David Barnett

"Gettamulla Tupya" <snapper@pookmail.com> wrote in message
news:bojsb4pi3a7frrudmnp61v1cunb9fe7epu@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:43:49 +1200, Nighthawk <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote:
>
>> Google 'HDMI scam'. Quite an eye opener. While looking around for a
>> 32" LCD and DVD player, in many places I was told that for upscaling
>> to work I needed an HDMI cable. No arguments there. But most places
>> said I needed a good one, one certified to certain levels, etc. I was
>> told that the starting price of HDMI cables was, (NZ prices) in one
>> shop, $50, in another, $99. I was recommended to get one for $169,
>> another salesman recommended a $300 cable, saying there are visible
>> differences, with cables going all the way up to $800.
>
> In the "old days" the salesmen used to talk people into buying very
> expensive component cables by showing people the difference in
> picture quality between composite and component. One tried it with me and
> I told him I much preferred the picture the composite
> cable gave. ;-)

Harvey Norman did this to me when I bought a digital Panasonic DVD recorder.
When I returned the cables in its original unopened plastic sealed pack,
after finding my own cables were satisfactory, Harvey Norman would not give
me a cash refund, & I had to get replacement stuff from the store. I now
boycott them.
--
David Barnett

>
>> I did some research. The fact is that HDMI cable is pure digital and
>> is not subject to the things that cause signal loss (except in very
>> long lengths, or interference. A $16 HDMI v1.3 cable from a computer
>> shop would do the job. If the specifications for HDMI v1 cable makes
>> it good enough for Blu-Ray with 8-channel sound, it will do for DVD as
>> well, hey?
>
> $16 is a bit much to pay. I've seen them for under $10 on Ebay.
>

Alan Rutlidge

"David Barnett" <dbarnett@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:NzCvk.33749$IK1.29084@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Gettamulla Tupya" <snapper@pookmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bojsb4pi3a7frrudmnp61v1cunb9fe7epu@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:43:49 +1200, Nighthawk <nighthawk@allo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Google 'HDMI scam'. Quite an eye opener. While looking around for a
>>> 32" LCD and DVD player, in many places I was told that for upscaling
>>> to work I needed an HDMI cable. No arguments there. But most places
>>> said I needed a good one, one certified to certain levels, etc. I was
>>> told that the starting price of HDMI cables was, (NZ prices) in one
>>> shop, $50, in another, $99. I was recommended to get one for $169,
>>> another salesman recommended a $300 cable, saying there are visible
>>> differences, with cables going all the way up to $800.
>>
>> In the "old days" the salesmen used to talk people into buying very
>> expensive component cables by showing people the difference in
>> picture quality between composite and component. One tried it with me and
>> I told him I much preferred the picture the composite
>> cable gave. ;-)
>
> Harvey Norman did this to me when I bought a digital Panasonic DVD
> recorder.
> When I returned the cables in its original unopened plastic sealed pack,
> after finding my own cables were satisfactory, Harvey Norman would not
> give me a cash refund, & I had to get replacement stuff from the store. I
> now boycott them.
> --
> David Barnett
>

Good move.
If you were told your original cables wouldn't work or would not deliver
satisfactory performance by the sales person and this was the reason for
making the purchase, you are entitled to a full refund.

The rationale is simple -
* you were misled by the salesperson,
* you returned the original goods unopened and presumably with the tax
invoice as proof you purchased the cable from them.

If you paid by cash you are entitled to a full cash refund.
If you paid by credit card, you are entitled to a full refund back into your
credit card account. Likewise if it was an EFTPOS transaction.

Telling you that you have to buy yet more junk from their store, is I
believe illegal.

One of my employees used to work part time at a HN store. He has confirmed
to me a full refund is what is legally required to be given.

