What is Digg?101 Comments
- tulwave, on 06/22/2008, -1/+72I just turned 40 so my eyes are not even high enough def to see it properly
- inactive, on 06/22/2008, -2/+55 ***** Comcast. That's where they are spending their money and on lobbyists and not on customer service or upgrading their networks.
- hotrodscott, on 06/22/2008, -2/+51Wouldn't it just be better if they just lowered the cost of cable for everyone by $22 million?
- grangerfx, on 06/22/2008, -0/+29So that's where all the missing Comcast HDTV pixels went!
- ivan423, on 06/22/2008, -4/+32duplicate story
http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Comcast%E2%80%99s_Immens ... - purple, on 06/22/2008, -0/+25Wtf did you just say?
- AlexWiggy, on 06/22/2008, -1/+25Hate to say it.
But imagine the porn! - Barackalypse, on 06/22/2008, -0/+20Unfortunately they'll compress the video feed down to 13 Mbps and still call it HD and you'll wonder why you have 10 million pixels and the picture still looks worse than Bluray.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=10 ... - Idiggapony, on 06/22/2008, -2/+20That has to be a lie. I'm the only person over 20 years old on digg.com.
- Zaneris, on 06/22/2008, -1/+19Um, it's supposed to match the tiles of the rest of the walls to give the illusion that it's not a screen.
They also have plenty of video without the tiles. - kmotiv1, on 06/22/2008, -10/+27Anyone else think that a big grid going across the screen in all directions really ruins screens?
- BoneStamp, on 06/22/2008, -0/+15I love Light Emitting Diode Lights, but they're so ***** redundant.
- inactive, on 06/22/2008, -0/+14This is ***** retarded.
Instead of showing absolutely jack ***** - how about rebuilding your network infrastructure - so you don't have to join Times Warner and AT&T in limiting bandwidth because you oversell your bandwidth.
Oh well, FIOS is going to own them all anyway. - Avaseal, on 06/22/2008, -1/+11I dont wanna see razor burn, stretch-marks, or breast implant surgery scars in High-Def!
- woofers07, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10That's pretty damn cool, but ***** comcast still.
- cj485, on 06/22/2008, -0/+9uh, cool? 22 million for this? not worth it, imo.
- c89a, on 06/22/2008, -0/+9i agree completely. love em' or hate em'? i don't think thats a real question.
- Daniel591992, on 06/22/2008, -1/+9No, you'd be a poor idiot. Now if you had a cent for each pixel in the largest screen in the world, then maybe...
- Laminarcissus, on 06/23/2008, -1/+8Hey, here's another fun statistic -- you could feed and educate 52,300 impoverished children for a year for what it cost to build that, and then you could even put their pictures up in that same space as decoration.
- dOOBiEx213, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7This is useless. Exactly, WTF are you going to watch in this? Secondly, if the resolution is only five times that of HDTV, yet 89234792 times bigger how big are those pixels? How "far away" do you have to be to view this? And when all is said, and done, how much of your Field of Vision will it cover?
- mbonzo531, on 06/22/2008, -0/+6Those doorways suck.
- PingKing, on 06/22/2008, -1/+7Anyone else think you need an Ultra HD monitor in order to really see a video about an Ultra HD monitor?
- zachxmorris, on 06/22/2008, -2/+8so that's where all my ***** money goes.
- XFi6, on 06/22/2008, -2/+7The problem is, even though it's 10 million pixels, the reason it is is because the screen is too big.
See if there were 10 million pixels in a 44" LCD TV that would be friggin' clear as real life. But 10 million pixels on a TV that big isn't making it any clearer than a normal 1080p TV. It's just, bigger. :/ - Elderon, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5nice, they can spend a bazillion dollars on some stupid tv that really makes no difference to any of it's customers, but they moan and groan about having to upgrade their network. asshats
- Mrdudeperson, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5Think they will sell these things at Wal-Mart? If they do I am so in.
- DiggzDE, on 06/23/2008, -1/+5I thought people over 40 weren't allowed on the internet anymore. :(
- Timdegreat, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4I hate 'em.
