On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 11:41:34 AM René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Tuesday October 26 2021 08:19:36 rhkramer@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Something specific to (certain) EU countries, where owners of appliances
> containing a TV tuner have to pay a few hundred bucks each year, which are
> used to finance the national TV stations. Given the overall quality of
> their offering and the fact they all run ads nowadays, I prefer to spend
> that money on other things. BTW, that is on top of what you'd pay for a
> cable subscription, or to your internet provider to pump their selection
> of channels through your modem. (Rant: more and more just include that
> cost in your internet subscription, whether to subscribe to the TV feature
> and get the decoder, or not. Thieves...)
Ahh, thanks!
> >I use a 1080p 32" TV as my computer monitor (192-x1080). Cost me about
> >$150 about 7 years ago (iirc).
>
> I have a 22" (or so) 1080p B&Q monitor which cast me about the same a few
> years (<7) ago, and it's a matte, high-frequency screen too. Not so
> certain you'd find those features in budget big screen TVs?
I'd have to check on the frequency (not up to it this morning / afternoon),
but I think I get a refresh rate of 60 Hz. at the 1920x1080 resolution -- ahh
wait, easier than I thought (displayed when I switch to and then back from a
VT (e.g, <ctrl><alt><F1> bacj to ... <F7>)
I intentionally looked for matte screens at that time (this is matte) and I
didn't have much trouble finding them among the least expensive TVs I looked
at.
> >that we can't get the gist of some other way (e.g., youtube).)
>
> The gist or slightly more of a whiff, right? O:-)
;-)
Have a good day!