Cheers,
Alan

J Brockley

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:uf8sb4ls64lm2vge3q2s6hqto051ifdjt0@4ax.com...
> Google 'HDMI scam'. Quite an eye opener. While looking around for a
> 32" LCD and DVD player, in many places I was told that for upscaling
> to work I needed an HDMI cable. No arguments there. But most places
> said I needed a good one, one certified to certain levels, etc. I was
> told that the starting price of HDMI cables was, (NZ prices) in one
> shop, $50, in another, $99. I was recommended to get one for $169,
> another salesman recommended a $300 cable, saying there are visible
> differences, with cables going all the way up to $800.
>
> I did some research. The fact is that HDMI cable is pure digital and
> is not subject to the things that cause signal loss (except in very
> long lengths, or interference. A $16 HDMI v1.3 cable from a computer
> shop would do the job. If the specifications for HDMI v1 cable makes
> it good enough for Blu-Ray with 8-channel sound, it will do for DVD as
> well, hey?
>
Expensive cables were always dubious even in the analogue world especially
when talking of distances of around a metre. This became really dubious once
digital arrived.
The optical cable on my first DVD (because of the horrendous cost at that
time) was a plastic fibre from one of those optic fibre lamps pushed thru a
hole in the blanking plugs.
It was actually better that the "proper" ones which were heavy due to more
substantial cladding and tended to pull out easier.

GDS

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:cdusb4pfad2npqo12rbfpq3t2k47el8dol@4ax.com...
>
> Very good. But to get to the video I had to go through this link:
> http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2008/0...king_the_deal/ and I only
> got audio. But it was still good.

It's a shame you couldn't see the video, sounds like it might be a browser/media player
problem? I'm using IE6 which launched WMP9, following your link worked also.

Still, even without the link and doing your own research you've saved yourself $100-$200,
not a bad days saving!

G.

Mutley

"J Brockley" <jsbrockley@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>news:uf8sb4ls64lm2vge3q2s6hqto051ifdjt0@4ax.com.. .
>> Google 'HDMI scam'. Quite an eye opener. While looking around for a
>> 32" LCD and DVD player, in many places I was told that for upscaling
>> to work I needed an HDMI cable. No arguments there. But most places
>> said I needed a good one, one certified to certain levels, etc. I was
>> told that the starting price of HDMI cables was, (NZ prices) in one
>> shop, $50, in another, $99. I was recommended to get one for $169,
>> another salesman recommended a $300 cable, saying there are visible
>> differences, with cables going all the way up to $800.
>>
>> I did some research. The fact is that HDMI cable is pure digital and
>> is not subject to the things that cause signal loss (except in very
>> long lengths, or interference. A $16 HDMI v1.3 cable from a computer
>> shop would do the job. If the specifications for HDMI v1 cable makes
>> it good enough for Blu-Ray with 8-channel sound, it will do for DVD as
>> well, hey?
>>
>Expensive cables were always dubious even in the analogue world especially
>when talking of distances of around a metre. This became really dubious once
>digital arrived.
>The optical cable on my first DVD (because of the horrendous cost at that
>time) was a plastic fibre from one of those optic fibre lamps pushed thru a
>hole in the blanking plugs.
>It was actually better that the "proper" ones which were heavy due to more
>substantial cladding and tended to pull out easier.

And don't forget the other scam. The $500 power cord that HiFi
enthusiast swear are better that the one that came with the amp..

Nighthawk

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 16:34:46 +0930, "GDS" <fake.mail@ii.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>news:cdusb4pfad2npqo12rbfpq3t2k47el8dol@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> Very good. But to get to the video I had to go through this link:
>> http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2008/0...king_the_deal/ and I only
>> got audio. But it was still good.
>
>It's a shame you couldn't see the video, sounds like it might be a browser/media player
>problem? I'm using IE6 which launched WMP9, following your link worked also.
>
>Still, even without the link and doing your own research you've saved yourself $100-$200,
>not a bad days saving!
>
>G.
>
I normally use Win98SE Lite, with either Firefox or Opera, NEVER IE.
I use Windows Media Classic, no WMP9 installed. I can boot into XP
where I have the very latest versions of Firefox and Opera, WMP9, and
where I will NOT use IE. Neither of those would work at all with that
video link. It is rare that a video link doesn't work for me. That
says something about their setup. For one thing, the video file
wasn't downloadable, bad news if you only have 256kbps broadband.

GDS

"Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
news:gbgvb459focsbn0636qqhsgkavahsdai9h@4ax.com...
>
> That says something about their setup.

