«

I've been waiting to be able to hook up a PC / disk drive with
pictures/video on it to watch on TV.
It seems that that day it just about here, and getting fine tuned, but I'm
now overwhelmed with ... where is it heading and what is a passing/already
outdated "fad" and could use some help.

First let me say, I'm NOT your 'typical guy' who wants a 72" TV in the
living room hooked up to a $3000 audio system. Not at all. I'm looking for
merely what I NEED to be able to view PC stuff ( jpeg's mpeg ,
QuickTime,Windows media formats) on a TV / maybe record a program on a new
DVR/VHS combo ( so I can copy old tapes to DVD).
As it is I have a ~3 yr old 27" full screen TV in a bookcase and works
great, BUT it has only coax and RGB RCA jacks and no connections for newer
devices ( HDMI etc)
If I were to go with another TV that 'fits in the space', and has the newer
jacks since now they are all widescreen, I'm obviously gonna end up with a
smaller visible screen than I have now ( same width but less height). That's
why I haven't gotten a new one. But with digital broadcasting I'm now not
getting all of the cable channels since some only broadcast in digital. So
, what of these connections is a MUST have ? (from a flexibility
standpoint - able to hook up different devices) and which are a waste ? (
HDMI, VGA, USB, SD memory, S-video,etc)

I looked at a few today and it seems all have HDMI but only some others have
other connections. None of my current stuff ( receiver, DVD, etc has HDMI so
a new TV with ONLY HDMI is useless to me. The way the TV's are packaged, ,
might I have to get the bigger screen TV to get connectors other than HDMI.
in which case then I'd have to rearrange the living room get new furniture,
toss the old stuff etc and I REALLY don't want to do that.

What to get, what to ignore etc and could use some pointers ... places
online to get educated . Any opinions, ideas ? Thanks

On 26/06/2010 3:02 AM, - Bobb - wrote:
> I've been waiting to be able to hook up a PC / disk drive with
> pictures/video on it to watch on TV.
> It seems that that day it just about here, and getting fine tuned, but I'm
> now overwhelmed with ... where is it heading and what is a passing/already
> outdated "fad" and could use some help.
>
> First let me say, I'm NOT your 'typical guy' who wants a 72" TV in the
> living room hooked up to a $3000 audio system. Not at all. I'm looking for
> merely what I NEED to be able to view PC stuff ( jpeg's mpeg ,
> QuickTime,Windows media formats) on a TV / maybe record a program on a new
> DVR/VHS combo ( so I can copy old tapes to DVD).
> As it is I have a ~3 yr old 27" full screen TV in a bookcase and works
> great, BUT it has only coax and RGB RCA jacks and no connections for newer
> devices ( HDMI etc)
> If I were to go with another TV that 'fits in the space', and has the newer
> jacks since now they are all widescreen, I'm obviously gonna end up with a
> smaller visible screen than I have now ( same width but less height). That's
> why I haven't gotten a new one. But with digital broadcasting I'm now not
> getting all of the cable channels since some only broadcast in digital. So
> , what of these connections is a MUST have ? (from a flexibility
> standpoint - able to hook up different devices) and which are a waste ? (
> HDMI, VGA, USB, SD memory, S-video,etc)
>
> I looked at a few today and it seems all have HDMI but only some others have
> other connections. None of my current stuff ( receiver, DVD, etc has HDMI so
> a new TV with ONLY HDMI is useless to me. The way the TV's are packaged, ,
> might I have to get the bigger screen TV to get connectors other than HDMI.
> in which case then I'd have to rearrange the living room get new furniture,
> toss the old stuff etc and I REALLY don't want to do that.
>
> What to get, what to ignore etc and could use some pointers ... places
> online to get educated . Any opinions, ideas ? Thanks
>
>

Hi bob

As far as must have connectors all you really need is HDMI even a cheap
GFX card like the HD4350 ($29 USD) comes with HDMI,the benefit of doing
this is that both the video and sound (7.1 sound on the GFX card) are
sent across the cable and you do not need to use separate speakers this
way, if you want to use an older GFX card SVGA/D-SUB connectors are a
must then you ether have to use a separate stereo cable for sound to the
TV or use PC speakers.