- KingCritter, on 06/23/2008, -2/+6Hrm. Hentai, then?
Anyone up for twenty-one hundred square feet of tentacle porn? - ULJarad, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4Imagine what 10 million pixels would look after they compress it to 1MB/sec!
- Idiggapony, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4Allow us to direct you to the "send a shout to my conspiracy theorist buddies" button. It's harder to find than the "Save Comment" button, but sometimes a more appropriate choice.
- Soniti, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4Seriously, I was thinking that the whole time.
Ultra HD, 10 million pixel display with 4 mm LEDs, thwarted by 3 doorways. It really ruins the experience in my opinion.. - Farmer77, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Yeah, Comcast sucks.
Now with that out of the way, I thought that wall screen was pretty cool... - AgincourtDB, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3Hey I have an idea, let's take a state of the art huge HD video installation, and then accompany it with a third-rate echochamber sound installation! Have these people never heard of acoustic treatment? Not that it's impossible to *design* a good-sounding room that size in the first place, it's just that we apparently don't have the nerve to expect that anymore.
- InsaneWookie, on 06/23/2008, -0/+3RAS syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAS_syndrome - FDL1, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3No, but the big hallway-sized cutouts ruin it. The future of TV... a large non-quadrilateral picture.
- mrblue182, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3anybody else really wanna break in and rick roll with it?
- jsaya, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2ur doing it wrong
- championchap, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2First, Ultra HD displayed in a YouTube video = fail.
Second, what the ***** is up with that arrow that brings up one button on the embedded YouTube player?
I mean honestly, what a ***** waste of time that is.. add more buttons to it or get rid of the ***** arrow! - WolverineBlue, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2So what exactly is the point of a demonstration of a super high def tv when it's viewed as an flv? (and am I the only one who is really annoyed at the placement of those doors?)
- mrinsanity, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2You can still get a sense of the size and clarity of the display, especially when they zoom in on the dancing people in the video and they look just as clear as the ACTUAL people watching.
- Laminarcissus, on 06/23/2008, -1/+3No, the logical conclusion to that logic is that we all attend a Comcast Center with a mosaic of the faces of 52,300 children that have been fed and educated through a $22 million donation by Comcast.
If I say, "Well, I wanted that Ferrari, but I decided that I would get more satisfaction and do more good by giving the money to charity," then I'm contributing to our cultural descent down the slippery slope of barbarism?
I happen to think it's exactly the opposite. - ahwang, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2WTF my laptop can barely handle 1080.
- gregcotten, on 06/23/2008, -0/+24K resolution is better. (See "Red" http://www.red.com )
- drew30319, on 06/23/2008, -0/+2Oh. Is that where my bandwidth went?
I received an email from Comcast yesterday that my upload speeds have been increased - "up to 1 megabit per second." If you'll notice the only limit is on the top-range. No guarantees on the bottom range though.
I think I'll adopt the Comcast marketing model: "If you hire me I'll work for up to 200 hours a week!" - Giever, on 06/23/2008, -0/+2So he has one more year, then.
- B3bomber, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2this was what i was going to say on this. $22 million... fiber optics per house is about $1,500 now instead of $2,000. that would wire around 14,666.66667 houses. by the size of my town and i'm guessing 3 people per house (yeah, i would be shocked if it was that low with all the illegal mexicans that put 3 families in a house [easily 10+ people. no i'm not kidding, last census thing we had ~47% of the entire towns population was mexican]) they'd only need to wire around 7,666.66667 houses to get fiber to EVERYONE in my city, oh and they'd have SPARE to work on somewhere else.
what a ***** joke. - Laminarcissus, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1They really named their flagship product "*****-Out-of-Luck?"
- inactive, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1Maybe we could get some decent monthly prices and bandwidth speeds if Comcast's profits weren't invested in things like this. Throw in the debates about the download caps and I am really about to "unsubscribe".
- DaffyDuck, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1This is about a billion times more badass than the service they provide their customers.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 103 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is