Yep, poor html authoring that doesn't work for everyone across popular browsers and OS's.
I also use Media Player Classic but after installing XP SP3 a couple of days ago WMP9 has
reared its ugly head

> For one thing, the video file
> wasn't downloadable

I tried to download it myself, no go obviously. I also couldn't convert the downloaded
..dat file in the cache using all my many tools! It was shitty resolution anyway so no
biggy.

> bad news if you only have 256kbps broadband.

It'd look better if you wrote 256,000b/s ;)
That's a sucky speed, mine's only 1500kb and I feel I'm getting nowhere with that.
Naturally I'm shaped every month though, so I do appreciate anything above 56k

G.

zog

Nighthawk wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 16:34:46 +0930, "GDS" <fake.mail@ii.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Nighthawk" <nighthawk@allo.com> wrote in message
>> news:cdusb4pfad2npqo12rbfpq3t2k47el8dol@4ax.com...
>>> Very good. But to get to the video I had to go through this link:
>>> http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2008/0...king_the_deal/ and I only
>>> got audio. But it was still good.
>> It's a shame you couldn't see the video, sounds like it might be a browser/media player
>> problem? I'm using IE6 which launched WMP9, following your link worked also.
>>
>> Still, even without the link and doing your own research you've saved yourself $100-$200,
>> not a bad days saving!
>>
>> G.
>>
> I normally use Win98SE Lite, with either Firefox or Opera, NEVER IE.
> I use Windows Media Classic, no WMP9 installed. I can boot into XP
> where I have the very latest versions of Firefox and Opera, WMP9, and
> where I will NOT use IE. Neither of those would work at all with that
> video link. It is rare that a video link doesn't work for me. That
> says something about their setup. For one thing, the video file
> wasn't downloadable, bad news if you only have 256kbps broadband.
>
>

I tried this link in firefox3 in both vista and ubuntu, it worked fine,
I am on optus broadband (not adsl) if that has anything to do with it
http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/marketpl...g_the_deal.wmv

Snapper

GDS wrote...

> Although there's always going to be someone try to justify getting ripped off by a
> salesman saying "well I can see the difference", the simple fact is so long as the HDMI
> cable meets the minimum specifications there will be zero observable difference on the
> screen and through the audio device.

As I get older, crankier (if I said "cranky" those that know me would howl me
down) and more cynical, I am increasingly convinced that employers hire people
as sales people not because of their product knowledge but because they can sell
freezers to Eskimos (fridges they do need).

Whether this is about the fellow in Harvey Norman trying to tell you that
Monster cable products are worth the $100 v a $15 cable from DSE, or some guy in
Bunnings trying to tell you that Hardiplank products are the same as timber
weatherboards, or the kid in Jaycar the other day trying to tell me that
component video was the same as RGB when I was in there looking for an RGB/SCART
to component converter, they all have demonstrated a decided lack of product
knowledge.

Snapper

Nighthawk wrote...

> Google 'HDMI scam'. Quite an eye opener. While looking around for a
> 32" LCD and DVD player, in many places I was told that for upscaling
> to work I needed an HDMI cable. No arguments there. But most places
> said I needed a good one, one certified to certain levels, etc. I was
> told that the starting price of HDMI cables was, (NZ prices) in one
> shop, $50, in another, $99. I was recommended to get one for $169,
> another salesman recommended a $300 cable, saying there are visible
> differences, with cables going all the way up to $800.

Same shit, different name, re "monster" cables. When I bought my plasma the
salesman "threw in" a Monster Cable branded component video lead. It was a solid
looking affair and the plugs almost needed a pair of pliers to slip over the
sockets they were that tight a fit.

Anyway, I had to move stuff around. I found a component lead that had what
appeared to be standard RCA plugs and cabling. I think that I paid about $5 in
Dick Smith or whatever. So I used it. I could not tell the difference in picture
quality.

I run my Xbox 360 through the Sony AV Receiver and use component from xbox to
receiver and component from receiver via monitor out to the plasma. In both legs
I use el cheapo cabling. When I had the xbox connected directly to the screen I
used this monster cable. The picture quality for games or video seems to be the
same whether I go through the receiver and using el cheapo cables or direct
using the Monster cable.

I liken it to the oil companies spruiking premium unleaded in cars designed to
run on normal unleaded with bullshit claims of increased performance, economy,
etc.


--
A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend. A successful woman is one who can find such a man.