As far as TV's and sizes go I quite like the Wide screen format as
opposed to the Old 4:3 format of TV's the usual comparison from a CRT to
a LCD/Plasma is that you get more screen for the same amount of inches
as a CRT screen, its just the casing is smaller on a LCD, its all
personal taste really.

I use a media centre PC that I built for the TV computer and a wireless
Keysonic keyboard (like a laptop keyboard with a mouse pad built in)
running win 7, which is an excellent choice for the MPC as it has media
centre etc built in, a dual tuner is also fitted for watching/recording
of TV

JD

"- Bobb -" <bobb@noemail.123> wrote in message
news:i03n47$s60$...
> I've been waiting to be able to hook up a PC / disk drive with
> pictures/video on it to watch on TV.
> It seems that that day it just about here, and getting fine tuned, but I'm
> now overwhelmed with ... where is it heading and what is a
> passing/already outdated "fad" and could use some help.
>
> First let me say, I'm NOT your 'typical guy' who wants a 72" TV in the
> living room hooked up to a $3000 audio system. Not at all. I'm looking for
> merely what I NEED to be able to view PC stuff ( jpeg's mpeg ,
> QuickTime,Windows media formats) on a TV / maybe record a program on a new
> DVR/VHS combo ( so I can copy old tapes to DVD).
> As it is I have a ~3 yr old 27" full screen TV in a bookcase and works
> great, BUT it has only coax and RGB RCA jacks and no connections for newer
> devices ( HDMI etc)
> If I were to go with another TV that 'fits in the space', and has the
> newer jacks since now they are all widescreen, I'm obviously gonna end up
> with a smaller visible screen than I have now ( same width but less
> height). That's why I haven't gotten a new one. But with digital
> broadcasting I'm now not getting all of the cable channels since some only
> broadcast in digital. So , what of these connections is a MUST have ?
> (from a flexibility standpoint - able to hook up different devices) and
> which are a waste ? ( HDMI, VGA, USB, SD memory, S-video,etc)
>
> I looked at a few today and it seems all have HDMI but only some others
> have other connections. None of my current stuff ( receiver, DVD, etc has
> HDMI so a new TV with ONLY HDMI is useless to me. The way the TV's are
> packaged, , might I have to get the bigger screen TV to get connectors
> other than HDMI. in which case then I'd have to rearrange the living room
> get new furniture, toss the old stuff etc and I REALLY don't want to do
> that.
>
> What to get, what to ignore etc and could use some pointers ... places
> online to get educated . Any opinions, ideas ? Thanks
>
>

You're mixing apples and oranges.

You have two things going on, the Delivery and the Presentation.

The delivery covers the stuff line PC-based TV, and Internet TV, which are
the same thing, by the way. Included in the delivery is cable, fiber, and
satellite.

The presentation is the TV itself.

If you get a new TV today, odds are very high that you must get a flat
panel, which is a wide screen (16:9) format. If you want to put a flat panel
into the same space as the existing 4:3 set you have now, then the
horizontal dimension will drive the maximum vertical dimension. But if you
wanted to hang your new TV on the wall, you can buy a bracket for about $150
that has a motorized control that tilts the screen so you are looking at it
straight on from your spot on the sofa, or your recliner.

The new TVs are high definition, which is a remarkable improvement in
picture quality.

The power consumption is also lower than a comparable sized TV from
yesteryear. And, if you can do the cost up to an LED-based TV, then the
power consumption will go down even more. Basically the new sets cost about
half what it costs for your existing TV to operate, and the LED TV will save
another 25% or so. And the picture is waaaay better. Way better.

