Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I am an infrequent poster but a very frequent reader of the articles and
publications that you and others provide here. I have also purchased
your annual CES reports when they are first made available and have made
contributions to the HDTV Magazine to help support it in the past. With
that as a background, here are my responses to your questions:

A. I feel strongly that these articles should continue to be well
researched and complete. This is one of the very few sources I have
come across that provides for complete and accurate information in this
field. If I want incomplete and inaccurate information, I have a lot of
other sources for such

B. While I certainly have no problem with "free", I have been a
financial supporter of HDTV Magazine and the publications for which
there has been a charge. I don't put any more faith on the articles I
pay for than the ones I receive for free here. With that being said, I
personally have no problems with making reasonable payment for
information that has been well researched and is complete. A couple
ideas come to mind: (1) provide a paid subscription that provides
additional information and reports; (2) provide these reports for free
to those who purchase your annual CES report or some combination of the
foregoing.

C. Definitely NOT

D. While question/answer documents can be very good for repetitive type
questions and certainly have their place, if I had to choose between
that and the current articles that are written, I would prefer the
current articles.

E. While a personal pinpoint answer to an individual will probably be
better for that individual than reading articles, and may answer other
readers who happen to have the same question, I believe more people
overall are benefitted by the articles.

F. As long as the article title describes the topic of the article
(which they currently do), I would still want the articles. Often
times, I learn things from the articles that I did not even know enough
about to think about or be able to ask questions about. That to me is
the real benefit of these articles.

I do have one unsolicited observation about the articles for your
consideration. What would helpful to me, if it is readily available,
would be links at the end of the articles as to where one could go to
get more information or details on the subject of the article, with the
understanding that the link does not mean that you or the author vouch
for what is on the linked pages.

Anyway, thanks for all the articles and information you have provided
and I look forward to what you can provide in the future.

Scott Shearer

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:51 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

The short answer is NO.

If you care to read:

The Sharp was a 2005 product; it was first announced at CES 2005 (over 2
years ago) to become TTM Nov 05, meaning the technology of everything on
that set is about 2 years old.

The HDMI 1.3 specs were approved mid 06, about six months ago. Chips
for
those specs started to appear several months later, toward the end of
06.

Manufacturers are at the beginning of their effort implementing those
chips
in "some" future products, not retrofitting current products with HDMI
chips.

Simplay Labs as a new test facility was not necessarily created for just
passing 1.3, but for general HDMI/HDCP compliance testing for more than
one
category in any kind of product, wires included, to benefit consumers
regarding HDMI interoperability.

Again, passing the test does not mean the product is automatically 1.3
compliant or 1080p capable, or has Deep Color, or xvcolor, or lossless
audio
codecs capabilities, etc, it means it interoperate well with other HDMI
suited products, it means that is better than no test, and better than
no
organization testing.

Even after CES 2007 MOST manufacturers are still short in specifying
correctly the version of HDMI they support and also the HDMI
functionality
features they implement of their equipment (like the above), so we are
all
in for another roller coaster ignorance sharing year (most probably
years).

And, as advance notice, please do not expect me to produce a flawless
list
of HDMI 1.3 products on the 2007 report, for 2 things:

A) It is misleading if specifying only 1.3 and not the 1.3 related
functionality implemented in the product, and
B) After I started doing the list at CES, I found the hard way that it
was
an impossible task because most at CES could not be trusted, unless it
was
on a press release, besides, I already have all that information even
before
CES. Samsung was one of the companies that showed better effort on
being
specific across products.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Now I have a question myself, maybe my first question since the magazine
started in 1998:

What would it take for people to read the very own articles and reports
produced by the magazine?

(Please, this is not a disrespectful or an ironic question, it is a
reality,
and issued with the intention to redirect efforts)

A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?
B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to
produce
articles to readerships.
C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the
eye
and be intellectually empty?
D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach
to
help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar
questions?
E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully
analyzed
subject anyone could use for research at anytime?
F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to
produce
the content and wait until someone asks?

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Mark Alford
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:28 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Richard,

Check the news section of the forum. Someone had posted an article
about a
month ago that gave the website for 1.3 certification. At that time
there
were less than ten pieces of equipment that had been verified as 1.3
capable. I don't remember there being any products from Sharp on the
list.

Mark


On 1/28/07 10:55 PM, "Joe Hart" <[email protected]> wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Considering the age of the model (it debuted in fall 2005) I would be
> surprised.
>
> Cheers,
> Joe Hart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of
> Richard Fisher
> Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:35 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?
>
> Thanks
>
> Richard Fisher
> ISF and HAA certified
> HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
> Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?

