean you can't read if no matter how
close you get to the screen or do you mean the characters aren't big enough
to read when you're sitting 4 feet away on the couch?

> Combine that with the 30 Hz refresh rate, and it
> didn't seem optimum.

That 30Hz is the frame rate and all the 'TV' modes are 30 fps with some new
24 fps rates to show movies in 'native' mode.

>
> At least at 640x480p, the text is legible.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
> EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> > In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Why aren't you using 1080i?
> >
> >
> > I tried it, and it is letterboxed.

> No other way to shove a 16:9 picture onto a 4:3 screen and you'd be in a
> heck of a worse pickle if they just chopped off the two ends, as is done
> with 'wide screen' movies 'reformatted' for TV.

Yep. So I figured. But that's the reason why I don't use 1080i.


> > So even though the resolution is
> > greater, the height of the picture is much smaller, and as a consequence,
> > it is no more legible.

> You're mixing two things here. At the lower resolution you can't GET that
> much on a line so 'legible' is moot. It's not there at all.

> When you say 'not legible' do you mean you can't read if no matter how
> close you get to the screen or do you mean the characters aren't big enough
> to read when you're sitting 4 feet away on the couch?

I mean that I can't read it from the couch. And the 30 Hz interlaced
refresh makes horizontal lines dance...



--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
>
>>EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>
>
>>>In alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt, David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why aren't you using 1080i?
>>>
>>>
>>>I tried it, and it is letterboxed.
>
>
>>No other way to shove a 16:9 picture onto a 4:3 screen and you'd be in a
>>heck of a worse pickle if they just chopped off the two ends, as is done
>>with 'wide screen' movies 'reformatted' for TV.
>
>
> Yep. So I figured. But that's the reason why I don't use 1080i.
>
>
>
>>> So even though the resolution is
>>>greater, the height of the picture is much smaller, and as a consequence,
>>>it is no more legible.
>
>
>>You're mixing two things here. At the lower resolution you can't GET that
>>much on a line so 'legible' is moot. It's not there at all.
>
>
>>When you say 'not legible' do you mean you can't read if no matter how
>>close you get to the screen or do you mean the characters aren't big enough
>>to read when you're sitting 4 feet away on the couch?
>
>
> I mean that I can't read it from the couch. And the 30 Hz interlaced
> refresh makes horizontal lines dance...

That's 30 *frames* per second.

Interlace will do that if it's not right spot on. Doesn't matter for
'moving pictures', though, which is the purpose.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

personaly im going to go with a rear LCD DLP rear projector when i can
aford it there really only a few draw backs and it more bang for
your buck than HDTV Set and I know it Pc compatible.

==============
Posted through www.HowToFixComputers.com/bb - free access to hardware troubleshooting newsgroups.
 

TRENDING THREADS