The digital broadcast vs. the analog broadcast should be a wash because you
need the digital to analog converter to convert the current digital signals
to analog. If you plug the cable directly to the TV, then the selection
should not change and you can get rid of the converter box. If you get
cable, fiber or satellite, then you still need a Set Top Box that the new TV
can use, so the selection should not change.

If you have a converter box now, you won't need it with a Digital TV, but if
you have cable, fiber optic, or satellite then you will still need the same
set top box, so you won't see any change from what you have now compared to
what you'll have with a new TV, except the new TV will have a remarkably
better picture and lower operating costs.

All of the TV sets today come with RCA jacks for video and audio, S-Video
and HDMI. They also have Component Video, which is a video supply that is
better than RCA but not as good as HDMI. Your cable/fiber/satellite set top
box will have all three outputs on the back, your DVD should have RCA at a
minimum, and most of the curent models have HDMI also.

Do not hesitate to do some serious shopping. I'd suggest a visit to Best Buy
for no other reason than to see several different samples all showing the
same picture side by side. You can get a feel for the size and price points
that best suit your interests. Then shop Costco and WalMart for price on the
size and brand that you saw at Best Buy. The idea here is to get a relative
value and quality in a place where the picture and lighting is the same,
then see if you can beat the price at a store where they sell the same set
but don't always display them the same. Costco does a pretty good job
displaying the TVs they have, but Walmart does a generally crappy job of
this. But if you know the ACME 42-inch is the set for you because it looked
good at Best Buy, but WalMart sells it for $100 less but doesn't display it
well, who cares? You know it's a good set because you saw for more money at
another store, who cares if WalMart doesn't show it well, they sell it at
the best price, and that's all that matters.

Personally, I bought a 42" Vizio almost two years ago, and it's a very good
value for the money. The difference between a $700 Vizio and a $1200 Sony is
$500, if you ask me. I could not see the difference in picture quality, so I
bought the cheaper TV. It's worked out very well so far.

Wow - thanks for all the info Jeff.

I have been going to Best Buy, and others and did NOT find that:
"All of the TV sets today come with RCA jacks for video and audio, S-Video
and HDMI. They also have Component Video, which is a video supply that is
better than RCA but not as good as HDMI. "

One thing too - since I last bought a TV - all other electronic chains near
me have gone out of business.

and you're right - 2 issues: Delivery and the Presentation. That's why I
asked here.
I have a lot of older stuff that has only coax, RCA and most of the current
"small TVs" only have HDMI for example or 1 HDMI and one USB. I have basic
cable ( coax) and no real desire to get a $130 per month cable plan / no
real room for a 42 inch wall mounted .... I just want " a TV" hopefully that
fits into same space. I agree that proportions mean that at best I will have
same width and less height ( why I bought what I have just prior to 'all
widescreens".) and why I haven't yet bought a new TV - it's a downgrade for
me. But it's really connectivity driving this for me. I don't care for TV
too much but WOULD like to integrate pictures, video on PC with the TV in
the living room. So I could watch ... video from ... our trip to Vegas ...
Europe etc from the MCE PC without having to burn it to DVD. I tried WDTV
and it worked fine except for QuickTime movies ( last few cameras do MOV
video). IF WDTV did QT then I'd be fine. I talked to Apple rep ... they
don't support it either. He told me you just need to convert to H264 first.
I looked at him and said - "if I wanted to do that I don't need your box. I
could use the WDTV. You guys wrote QT, you really ought to recommend that
Apple TV work with it."