Rodolfo, I as well as many on this list appreciate every bit of information
we get from you.

B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to produce
articles to readerships.

I would be happy to pay yearly subscription fee because you have no bias
with your answers unlike the commercial mags.

C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the eye
and be intellectually empty?

Please NO

D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach to
help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar questions?

Please NO

E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully analyzed
subject anyone could use for research at anytime?

That would not do the group well.

F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to produce
the content and wait until someone asks?

Please no again!

I for one am looking forward to the paid version of the 2007 CES report.


Larry



-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 9:51 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

The short answer is NO.

If you care to read:

The Sharp was a 2005 product; it was first announced at CES 2005 (over 2
years ago) to become TTM Nov 05, meaning the technology of everything on
that set is about 2 years old.

The HDMI 1.3 specs were approved mid 06, about six months ago. Chips for
those specs started to appear several months later, toward the end of 06.

Manufacturers are at the beginning of their effort implementing those chips
in "some" future products, not retrofitting current products with HDMI
chips.

Simplay Labs as a new test facility was not necessarily created for just
passing 1.3, but for general HDMI/HDCP compliance testing for more than one
category in any kind of product, wires included, to benefit consumers
regarding HDMI interoperability.

Again, passing the test does not mean the product is automatically 1.3
compliant or 1080p capable, or has Deep Color, or xvcolor, or lossless audio
codecs capabilities, etc, it means it interoperate well with other HDMI
suited products, it means that is better than no test, and better than no
organization testing.

Even after CES 2007 MOST manufacturers are still short in specifying
correctly the version of HDMI they support and also the HDMI functionality
features they implement of their equipment (like the above), so we are all
in for another roller coaster ignorance sharing year (most probably years).

And, as advance notice, please do not expect me to produce a flawless list
of HDMI 1.3 products on the 2007 report, for 2 things:

A) It is misleading if specifying only 1.3 and not the 1.3 related
functionality implemented in the product, and
B) After I started doing the list at CES, I found the hard way that it was
an impossible task because most at CES could not be trusted, unless it was
on a press release, besides, I already have all that information even before
CES. Samsung was one of the companies that showed better effort on being
specific across products.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Now I have a question myself, maybe my first question since the magazine
started in 1998:

What would it take for people to read the very own articles and reports
produced by the magazine?

(Please, this is not a disrespectful or an ironic question, it is a reality,
and issued with the intention to redirect efforts)

A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?
B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to produce
articles to readerships.
C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the eye
and be intellectually empty?
D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach to
help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar questions?
E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully analyzed
subject anyone could use for research at anytime?
F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to produce
the content and wait until someone asks?

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Mark Alford
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:28 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Richard,

Check the news section of the forum. Someone had posted an article about a
month ago that gave the website for 1.3 certification. At that time there
were less than ten pieces of equipment that had been verified as 1.3
capable. I don't remember there being any products from Sharp on the list.

Mark


On 1/28/07 10:55 PM, "Joe Hart" <[email protected]> wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Considering the age of the model (it debuted in fall 2005) I would be
> surprised.
>
> Cheers,
> Joe Hart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Richard Fisher
> Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:35 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?
>
> Thanks
>
> Richard Fisher
> ISF and HAA certified
> HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
> Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I did read today and...

Yes, this was a 2005 model that was provided again as a 2006 model and
per Sharps website it is being sold yet again as a 2007 model except now
it has HDMI besides the DVI.

Still waiting to hear from Sharp.

