Re: Widescreen TV vs "regular" TV
I read an opinion a few months ago on this subject and the logic still seems difficult to refute.
The writer postulated that IF you still watch much in the way of commercial TV that is broadcast in the squarish 4:3 format AND you are thinking of purchasing a new TV set, you might consider getting a very large standard set instead of a wide-screen set.
Given that you will be watching both theatrical releases on DVD and also commercial TV, you are going to have black bars with one or the other format regardless of which type of TV you have.
If you have a widescreen set, the "regular" 4:3 programming will have black bars on the side. If you have a 4:3 set, the movie programming will have black bars on the top and bottom.
Widescreen sets are still quite expensive. For the same money or considerably less, you can get a very large "regular" set which will show a large picture of 4:3 programming AND show a wide-screen image that is the same size or bigger than what you would see with the widescreen set. You still have the black bars top and bottom, but you get a very large widescreen picture.
So, if physical size of the TV set is not critical, for fewer dollars you can get as large or larger (in inches) widescreen picture with a large "regular" TV than you would get with a real widescreen set and get better 4:3 compatibility also.
I have neither a large 4:3 TV nor a wide-screen TV to test this hypothesis. And I realize that one can easily add a dozen other factors (digital, high-definition, etc. and etc.) to thoroughly confuse the issue.
But the argument about getting a a large 4:3 TV instead of a wide-screen TV IF you don't exclusively watch movies or programming shot in wide-screen seemed compelling.