Also without cable, I saw DTV antennas with only coax and if newer TV's
don't support it ... how to get reception without cable ??
I'll keep looking
Thanks for feedback


"Jeff Strickland" <> wrote in message
news:i06qas$a8k$...
>
> "- Bobb -" <bobb@noemail.123> wrote in message
> news:i03n47$s60$...
>> I've been waiting to be able to hook up a PC / disk drive with
>> pictures/video on it to watch on TV.
>> It seems that that day it just about here, and getting fine tuned, but
>> I'm now overwhelmed with ... where is it heading and what is a
>> passing/already outdated "fad" and could use some help.
>>
>> First let me say, I'm NOT your 'typical guy' who wants a 72" TV in the
>> living room hooked up to a $3000 audio system. Not at all. I'm looking
>> for merely what I NEED to be able to view PC stuff ( jpeg's mpeg ,
>> QuickTime,Windows media formats) on a TV / maybe record a program on a
>> new DVR/VHS combo ( so I can copy old tapes to DVD).
>> As it is I have a ~3 yr old 27" full screen TV in a bookcase and works
>> great, BUT it has only coax and RGB RCA jacks and no connections for
>> newer devices ( HDMI etc)
>> If I were to go with another TV that 'fits in the space', and has the
>> newer jacks since now they are all widescreen, I'm obviously gonna end
>> up with a smaller visible screen than I have now ( same width but less
>> height). That's why I haven't gotten a new one. But with digital
>> broadcasting I'm now not getting all of the cable channels since some
>> only broadcast in digital. So , what of these connections is a MUST have
>> ? (from a flexibility standpoint - able to hook up different devices) and
>> which are a waste ? ( HDMI, VGA, USB, SD memory, S-video,etc)
>>
>> I looked at a few today and it seems all have HDMI but only some others
>> have other connections. None of my current stuff ( receiver, DVD, etc has
>> HDMI so a new TV with ONLY HDMI is useless to me. The way the TV's are
>> packaged, , might I have to get the bigger screen TV to get connectors
>> other than HDMI. in which case then I'd have to rearrange the living room
>> get new furniture, toss the old stuff etc and I REALLY don't want to do
>> that.
>>
>> What to get, what to ignore etc and could use some pointers ... places
>> online to get educated . Any opinions, ideas ? Thanks
>>
>>
>
> You're mixing apples and oranges.
>
> You have two things going on, the Delivery and the Presentation.
>
> The delivery covers the stuff line PC-based TV, and Internet TV, which are
> the same thing, by the way. Included in the delivery is cable, fiber, and
> satellite.
>
> The presentation is the TV itself.
>
> If you get a new TV today, odds are very high that you must get a flat
> panel, which is a wide screen (16:9) format. If you want to put a flat
> panel into the same space as the existing 4:3 set you have now, then the
> horizontal dimension will drive the maximum vertical dimension. But if you
> wanted to hang your new TV on the wall, you can buy a bracket for about
> $150 that has a motorized control that tilts the screen so you are looking
> at it straight on from your spot on the sofa, or your recliner.
>
> The new TVs are high definition, which is a remarkable improvement in
> picture quality.
>
> The power consumption is also lower than a comparable sized TV from
> yesteryear. And, if you can do the cost up to an LED-based TV, then the
> power consumption will go down even more. Basically the new sets cost
> about half what it costs for your existing TV to operate, and the LED TV
> will save another 25% or so. And the picture is waaaay better. Way better.
>
> The digital broadcast vs. the analog broadcast should be a wash because
> you need the digital to analog converter to convert the current digital
> signals to analog. If you plug the cable directly to the TV, then the
> selection should not change and you can get rid of the converter box. If
> you get cable, fiber or satellite, then you still need a Set Top Box that
> the new TV can use, so the selection should not change.
>
> If you have a converter box now, you won't need it with a Digital TV, but