Richard Fisher
ISF and HAA certified
HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Rodolfo La Maestra wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> The short answer is NO.
>
> If you care to read:
>
> The Sharp was a 2005 product; it was first announced at CES 2005 (over 2
> years ago) to become TTM Nov 05, meaning the technology of everything on
> that set is about 2 years old.
>
> The HDMI 1.3 specs were approved mid 06, about six months ago. Chips for
> those specs started to appear several months later, toward the end of 06.
>
> Manufacturers are at the beginning of their effort implementing those chips
> in "some" future products, not retrofitting current products with HDMI
> chips.
>
> Simplay Labs as a new test facility was not necessarily created for just
> passing 1.3, but for general HDMI/HDCP compliance testing for more than one
> category in any kind of product, wires included, to benefit consumers
> regarding HDMI interoperability.
>
> Again, passing the test does not mean the product is automatically 1.3
> compliant or 1080p capable, or has Deep Color, or xvcolor, or lossless audio
> codecs capabilities, etc, it means it interoperate well with other HDMI
> suited products, it means that is better than no test, and better than no
> organization testing.
>
> Even after CES 2007 MOST manufacturers are still short in specifying
> correctly the version of HDMI they support and also the HDMI functionality
> features they implement of their equipment (like the above), so we are all
> in for another roller coaster ignorance sharing year (most probably years).
>
> And, as advance notice, please do not expect me to produce a flawless list
> of HDMI 1.3 products on the 2007 report, for 2 things:
>
> A) It is misleading if specifying only 1.3 and not the 1.3 related
> functionality implemented in the product, and
> B) After I started doing the list at CES, I found the hard way that it was
> an impossible task because most at CES could not be trusted, unless it was
> on a press release, besides, I already have all that information even before
> CES. Samsung was one of the companies that showed better effort on being
> specific across products.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now I have a question myself, maybe my first question since the magazine
> started in 1998:
>
> What would it take for people to read the very own articles and reports
> produced by the magazine?
>
> (Please, this is not a disrespectful or an ironic question, it is a reality,
> and issued with the intention to redirect efforts)
>
> A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?
> B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to produce
> articles to readerships.
> C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the eye
> and be intellectually empty?
> D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach to
> help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
> depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar questions?
> E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully analyzed
> subject anyone could use for research at anytime?
> F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
> require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to produce
> the content and wait until someone asks?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Mark Alford
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:28 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Richard,
>
> Check the news section of the forum. Someone had posted an article about a
> month ago that gave the website for 1.3 certification. At that time there
> were less than ten pieces of equipment that had been verified as 1.3
> capable. I don't remember there being any products from Sharp on the list.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 1/28/07 10:55 PM, "Joe Hart" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Considering the age of the model (it debuted in fall 2005) I would be
>>surprised.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Joe Hart
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>Richard Fisher
>>Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:35 PM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Richard Fisher
>>ISF and HAA certified
>>HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
>>Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Richard,

The model # of the 2007 model is not the same, the size is.

65" LC-65D93U $11,000, TTM Mar 07, same features as the rest of the 93U
line, with fixed bottom-placed speakers. I have all the details on the
future 2007 report but we do not need those here.

One can not assume that because a model is continuing from 2005 to 2006 the
unit is a 2006 model, usually there is a change on model # when new features
are implemented, such as HDMI.

The specific model # you provided is a model introduced in 2005, not in
2006, nor is the 2007 model.

I am glad you are contacting Sharp, but someone from Sharp has to give you
the complete picture of the 3 years of model #s and added features.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Richard Fisher
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 4:53 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I did read today and...

Yes, this was a 2005 model that was provided again as a 2006 model and
per Sharps website it is being sold yet again as a 2007 model except now
it has HDMI besides the DVI.

Still waiting to hear from Sharp.

Richard Fisher
ISF and HAA certified
HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Rodolfo La Maestra wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> The short answer is NO.
>
> If you care to read:
>
> The Sharp was a 2005 product; it was first announced at CES 2005 (over 2
> years ago) to become TTM Nov 05, meaning the technology of everything on
> that set is about 2 years old.
>
> The HDMI 1.3 specs were approved mid 06, about six months ago. Chips for
> those specs started to appear several months later, toward the end of 06.
>
> Manufacturers are at the beginning of their effort implementing those
chips
> in "some" future products, not retrofitting current products with HDMI
> chips.
>
> Simplay Labs as a new test facility was not necessarily created for just
> passing 1.3, but for general HDMI/HDCP compliance testing for more than
one
> category in any kind of product, wires included, to benefit consumers
> regarding HDMI interoperability.
>
> Again, passing the test does not mean the product is automatically 1.3
> compliant or 1080p capable, or has Deep Color, or xvcolor, or lossless
audio
> codecs capabilities, etc, it means it interoperate well with other HDMI
> suited products, it means that is better than no test, and better than no
> organization testing.
>
> Even after CES 2007 MOST manufacturers are still short in specifying
> correctly the version of HDMI they support and also the HDMI functionality
> features they implement of their equipment (like the above), so we are all
> in for another roller coaster ignorance sharing year (most probably
years).
>
> And, as advance notice, please do not expect me to produce a flawless list
> of HDMI 1.3 products on the 2007 report, for 2 things:
>
> A) It is misleading if specifying only 1.3 and not the 1.3 related
> functionality implemented in the product, and
> B) After I started doing the list at CES, I found the hard way that it was
> an impossible task because most at CES could not be trusted, unless it was
> on a press release, besides, I already have all that information even
before
> CES. Samsung was one of the companies that showed better effort on being
> specific across products.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now I have a question myself, maybe my first question since the magazine
> started in 1998:
>
> What would it take for people to read the very own articles and reports
> produced by the magazine?
>
> (Please, this is not a disrespectful or an ironic question, it is a
reality,
> and issued with the intention to redirect efforts)
>
> A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?
> B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to
produce
> articles to readerships.
> C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the
eye
> and be intellectually empty?
> D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach
to
> help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
> depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar
questions?
> E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully analyzed
> subject anyone could use for research at anytime?
> F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
> require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to produce
> the content and wait until someone asks?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Mark Alford
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:28 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Richard,
>
> Check the news section of the forum. Someone had posted an article about
a
> month ago that gave the website for 1.3 certification. At that time there
> were less than ten pieces of equipment that had been verified as 1.3
> capable. I don't remember there being any products from Sharp on the
list.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 1/28/07 10:55 PM, "Joe Hart" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Considering the age of the model (it debuted in fall 2005) I would be
>>surprised.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Joe Hart
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>Richard Fisher
>>Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:35 PM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Richard Fisher
>>ISF and HAA certified
>>HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
>>Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

