The results are in. From <strong>August 22nd, 2006</strong> through <strong>October 1st, 2006</strong>, HDTV Magazine conducted and sponsored The Fall 2006 HDTV Study. This article focuses on several key questions related to HDTV technology and how the results came out. The charts and data below reflect the preferences, buying habits, and general demographics of <strong>1281</strong> study respondents. These respondents took the survey either as a subscriber to our services, or by navigating from a link featured on our home page. As such, the audience for this survey are primarily either owners of HDTVs or those in the immediate market (within 3 months of purchase) for an HDTV.
(1) You didn't ask if they had or planned to acquire antennas for over-the-air reception. Since you also didn't ask which is their principal method of reception, you left out any way of determining if the study population will be consumers of broadcasting services or will be limited to narrowcasting by cable and/or satellite.
I understand that you are a cheering section for new, high-performance equipment, but HDTV over-the-air broadcasting is mandated by law and regulation and will be killing off the old channels 2-13 just before March Madness 2009. As such, OTA HDTV is both a consumer factor and a business factor to keep in mind.
(2) The presentation even with flash was uneven, with some graphics blocks generously sized and readable and others jammed up and/or cropped.
1) With respect to purchasing an antenna, are you referring to a specific question(s)? And we did ask "How do you receive your HD programming?". That should answer your question exactly, unless I have misunderstood it.
Over the air HDTV broadcasting IS NOT mandated by law ... only DIGITAL broadcasting is mandated by law, not necessarily HD. And it's 2/17 for the analog cut-off, not 2/13.
2) Sorry, did the best job that I could without delaying the article yet another week. If you can tell me which questions graphs need enlarged, I'll gladly update the article so it is more readable.
If I view the study with Windows Explorer 6, I see the graphics. Even with this combo, the graphics are not real good. Graphics labels frequently overlapping the graphics, etc. Maybe Flash 8 is not so great even with Explorer 6.
That's rather interesting. I upgraded from 1.5.0.7 at the end of last week, but have been working on this article for about 3 weeks. I have not had a single problem in either FF 1.5 or FF2.0, which I am using now.
There must be something else at play here (other extensions, security settings, etc), outside of FF and Flash. I've never had a problem.
According to what I read on the Firefox forums, some people, probably many, do not have a problem and others do. I also upgraded from 1.5.x.x using the FF procedures. My XP Control Panel Add & Remove Programs says I have Flash 8 installed - but when I go to the Adobe Flash site with FF2, it takes a look at my computer and says I have 9.0.16.0 installed.
I don't believe my flash operation is consistant, e.g. I do not see the graphics on your Report, but that is the only time I have "missed" flash content as far as I know. E.g., flash content seems to be working well at http://www.2kgames.com/civ4/home.htm
and http://www.webwasp.co.uk/flash-sample-m ... amples.php
These files seem to be more complex than your static graphics - but they work.
Hopefully the folks at FF will sort it out, especially if it becomes an issue with a lot of their millions of users. IN the meantime, I will plod along and let the experts sort it out.
If I get a little time, I'll screen scrape those flash files and store them instead as standard GIF graphics. That should eliminate all problems. Give me a week or so though ;-)
Just to add to the mystery, I decided to try out the FF2 extension, Adblock Plus 0.7.2.2 and after that was in and FF2 restarted, I can now see the graphics in the Fall Review. I made no changes to the Flash software. I disabled Adblock Plus, restarted FF2 and the graphics went away. Enabling Adblock Plus and restarting FF2 again restored them, so it is definitely a nice side effect of Adblock Plus.