> if you have cable, fiber optic, or satellite then you will still need the
> same set top box, so you won't see any change from what you have now
> compared to what you'll have with a new TV, except the new TV will have a
> remarkably better picture and lower operating costs.
>
> All of the TV sets today come with RCA jacks for video and audio, S-Video
> and HDMI. They also have Component Video, which is a video supply that is
> better than RCA but not as good as HDMI. Your cable/fiber/satellite set
> top box will have all three outputs on the back, your DVD should have RCA
> at a minimum, and most of the curent models have HDMI also.
>
> Do not hesitate to do some serious shopping. I'd suggest a visit to Best
> Buy for no other reason than to see several different samples all showing
> the same picture side by side. You can get a feel for the size and price
> points that best suit your interests. Then shop Costco and WalMart for
> price on the size and brand that you saw at Best Buy. The idea here is to
> get a relative value and quality in a place where the picture and lighting
> is the same, then see if you can beat the price at a store where they sell
> the same set but don't always display them the same. Costco does a pretty
> good job displaying the TVs they have, but Walmart does a generally crappy
> job of this. But if you know the ACME 42-inch is the set for you because
> it looked good at Best Buy, but WalMart sells it for $100 less but doesn't
> display it well, who cares? You know it's a good set because you saw for
> more money at another store, who cares if WalMart doesn't show it well,
> they sell it at the best price, and that's all that matters.
>
> Personally, I bought a 42" Vizio almost two years ago, and it's a very
> good value for the money. The difference between a $700 Vizio and a $1200
> Sony is $500, if you ask me. I could not see the difference in picture
> quality, so I bought the cheaper TV. It's worked out very well so far.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"- Bobb -" <bobb@noemail.123> wrote in message
news:i07rr3$19o$...
> Wow - thanks for all the info Jeff.
>
> I have been going to Best Buy, and others and did NOT find that:
> "All of the TV sets today come with RCA jacks for video and audio, S-Video
> and HDMI. They also have Component Video, which is a video supply that is
> better than RCA but not as good as HDMI. "
>
> One thing too - since I last bought a TV - all other electronic chains
> near me have gone out of business.
>
> and you're right - 2 issues: Delivery and the Presentation. That's why I
> asked here.
> I have a lot of older stuff that has only coax, RCA and most of the
> current "small TVs" only have HDMI for example or 1 HDMI and one USB. I
> have basic cable ( coax) and no real desire to get a $130 per month cable
> plan / no real room for a 42 inch wall mounted .... I just want " a TV"
> hopefully that fits into same space. I agree that proportions mean that at
> best I will have same width and less height ( why I bought what I have
> just prior to 'all widescreens".) and why I haven't yet bought a new TV -
> it's a downgrade for me. But it's really connectivity driving this for me.
> I don't care for TV too much but WOULD like to integrate pictures, video
> on PC with the TV in the living room. So I could watch ... video from ...
> our trip to Vegas ... Europe etc from the MCE PC without having to burn it
> to DVD. I tried WDTV and it worked fine except for QuickTime movies ( last
> few cameras do MOV video). IF WDTV did QT then I'd be fine. I talked to
> Apple rep ... they don't support it either. He told me you just need to
> convert to H264 first. I looked at him and said - "if I wanted to do that
> I don't need your box. I could use the WDTV. You guys wrote QT, you really
> ought to recommend that Apple TV work with it."
>
> Also without cable, I saw DTV antennas with only coax and if newer TV's
> don't support it ... how to get reception without cable ??
> I'll keep looking
> Thanks for feedback
>
>

