XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips   
   From: psperson@old.netcom.invalid   
      
   On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 09:43:07 -0700, Bobbie Sellers   
    wrote:   
      
   >On 10/24/25 09:27, Paul S Person wrote:   
      
      
      
   >> And this presumes that /Consumer Reports/ took the appropriate steps   
   >> when I wrote into them about their first DVD player article. This had   
   >> two problems:   
   >>    
   >> 1. It complained that it could not record, thus showing that the   
   >> Consumer's Union believed each and every one of its members was in   
   >> intentional and frequent violation of the copyright laws by recording   
   >> over-the-air programming. IOW, it thought we were all thieves.   
   >> 2. It asserted that P&S (pan-and-scan) films were for older 4:3 TVs,   
   >> while LB (letterboxed) films were for 16:9 HDTVs.   
   >   
   >   
   >	No they though we were all time shifters i.e. watching shows after   
   >the broadcast time.  I used to do that but i figured out eventually I could   
   >never find enough time to watch all the interesting sounding stuff.   
      
   So did I, but I never fooled myself that I wasn't violating the   
   Copyright Law. Or did the Courts rule this to be Reasonable Use?   
   Recording the whole program, with commercials (presumably), to be seen   
   again later again and again and again if one wanted to?   
      
   I had some hard-to-find movies on such tapes for some time before   
   replacing them. I think they all came out on VHS, but any that did not   
   were replaced with DVDs when they came out on DVD.   
      
   OTOH, for a while I recorded six hours starting at midnight every   
   Sunday. I did this because Dr Who would appear at some point in that   
   timeframe. When it appeared varied because it depended on how many   
   infomercials they had been able to sell air time to and when the   
   owners of those wanted them to be seen.   
      
   >> I wrote them a letter covering the first point and pointing out that   
   >> letterboxing was not done to fit the screen, but rather to satisfy the   
   >> market for films that were actually all there instead of being cut off   
   >> on the sides. I, myself, replaced many P&S VHS films with LB VHS films   
   >> (and then with LB DVDs) because I only buy films I really want to see,   
   >> and I really want to see the entire film, not just the "important"   
   >> bits P&S presents. This included an essay on aspect ratios which I   
   >> will spare you all.   
   >>    
   >> I also suggested they find someone who actually understood this stuff   
   >> to do the tests/reviews in the future.   
   >>    
   >> So it is possible that they did, in fact, find people who had at least   
   >> some idea of what was going on and the review of TVs able to play   
   >> "3d" (stereoscopic) films without special glasses was written by them.   
   >> And the claim that the reduced resolution actually mattered when "3d"   
   >> (stereoscopic) films were watched may have been based on actual   
   >> comparison testing and not just "the resolution is halved, that /must/   
   >> be a problem" thinking.   
      
   I should have pointed out that this would been in the late 90s/early   
   00s, as I stop subscribing to /Consumer Reports/ after they insisted   
   on limited online access without additional payment, would not   
   consider a higher subscription price which would include the web-site,   
   and, oh yes, started treating us as "customers" with "accounts"   
   instead of Members of the Consumer's Union.    
      
   My last annual issue (a summary of the preceding year, and a   
   convenient reference as it was a PB book not a magazine issue) was 2/3   
   the size of the year before, and mostly descriptive articles as   
   opposed to articles with ratings. To get the ratings, you had to go   
   online. And pay extra.   
      
   >	Personally I am happy with a decent HD screen on the TV but lately as the   
   >weather undergoes changes I am lucky to have one good channel out of    
   >over 50.   
      
   It sounds like you are using an antenna. How quaint.   
      
   Have you considered using a computer and a web browser? Several offer   
   TV shows, organized in channels with fixed start times. I just checked   
   Plex and it does, so other free streaming services probably do as   
   well. Not 50 channels, perhaps, but then not mostly in a language you   
   don't understand or religious (unless you choose that category)   
   either.   
      
   Judging from the films I have occasionally streamed from them, there   
   are lots of ads. But what is TV without advertising?   
      
   I long ago realized that (at least at that time) the advertisements   
   often had higher production values and were more entertaining than the   
   programs, after all.   
   --    
   "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,   
   Who evil spoke of everyone but God,   
   Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)