Re: Defining safe areas for media devices and set top boxes

On Dec 6, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris Lilley <> wrote:

> On Monday, December 6, 2010, 9:06:45 PM, Brad wrote:
> BK> On Dec 6, 2010, at 9:27 AM, João Eiras <> wrote:
>>> Sorry, that's not acceptable. I'm working in an HD tv and state of the art media devices. If they connect with an RCA cable, the content is cropped, so a simple cable can make a big difference. I did mention that in the very first email. So I'd like to keep this discussion around the media query issue.
> BK> What did I say that took it out of being a media query issue? I
> BK> merely suggested that the same query to find devices with an
> BK> unsafe zone would also find devices with interlacing. So I was
> BK> wrong; it also finds people who are using the wrong cable. Right?
> Brad how about you step back a little and consider if, just maybe, there might be something to learn from an entire industry segment (TV) instead of assuming that everything they do is dumb and stupid?

That's not fair. I did nothing to suggest that everything the entire TV segment does is stupid, nor even what this one person said. 

> You never know, Web-on-TV and TV-on-Web just might be important technologies in the coming years.

I don't doubt it for a second. 

> BK> So you want a new query term that not only supports a dying
> BK> technology (CRTs), but also inappropriate yet still somewhat workable hardware set-ups.
> Since the very post you quoted mentions HDTV and 'state of the art media devices' the relevance of your comment is debatable and its tone, inappropriate.

I admitted to being wrong about conflating interlacing with unsafe areas of TVs. So, since this is no longer about tube technology (which the media query would also support), explain to me how using a non-HD-supporting cable with a HD TV is "'state of the art", and something worthwhile. I think you are reading too much into my tone. I invited correction if there was more that I was wrong about. 

Received on Monday, 6 December 2010 20:50:42 UTC