PC to TV converters

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by -=rjh=-, Dec 21, 2004.

  1. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would be
    appreciated.

    Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    been disappointing.

    These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    independent way of getting input to a TV.

    Comments please.


    -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. -=rjh=-

    Dogboy Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    > currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    > LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would be
    > appreciated.
    >
    > Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    > experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    > been disappointing.
    >
    > These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    > independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >
    > Comments please.
    >


    Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.

    If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    something like that it works well.

    All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.

    --
    Dogboy
     
    Dogboy, Dec 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. -=rjh=-

    Dogboy Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    > currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    > LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would be
    > appreciated.
    >
    > Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    > experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    > been disappointing.
    >
    > These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    > independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >
    > Comments please.
    >


    Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.

    If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    something like that it works well.

    All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.

    --
    Dogboy
     
    Dogboy, Dec 21, 2004
    #3
  4. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:00:18 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would be
    >appreciated.
    >
    >Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >been disappointing.
    >
    >These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >
    >Comments please.
    >




    Most 3D Video card have TV outs, that is all you need.


    >-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    >-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    Aspiringpsychopath, Dec 21, 2004
    #4
  5. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:00:18 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would be
    >appreciated.
    >
    >Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >been disappointing.
    >
    >These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >
    >Comments please.
    >




    Most 3D Video card have TV outs, that is all you need.


    >-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    >-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    Aspiringpsychopath, Dec 21, 2004
    #5
  6. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Dogboy wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:
    >
    >> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >> be appreciated.
    >>
    >> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >> been disappointing.
    >>
    >> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>
    >> Comments please.
    >>

    >
    > Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.


    Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    No wonder TV looks so bad.
    >
    > A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    > display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    > useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    > movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    > screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.
    >
    > If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    > disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    > something like that it works well.
    >

    I should probably have said - video playback and similar functions -
    media centre type stuff only. Maybe games, but probably not often.

    > All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    > but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.


    But - are they any worse?


    -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 21, 2004
    #6
  7. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Dogboy wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:
    >
    >> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >> be appreciated.
    >>
    >> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >> been disappointing.
    >>
    >> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>
    >> Comments please.
    >>

    >
    > Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.


    Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    No wonder TV looks so bad.
    >
    > A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    > display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    > useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    > movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    > screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.
    >
    > If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    > disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    > something like that it works well.
    >

    I should probably have said - video playback and similar functions -
    media centre type stuff only. Maybe games, but probably not often.

    > All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    > but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.


    But - are they any worse?


    -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 21, 2004
    #7
  8. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:54:39 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Dogboy wrote:
    >> -=rjh=- wrote:
    >>
    >>> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >>> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >>> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >>> be appreciated.
    >>>
    >>> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >>> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >>> been disappointing.
    >>>
    >>> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >>> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>>
    >>> Comments please.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    >
    >Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    >limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.
    >>
    >> A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    >> display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    >> useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    >> movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    >> screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.
    >>
    >> If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    >> disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    >> something like that it works well.
    >>

    >I should probably have said - video playback and similar functions -
    >media centre type stuff only. Maybe games, but probably not often.
    >
    >> All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    >> but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.

    >
    >But - are they any worse?
    >




    Yes they would be..

    Simple Logic..


    >-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    >-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    Aspiringpsychopath, Dec 21, 2004
    #8
  9. On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:54:39 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Dogboy wrote:
    >> -=rjh=- wrote:
    >>
    >>> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >>> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >>> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >>> be appreciated.
    >>>
    >>> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >>> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >>> been disappointing.
    >>>
    >>> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >>> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>>
    >>> Comments please.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    >
    >Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    >limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.
    >>
    >> A normal TV just isnt a good monitor no matter what "resolution" you
    >> display at the TV cant cut it. That doesnt mean that TV output is
    >> useless, far from it. I have a media PC that does fantastic DVD and
    >> movie output, is great for flash websites etc. But at 800x600 on a 29"
    >> screen 12 point fonts are still near unreadable. Its all about the content.
    >>
    >> If your after a TV as a substitute monitor then expect to be
    >> disappointed. However if your wanting TV out for movie playback or
    >> something like that it works well.
    >>

    >I should probably have said - video playback and similar functions -
    >media centre type stuff only. Maybe games, but probably not often.
    >
    >> All my experience has been with video cards that have built in TV Out,
    >> but I cant see one of these PC to TV converters having better output.

    >
    >But - are they any worse?
    >




    Yes they would be..

    Simple Logic..


    >-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
    > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    >-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
     
    Aspiringpsychopath, Dec 21, 2004
    #9
  10. -=rjh=-

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:54:39 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Dogboy wrote:
    >> -=rjh=- wrote:
    >>
    >>> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >>> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >>> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >>> be appreciated.
    >>>
    >>> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >>> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >>> been disappointing.
    >>>
    >>> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >>> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>>
    >>> Comments please.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    >
    >Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    >limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.


    It's amazing what they made a TV do 40 years ago, and the fact that it was that
    good then that it's still in use now.
     