I've never seen a TV set that does not have a coax connector. I've not seen
a flat panel that does not have at least RCA, and most have HDMI, S-Video,
and Component along with the coax. Coax is the primary means of bringing TV
to most homes in America, so a TV without coax is counter intuitive. I would
not say that there is no such thing, but as long as broadcasting is
delivered by cable, TVs will have a coax connector on the back or a huge
percentage of the market place will be excluded from buying the set that
lacks coax. If you're finding a set without coax, you should look to see if
it also lacks a tuner. All TV tuners available today are digital, so they
don't need the converter box, you simply plug your digital antenna lead into
the back. All TV sets don't have a tuner though, and these would not have a
coax connector because they can't do anything with the information that's
delivered in that format.

You _might_ find a few sets that have limited connections, but you should be
able to find any combination of connections on any size TV set. If there is
one that hasn't got the connection combination you want, then you have to
check that one off of your list and select another model. Higher priced
units might have more connections than the cheaper sets, but the comparison
has to be held to the same size.

If you want a 42" TV, then you compare the price and features of the other
42" TVs, lower priced uints wold reasonably have fewer options for
connecting different things, but the basics of all flat panels that I've
seen are a coax, an HDMI, or two, if the TV is rated as High Definition, two
sets of auxiliary connections (RCA). Most have Component Video, and lots of
them have S-Video. Frankly, I've never connected or used any component that
makes use of S-Video, and my instinct is that this format didn't take off
very well. I could be wrong, but I don't think S-Video is used by very many
people, and I suspect it is the least used connection. I have no specific
data to support my thesis. Picture quality for an HDTV in the range of
basic, good, better, best is coax, RCA, Component, HDMI. Game console inputs
are typically RCA which are called Auxiliary inputs, and most sets today
have Aux1 and Aux2. Component inputs are also available in multiples.

- Bobb - wrote:

> I have a lot of older stuff that has only coax, RCA and most of the current
> "small TVs" only have HDMI for example or 1 HDMI and one USB. I have basic
> cable ( coax) and no real desire to get a $130 per month cable plan / no
> real room for a 42 inch wall mounted .... I just want " a TV" hopefully that
> fits into same space. I agree that proportions mean that at best I will have
> same width and less height ( why I bought what I have just prior to 'all
> widescreens".) and why I haven't yet bought a new TV - it's a downgrade for
> me.

Two points to consider.

1) Today's flat screen LCD sets generally have a much narrower bezel than the
analog 4:3 CRT TVs did. I have a cabinet in my den that has a 26" wide area
for a TV. The biggest analog 4:3 CRT I could find that would fit was a 24"
diagonal Sony WEGA. Total set width was just a hair under 26". I replaced
it a couple of years ago with a 26" diagonal Sony Bravia LCD, which also
measured a hair under 26" wide. I have a 3.5" wider picture (22.7 versus
19.2") in the same cabinet.

2) Even with NO cable box (incoming cable plugged directly into the TV), you
will get many "ClearQAM" digital channels, most in HD. Yes, you CAN have
HDTV with basic cable with NO added cost. Perfectly legal. Google "Clear
QAM."

"Jeff Strickland" <> wrote in message
news:i083eh$4iv$...
>
> "- Bobb -" <bobb@noemail.123> wrote in message
> news:i07rr3$19o$...
>> Wow - thanks for all the info Jeff.
>>
>> I have been going to Best Buy, and others and did NOT find that:
>> "All of the TV sets today come with RCA jacks for video and audio,
>> S-Video
>> and HDMI. They also have Component Video, which is a video supply that is
>> better than RCA but not as good as HDMI. "
<< snipped>>
>> Also without cable, I saw DTV antennas with only coax and if newer TV's
>> don't support it ... how to get reception without cable ??
>> I'll keep looking
>> Thanks for feedback
>>
>>
>
> I've never seen a TV set that does not have a coax connector.
--------------------
Here's an example of what I'm finding:
Samsung - 26" Class / 720p / 60Hz / LCD HDTV
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+...&skuId=9770706

See no coax listed
a.. Internet Connectable No
a.. PC Inputs 1
a.. USB Port Yes
a.. Media Card Slot No
a.. HDMI Inputs 2
a.. DVI Inputs 0
a.. Component Video Inputs 0
a.. Composite Inputs 0

MOST list only HDMI and /or USB. I thought Ok - maybe it's assumed and they
all have it.
I went onsite and turned a few around - no coax.

Others DID have coax ( RF) jack like
SKU: 9559881
Inputs
Include 2 composite (1 rear, 1 side), 1 S-video, 2 HDMI (1 rear, 1 side), 1
component video (rear), 1 PC (rear), 1 PC audio (rear) and RF (rear).