From your 2006 report
65

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Richard,

The specs on the 2006 report were disclosed when the unit was announced in
2005, but it looks as when the unit was actually out several features were
adjusted, not matching with the initial announcement (vaporware advanced
press release time):

HDMI was not mentioned (in addition to DVI), but it could have been there
all the time.
800:1 CR was actually released as 1200:1 CR
12ms response time was actually released as 6ms
$21K was actually released much lower (competition eating them alive at
$21K, and by the time it went to market, LCDs started to come down).

In other words, it most probably is the same Nov 2005 unit but the specs on
the report became outdated, it happens with many products that are announced
so much in advance that by the time they are out they even have a different
model #, or they are DOA, like I remember some Sony cable DVRs did,
different model #s, larger HDDs, etc.

I am crossing emails with Sharp to get the full story, but my guess is that
there was only one 65" model released since then, and carried throughout
2006. In Mar 07 it will be replaced by the 93U line.

Let us remember your original question:

"Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?"

I responded basically to only that question (1.3), and it still the same
response, 1.3 could not have been A) retrofitted into the 2005 model (even
when current in 2006), is not normally done by anyone, and B) the model
could not have been replaced by another unit with the same number (another
abnormal situation), and either (A or B) ought to have been done only over
the past 3 months (availability of HDMI 1.3 chips), which is illogical if
they did it considering they were already working of the 93U line for TTM
Mar 07, which we are "assuming" it would have 1.3, it would be a bad Sharp's
move if it does not, but anything can happen, and it happens everyday even
with expensive units.

I will get back to you as soon as Sharp responds, but my analysis above
would be the most likely scenario.

In other words, assume NO 1.3 until Sharp officially proves the contrary.

And even if it does, 1.3 would not be of much use for a video display that
does not have implemented the 1.3 hi-end video functionally (deep color,
Xvcolor, etc).

Not even the future model 93U was announced as having those capabilities,
not yet (and would certainly be in the best interest of Sharp to start
bragging about if it does, like Sony with their $30K LCD Bravia with
xvcolor).

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Richard Fisher
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:06 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

From your 2006 report
65" LC-65D90U,
$21,000 (right),
TTM Nov 05,
AQUOS
1920x1080p,
same specs as
2005 report,
ATSC & Cable
CARD tuners,
four-wavelength backlight system, 800:1 CR, 450 cd/m2
brightness, DVI-I, IEEE-1394, Quick Shoot video circuitry, 12 ms
response time, TV
Guide On Screen free interactive programming
guide, titanium finish, detachable stand and
bottom speakers (specs
above on left).

From sharp's site
DVI Input DVI-I x 1
HDMI Input HDMI x 1
http://www.sharpusa.com/products/ModelD ... 2-,00.html

As to whether this is a 2007 model, the same model for 3 years, I don't
know but it is in your 2006 report. Sharp seems to act as if it is
current...
http://www.sharpusa.com/products/TypeLa ... 65,00.html

Stating model meant same specs as you stated, sorry for any confusion. I
do appreciate your assistance.