    Craig Shore, Dec 22, 2004
    #10
  11. -=rjh=-

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:54:39 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >Dogboy wrote:
    >> -=rjh=- wrote:
    >>
    >>> Can anyone here give an informed opinion on PC to TV converters
    >>> currently available - specifically Grandtec's TV-View Pocket and
    >>> LifeView's ViewMaster LR77? Although opinions on other devices would
    >>> be appreciated.
    >>>
    >>> Both of these do up to 1024x768 but what is the quality like? My
    >>> experience with similar converters in the past (several years ago) has
    >>> been disappointing.
    >>>
    >>> These are attractive as they offer a hardware only, OS and software
    >>> independent way of getting input to a TV.
    >>>
    >>> Comments please.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Your main limitation with these kind of things is always the TV itself.

    >
    >Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    >limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.


    It's amazing what they made a TV do 40 years ago, and the fact that it was that
    good then that it's still in use now.
     
    Craig Shore, Dec 22, 2004
    #11
  12. In article <41c7f1e3$1_4@127.0.0.1>, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.


    Can you say "installed base"? It's no worse than any other technology
    that has had to grow by accretion over decades without losing backward
    compatibility. Look at your standard Microsoft-compatible PC
    architecture, with its mess of IRQs and BIOS interfaces and all that
    nonsense. It's the same sort of thing.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Dec 26, 2004
    #12
  13. In article <41c7f1e3$1_4@127.0.0.1>, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >No wonder TV looks so bad.


    Can you say "installed base"? It's no worse than any other technology
    that has had to grow by accretion over decades without losing backward
    compatibility. Look at your standard Microsoft-compatible PC
    architecture, with its mess of IRQs and BIOS interfaces and all that
    nonsense. It's the same sort of thing.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Dec 26, 2004
    #13
  14. -=rjh=-

    Richard Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:

    > Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    > limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    > 40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    > No wonder TV looks so bad.


    Hardly, - there is component video and progressive scan available these days
    which removes all the issues other then resolution that TV has, get an HD
    capable screen and you get decent res as well.

    If you are expecting a composite output to get any better, then your in for
    disappointment, but then again, it is a format where the ability to provide
    colour was an afterthought, just like stereo on FM was a late development, and
    not as good as it would have being otherwise.

    > But - are they any worse?


    No, they are usually better, as they give you control over the overscan etc on
    the units (At least the one I used did) - and it had a scart and component
    output as well.
     
    Richard, Dec 26, 2004
    #14
  15. -=rjh=-

    Richard Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:

    > Definitely - I've used video cards with TV out, so I know what the
    > limitations are. It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    > 40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    > No wonder TV looks so bad.


    Hardly, - there is component video and progressive scan available these days
    which removes all the issues other then resolution that TV has, get an HD
    capable screen and you get decent res as well.

    If you are expecting a composite output to get any better, then your in for
    disappointment, but then again, it is a format where the ability to provide
    colour was an afterthought, just like stereo on FM was a late development, and
    not as good as it would have being otherwise.

    > But - are they any worse?


    No, they are usually better, as they give you control over the overscan etc on
    the units (At least the one I used did) - and it had a scart and component
    output as well.
     
    Richard, Dec 26, 2004
    #15
  16. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <41c7f1e3$1_4@127.0.0.1>, -=rjh=- <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >>40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >>No wonder TV looks so bad.

    >
    >
    > Can you say "installed base"? It's no worse than any other technology
    > that has had to grow by accretion over decades without losing backward
    > compatibility. Look at your standard Microsoft-compatible PC
    > architecture, with its mess of IRQs and BIOS interfaces and all that
    > nonsense. It's the same sort of thing.


    True of course, but if you are going to draw a parallel with the PC
    equivalent, we'd still be using CGA displays :)
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 26, 2004
    #16
  17. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <41c7f1e3$1_4@127.0.0.1>, -=rjh=- <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>It is amazing that the standards used for TV are what,
    >>40+ years old now (almost half a century) and yet they are still in use.
    >>No wonder TV looks so bad.

    >
    >
    > Can you say "installed base"? It's no worse than any other technology
    > that has had to grow by accretion over decades without losing backward
    > compatibility. Look at your standard Microsoft-compatible PC
    > architecture, with its mess of IRQs and BIOS interfaces and all that
    > nonsense. It's the same sort of thing.


    True of course, but if you are going to draw a parallel with the PC
    equivalent, we'd still be using CGA displays :)
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 26, 2004
    #17
  18. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:


    >> But - are they any worse?

    >
    >
    > No, they are usually better, as they give you control over the overscan
    > etc on the units (At least the one I used did) - and it had a scart and
    > component output as well.


    Sounds like a reasonably high end unit from your description - can you
    remember what it was?
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 26, 2004
    #18
  19. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > -=rjh=- wrote:


    >> But - are they any worse?

    >
    >
    > No, they are usually better, as they give you control over the overscan
    > etc on the units (At least the one I used did) - and it had a scart and
    > component output as well.


    Sounds like a reasonably high end unit from your description - can you
    remember what it was?
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 26, 2004
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zed
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    883
    Melon
    Nov 7, 2003
  2. Matthew Melbourne

    Catalyst 3550s and Media Converters

    Matthew Melbourne, Feb 6, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    456
    Terry Knight
    Feb 9, 2004
  3. Yehavi Bourvine

    POS to ethernet converters?

    Yehavi Bourvine, Mar 9, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    562
    Yehavi Bourvine
    Mar 9, 2006
  4. gronod

    video converters

    gronod, Nov 24, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    585
    Valverdez
    Nov 24, 2004
  5. Slack

    CD compatable audio converters?

    Slack, Jun 26, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    374
    Toolman Tim
    Jun 26, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page