I'm thinking that I'd like:

RF, USB /SD slot, RCA composites and probably HDMI ( for future DVD /DVR
use)
I saw BestBuy SKU: 9791632 online, but customer reviews show several people
with multiple issues. Of course the bad reviews always get posted and people
without a problem don't think to provide feedback.

--------------------
> I've not seen a flat panel that does not have at least RCA,
> and most have HDMI, S-Video, and Component along with the coax. Coax is
> the primary means of bringing TV to most homes in
> America, so a TV without coax is counter intuitive. I would not say that
> there is no such thing, but as long as broadcasting is delivered by cable,
> TVs will have a coax connector on the back or a huge percentage of the
> market place will be excluded from buying the set that lacks coax. If
> you're finding a set without coax, you should look to see if it also lacks
> a tuner. All TV tuners available today are digital, so they don't need the
> converter box, you simply plug your digital antenna lead into the back.
> All TV sets don't have a tuner though, and these would not have a coax
> connector because they can't do anything with the information that's
> delivered in that format.

That's what I found on some of them - after getting there to look at them.
That how my confusion started. I would say that a " TV" without a tuner is
NOT a TV - it's a monitor.But they advertise them as HDTV's (since most
people have cable boxes with HDMI ?? ). Semantics I know but for someone
that just wants a TV it's been aggravating

On some Toshiba's I see I could use a HDMI-to-DVI adapter cable to go from a
DVI PC to the TV as output device and thinking that will work OK
Thanks again ... I'll keep shopping.

I think I might have found a good candidate:
Samsung UN22C4000
I had dismissed it previously because when I checked, online info showed
30.5 wide. I did another search for .. my variables and it came up again and
this time I noticed - it's a 22" diagonal screen - it can't be 30.5 " wide
as listed at ... compUSA, TigerDirect, Best Buy etc. Went to Samsung -
listed incorretly there too, and I'm sure the source for bad retailer's
info, but in owners manual at Samsung it shows as 21.5 wide - makes more
sense. Bingo - fits in the spot I have.
And it has most of what I'm looking for, so willl check it out tomorrow.
Thanks folks. I'll let you know how it goes.

- Bobb - wrote:

>>I've never seen a TV set that does not have a coax connector.
>
> --------------------
> Here's an example of what I'm finding:
> Samsung - 26" Class / 720p / 60Hz / LCD HDTV
> http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+...&skuId=9770706
>
> See no coax listed
> a.. Internet Connectable No
> a.. PC Inputs 1
> a.. USB Port Yes
> a.. Media Card Slot No
> a.. HDMI Inputs 2
> a.. DVI Inputs 0
> a.. Component Video Inputs 0
> a.. Composite Inputs 0

The above is not correct according to Samsung's website. The site lists one
set of composite and one set of component inputs.

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/t...etail&tab=spec
[ http://tinyurl.com/2agwmpy ]

Also, as the drawing on Page 7 of the manual shows, it clearly has an RF input
(and output.)

http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/co...02Eng_0211.pdf

Check out the manual. Don't rely on Bestbuy's website.

- Bobb - wrote:

> I think I might have found a good candidate:
> Samsung UN22C4000
> I had dismissed it previously because when I checked, online info showed
> 30.5 wide. I did another search for .. my variables and it came up again and
> this time I noticed - it's a 22" diagonal screen - it can't be 30.5 " wide
> as listed at ... compUSA, TigerDirect, Best Buy etc. Went to Samsung -
> listed incorretly there too,

Sigh...

On the SPECIFICATIONS page for this product at the Samsung site, it clearly
states:

Product Dimensions (WxHxD) - 21.5" x 16.2” x 7.5"
(with stand)

Product Dimensions (WxHxD) - 21.5" x 14.1” x 1.2"
(without stand)

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/t...etail&tab=spec