Richard Fisher
ISF and HAA certified
HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Rodolfo La Maestra wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Richard,
>
> The model # of the 2007 model is not the same, the size is.
>
> 65" LC-65D93U $11,000, TTM Mar 07, same features as the rest of
the 93U
> line, with fixed bottom-placed speakers. I have all the details on the
> future 2007 report but we do not need those here.
>
> One can not assume that because a model is continuing from 2005 to 2006
the
> unit is a 2006 model, usually there is a change on model # when new
features
> are implemented, such as HDMI.
>
> The specific model # you provided is a model introduced in 2005, not in
> 2006, nor is the 2007 model.
>
> I am glad you are contacting Sharp, but someone from Sharp has to give you
> the complete picture of the 3 years of model #s and added features.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Richard Fisher
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 4:53 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U with 1.3 - And a short question for readers
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> I did read today and...
>
> Yes, this was a 2005 model that was provided again as a 2006 model and
> per Sharps website it is being sold yet again as a 2007 model except now
> it has HDMI besides the DVI.
>
> Still waiting to hear from Sharp.
>
> Richard Fisher
> ISF and HAA certified
> HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
> Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra wrote:
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>The short answer is NO.
>>
>>If you care to read:
>>
>>The Sharp was a 2005 product; it was first announced at CES 2005 (over 2
>>years ago) to become TTM Nov 05, meaning the technology of everything on
>>that set is about 2 years old.
>>
>>The HDMI 1.3 specs were approved mid 06, about six months ago. Chips for
>>those specs started to appear several months later, toward the end of 06.
>>
>>Manufacturers are at the beginning of their effort implementing those
>
> chips
>
>>in "some" future products, not retrofitting current products with HDMI
>>chips.
>>
>>Simplay Labs as a new test facility was not necessarily created for just
>>passing 1.3, but for general HDMI/HDCP compliance testing for more than
>
> one
>
>>category in any kind of product, wires included, to benefit consumers
>>regarding HDMI interoperability.
>>
>>Again, passing the test does not mean the product is automatically 1.3
>>compliant or 1080p capable, or has Deep Color, or xvcolor, or lossless
>
> audio
>
>>codecs capabilities, etc, it means it interoperate well with other HDMI
>>suited products, it means that is better than no test, and better than no
>>organization testing.
>>
>>Even after CES 2007 MOST manufacturers are still short in specifying
>>correctly the version of HDMI they support and also the HDMI functionality
>>features they implement of their equipment (like the above), so we are all
>>in for another roller coaster ignorance sharing year (most probably
>
> years).
>
>>And, as advance notice, please do not expect me to produce a flawless list
>>of HDMI 1.3 products on the 2007 report, for 2 things:
>>
>>A) It is misleading if specifying only 1.3 and not the 1.3 related
>>functionality implemented in the product, and
>>B) After I started doing the list at CES, I found the hard way that it was
>>an impossible task because most at CES could not be trusted, unless it was
>>on a press release, besides, I already have all that information even
>
> before
>
>>CES. Samsung was one of the companies that showed better effort on being
>>specific across products.
>>
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Now I have a question myself, maybe my first question since the magazine
>>started in 1998:
>>
>>What would it take for people to read the very own articles and reports
>>produced by the magazine?
>>
>>(Please, this is not a disrespectful or an ironic question, it is a
>
> reality,
>
>>and issued with the intention to redirect efforts)
>>
>>A) They are free well researched and complete; maybe they should not be?
>>B) Maybe they should not be free? Magazines charge subscriptions to
>
> produce
>
>>articles to readerships.
>>C) Maybe they should only be 3 statements with a big photo to please the
>
> eye
>
>>and be intellectually empty?
>>D) Maybe we should not write articles and use a question/answer approach
>
> to
>
>>help readers, an approach that would take me more effort for less
>>depth/variety while producing repetitive responses to the similar
>
> questions?
>
>>E) Would a pinpoint personal response more valuable than a fully analyzed
>>subject anyone could use for research at anytime?
>>F) While the answer might not be in the title of an article and might
>>require a few minutes of reading, would it rather be better not to produce
>>the content and wait until someone asks?
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>
>>Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>Mark Alford
>>Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 7:28 AM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: Re: Sharp LC-65D90U
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Richard,
>>
>>Check the news section of the forum. Someone had posted an article about
>
> a
>
>>month ago that gave the website for 1.3 certification. At that time there
>>were less than ten pieces of equipment that had been verified as 1.3
>>capable. I don't remember there being any products from Sharp on the
>
> list.
>
>>Mark
>>
>>
>>On 1/28/07 10:55 PM, "Joe Hart" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>>
>>>Considering the age of the model (it debuted in fall 2005) I would be
>>>surprised.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Joe Hart
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>>Richard Fisher
>>>Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:35 PM
>>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>>Subject: Sharp LC-65D90U
>>>
>>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>>
>>>Can anybody confirm HDMI 1.3 on this display?
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>Richard Fisher
>>>ISF and HAA certified
>>>HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
>>>Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>>
>>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
>>>day) send an email to:
>>>[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>>
>>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
same
>>>day) send an email to:
>>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>
> day) send an email to:
>
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]