Is this a good TV deal? Page 1 / 3

dropstix, Aug 16, 1:38am
The warehouse has this 42" LCD TV:!SKU=1541009

It's a present for nephew and at the max' our budget can stretch to.

Is there anything about this deal that may not be best!
I wish I could list all his requirements but I don't know them and it's a surprise gift. He's got a PS2 and may want to connect his computer to it also, but that's about all I can think of. Is a 5ms response time OK for sports!

Is there anything about the connections in or out that I should be aware of or that he may need or anything else you can think of that he might need (a bit 'crystal ball', I know, but I'm clueless and not sure what features would suit him that we could actually afford.

Is there a more suitable TV deal out there at the mo'!


r.g.nixon, Aug 16, 2:32am

suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 3:06am
I personally wouldn't buy an unknown brand like that.

Noel Lemmings are selling 42" Samsung TVs for the same price at the moment. It's a no-brainer.

stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 3:18am
JB hifi have this Panasonic for $688
Extra HDMI input and known brand name which always comes top of consumer reliability reports.

elect70, Aug 16, 4:10am
Digital TVIf i am watchingnetwork tvviaordinary sky decoderwill itproduce pictures in HD ( if the programme is in HD) or doessky in their greediness, block it like thierprogrammes unless buy their HDticket .!

stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 4:45am
Yes, you need a My Sky HDi decoder to get HD.

suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 4:56am
It's $10 a month extra. HD content uses more bandwidth therefore costs them more to broadcast. Satellites aren't free. How is that greediness!

mattnzw, Aug 16, 5:28am
Buy a decent brand, and you probably want LED backlighting so it will be a thinner profile. Non LED displays are pretty old these days. You should be able to get something close to that price when they have sales.

kiwikidd77, Aug 16, 5:44am
Believe it or not they're transmitting the HD content anyway, so can't see your logic there.

SKY has ALWAYS been overpriced since there's NO competition at all.

The VEON is a good set.

spyware, Aug 16, 5:45am
Nothing to do with blocking anything, the standard definition decoders are totally incapable of receiving the DVB-S2 H.264 streams. they were designed in 1998 and are mpeg2 stream only.

lythande1, Aug 16, 5:48am
Crap brand.

gibler, Aug 16, 6:17am
+1 indeed.

stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 6:28am
Samsung! Yep.

suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 6:35am
No they're not. The SD decoders don't have the hardware to receive HD content, so SD content is transmitted to them.

And I don't think $60-80 a month for the ridiculous amount of channels is expensive, especially if you had any clue what went into broadcasting TV

black-heart, Aug 16, 6:42am
HD content is transmitted, it doesn't matter how many receivers there are.

ridiculous amount ofchannels! Most of them are rubbish, and filled with so much advertising you forget what your watching by the time it comes back on.
Oh thanks sky for MASH, hogans heroes, get smart, 20 years of simpsons repeats. it must have been really costly for you to transmit them every day since the first day of skys existence.

mattnzw, Aug 16, 6:43am
I had heard that they were rebadged transonics, which is what the WH used to sell. I believe that is the WH own inhouse brand.

mattnzw, Aug 16, 6:44am
Thats why you get something like a tivo. You never have to watch ads again, and you can just watch what you want to. I never watch live tv.

suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 6:50am
edit: Actually you're not worth arguing with.

spyware, Aug 16, 6:57am
A lot of us TV watchers would say that many of the Sky standard definition channels are such poor image quality, visible compression artifacts to the point of making me sick, that they aren't actually worth paying anything for.

I got Sky back after 4 years but can't watch many of the channels because of the hideous low quality courtesy of Mr Fellet and his 3 Mbps limit. And you can't tell me it is the raw state of the satellite streams into NZ as I know this ain't true, with Auckland based channels like Prime being one of the worst.

Three MTV channels I see, quality so low almost sickening, I doubt they run more than 2 Mbps each.

Sport HD, ESPN and SoHo HD are the only channels fit to view in my opinion.

spyware, Aug 16, 6:59am
P.S. The low bitrate debauchery done to Discovery and National Geographic is almost unforgivable in my opinion.

ropes2, Aug 16, 7:24am
I know nothing about HD/SD distribution, but I would be interested to know suicidemonkeys answer. i would've thought other than the decoder, potentially it's just bandwidth or frequency range that costs extra for HD.

christin, Aug 16, 7:24am
id go for the warehouse one.i have the same brand but 32 inch.It was on special for $399, full hd, freeview etc.

the equivalent "brand name" was about $699, BUT the warehouse one has a THREE year warranty vs a one year one for the so called better brands.

i figured id much rather save 300 dollars and have painfree hassle free tv for three years.

ive had it a few months now, and its been good.two other people i know got one too. and no complaints so far.

vtecintegra, Aug 16, 7:32am
With consumer laws in this country it hardly matters

macuser, Aug 16, 8:08am
If you don't mind a crap picture go for it, LCD Hz are crap especially when you are buying a low end TV, Samsung 43" High Definition Plasma RRP $699, I would take this option straight away at least the refresh rate would make a clear and smoother tv image, only down fall is plasma shows reflection if you have a sunny room! night time viewing is perfect or just close the curtains during the day

stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 8:16am
Yeah, there's only two problems with that:
1. The resolution is 1024 by 768.
2. It's Samsung.

Share this thread

Buy me a coffee :)Buy me a coffee :)