Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Its always the same.

Manipulation, from the right and the left... and you guys fall for it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Its always the same.

Manipulation, from the right and the left... and you guys fall for it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Army? No.

Marines? Yes.

Semper Fi.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Just curious, but is there something *WRONG* with having a TV?

Oh, and if you have internet and watch anything on your computer, you have a TV according to DT's definition. You're paying for a stream of video, etc., and watching programming on your "TV" - it's just shaped like a computer now.

I just have to stop and savor the irony now. It seems every once in a while people love to decry TV around here - on a website devoted to...

Wait for it...

A *TV SHOW*!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Well, I was a kid when TV first came along, two whole stations, black and white, so I'm comfortable with it. Jim's son LIVED in front of the TV when with his mom; carried it over when he came here, despite our efforts to the contrary. Two generations. This more recent generation is computer-oriented, but I agree in part[quoteOh, and if you have internet and watch anything on your computer, you have a TV according to DT's definition. You're paying for a stream of video, etc., and watching programming on your "TV" - it's just shaped like a computer now.

---

In part I disagree...for entertainment, I'd rather watch TV, got plenty of channels to choose from and when nothing's on, got DVDs.

I also like TV because sitting at the computer is hard on my back and legs, while I can watch TV in my recliner, which is much more comfortable. Also, I tend to have the TV on while I'm working on my plants...not necessarily paying it attention, or sometimes donig so.

The internet for me is for searching for news and different viewpoints. The trouble is, the vast majority of what's on the initernet is just as much bullshit as what's on TV, except it's written by people who think they have "something to say". Me, I watch CNN and MSNBC both as entertainment (some of the "news" is hysterical) and to get news. Once I see something that interests me, I look it up on the internet--I never take their word for it.

So I think it's a toss-up. Those of us who have TVs enjoy them for one reason, the internet for another. A generation is arising which depends more on the internet than TV. So what?

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

---

Bingo. The TV has its place. So does the internet. Don't let anyone fool you that EITHER of them has a lock on "objective" news coverage.

For movies and TV shows, I'll take the TV every day. Hell, it's not even a competition. There's a REASON I bought a 47" flat-screen HDTV and subscribed to HD cable. There's a REASON I bought an upconverting HDMI-out DVD player that makes my "old" DVDs look better, and there's a REASON I bought a BluRay player (actually, that reason is because it came in a PlayStation 3 videogame console... ). I like watching my shows big and loud, and my computer just really doesn't like video all that much. I've used it some, and connected it to the TV when the local NBC affiliate was yanked off the cable carrier due to contract disputes, but Hulu wasn't able to get me better than 720p resolution (and more often than not, it was 480p), and after High-Definition television, the low-def stuff just looks really junky.

TV's for watching stories. Computer and internet are for researching them, and participating. And for yelling. Always for yelling. :)

Oh, and my home video system is also my preferred way to watch movies, since movie theatre seats really don't fit me. Sorry, Wulf - it's not a "fat" thing, it's a "height" thing; I'm the guy in the theatre who's sitting in one seat with his legs draped over the back of the seat in front of him, and his size fifteens flat on the cushion of that seat. :)

Mike

Old friend charity
Cruel twisted smile
And the smile signals emptiness
For me
Starless and Bible black

Quote:

---

Oh, and if you have internet and watch anything on your computer, you have a TV according to DT's definition. You're paying for a stream of video, etc., and watching programming on your "TV" - it's just shaped like a computer now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
PIZMO

Ain't no accident. Joss makes fun of it himself in Buffy, that his viewers don't really watch "TV" they watch TV programs on DVD. I never saw firefly on television, I'm not even sure the whole thing ever ran. I've seen 3 buffy eps. on TV, and watched the whole series through many times on DVD. Now you can watch it on hulu, which is where I assume people are getting stuff they recommend.

Here's the logic: If you have TV, the programming is pushed at you, one after another, and there are 500 channels, and at least 50 of those are running programming, so a decent % of the time you can find *something* to watch.

For the remote viewer, there's much more of a selective process, because we're aware that we're sacrificing time to hear a story. Now that may be a damn good story, like firefly, and it might be very so what, as so many are.

I got many recommendations here, Burn Notice, anh, okay, but gets old, Sarah Connor, loved it, Fringe, didn't care for it, Chuck, funny, but not something I miss, Dollhouse, painful to sit through, Kings, intriguing, would like to know where it was going, BSG, very fine construction on detail, weaker on story arc (the same could be said for Buffy)

Strangely, no one ever recommended a show, not once that I can recall, which was not available at Hulu, though most shows aren't. The overwhelming base of television isn't online at all, which might in itself be a selection process.

So, you can see, I can have no idea from our conversations here whether or not anyone has a television. No one I know here has a TV. It's funny, when the Buffy finale aired, we decided to all get together and have a Buffy party. That plan went fine until someone mentioned that no one had a TV. Then it turned out that no one even knew someone with a TV.

When I was a kid, television was the king of media, it controlled everything, I watched as one by one information sources were taken over: MTV, CNN, Premium Movie Channels, (Even Pay per view and Home shopping channel) and then one day, there was an internet.

I was wondering is all. Is it gone? Is television a dead medium? Sure, there are people who will always watch TV, listen to talk radio, read the newspaper, almost always (No one goes to the town square to hear the crier herald the news.)

---

Quote:

---

Sorry, not in my estimation. Book is to savor whenever I want, and reread a passage or a sentence or whatever if it didn't make sense the first time or I need to go back to reference something. Lecture happens immediately; if I missed something, I can't go back, and I have to go out among (gasp!)PEOPLE to hear it. DVD is rental, I have to pay, go there, return it, get it via Netflix and wait two days, or buy it. And that's each one.

---

Quote:

---

Look out for 2 things that will make TV the undisputed KING of visual medium:

1. Ability to record from dvr (or at the very least more storage)
2. Surfing the web on your TV - and not the old WebTV. Can't imagine why that hasn't happened yet but it will, and when it does look out computers. Cloud storage, flickr, etc can replace hard drives and Google's busting out online apps left and right... who's going to need a box then?

---