Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs - Sinclair

This is a discussion on Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs - Sinclair ; Sorry for the triple post earlier. I swear I only clicked the post button once. It was either Google, IE6 or some other bit of shoddy software. If you're interested in the start of colour television, BMW motorcycles or magic ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

  1. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Sorry for the triple post earlier. I swear I only clicked the post
    button once. It was either Google, IE6 or some other bit of shoddy
    software.

    If you're interested in the start of colour television, BMW motorcycles
    or magic tricks, or all three, may I recommend the novel 'Carter Beats
    The Devil'. Can't remember the author but it's an interesting read.

    PAL is better than NTSC for one very simple reason: NTSC came first.
    When PAL was created they learned from the mistakes of NTSC.

    I do have a question though. What is the point of SECAM? All I know
    about it is that the French use it (still?), that the picture is stored
    in the same format as PAL but the colour in a different format.


  2. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    cheveron@gmail.com did eloquently scribble:
    > I do have a question though. What is the point of SECAM?


    They're french, they HAVE to be different.


    It's just pigheadedness, I wouldn't let it bother you.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  3. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs


    napísal
    > I do have a question though. What is the point of SECAM? All I know
    > about it is that the French use it (still?), that the picture is stored
    > in the same format as PAL but the colour in a different format.
    >


    afaik PAL has colour information for each specific scanline, SECAM uses
    colour information for two next scanlines, but I may be wrong. Two picture
    fading colour mixing in SECAM is much more complicated than in PAL

    B


  4. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    cheveron@gmail.com wrote:

    > I do have a question though. What is the point of SECAM? All I know
    > about it is that the French use it (still?), that the picture is
    > stored in the same format as PAL but the colour in a different format.



    Hi!


    I wonder how the next Football World Championsship will be sourced. By
    NTSC, PAL, PAL+ or PAL Secam!? Or even by 1080HD?? :-)))
    (For any African Villain Tent, a 1080HD Tuner :-)))))



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  5. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Well I've done a bit of research and it seems that SECAM is better than
    PAL, which is better than NTSC. However, it's about time we ditched all
    three because all they are doing is overlaying colour on a monochrome
    image and if we're going to force everyone to switch to digital TV
    anyway, we should at least reward people with a better picture.


  6. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    cheveron@gmail.com wrote:
    > Well I've done a bit of research and it seems that SECAM is better than
    > PAL, which is better than NTSC. However, it's about time we ditched all
    > three because all they are doing is overlaying colour on a monochrome
    > image and if we're going to force everyone to switch to digital TV
    > anyway, we should at least reward people with a better picture.
    >


    Switch or not, you're watching a picture that has been digital at some
    point in the chain. You see MPEG degradation artifacts all the time in
    analogue TV these days.

  7. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs


    cheveron@gmail.com wrote:
    > Well I've done a bit of research and it seems that SECAM is better than
    > PAL, which is better than NTSC.


    I think the main point of SECAM was to protect
    the French television and broadcast industry. The
    Eastern block countries adopted it so that tv
    broadcasts from the west couldn't be received.


  8. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    A936@hotmail.com wrote:
    > cheveron@gmail.com wrote:
    >> Well I've done a bit of research and it seems that SECAM is better than
    >> PAL, which is better than NTSC.

    >
    > I think the main point of SECAM was to protect
    > the French television and broadcast industry. The
    > Eastern block countries adopted it so that tv
    > broadcasts from the west couldn't be received.
    >


    Are you sure? I could be mistaken, but after stripping the colour
    components, SECAM and PAL are essentially compatible - you can receive
    either on a monochrome set.

  9. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs


    napísal

    > I think the main point of SECAM was to protect
    > the French television and broadcast industry. The
    > Eastern block countries adopted it so that tv
    > broadcasts from the west couldn't be received.
    >


    Yes, during socialism in Czechoslovakia there has been SECAM broadcast, but
    as I've mentioned before, SECAM is not efficient for mixing colors when
    editing, thus when they edited something, they must at first place convert
    it to PAL, and for broadcasting back convert to SECAM. In 80s you couldn't
    obtain here in our socialistic market a PAL tv set, we've seen austrian
    broadcascing B/W.

    B


  10. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs


    "Bohus Král" napísal
    > In 80s you couldn't obtain here in our socialistic market a PAL tv set,
    > we've seen austrian broadcascing B/W.


    Of course, people have been bringing a PAL tv sets from the west, and
    Tesla(a brand) started to make dual system TV sets, so you could see also
    PAL colours, but till velvet revolution I never seen colors on my ZX
    Spectrum at home.

    B


  11. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Wayne Marsh wrote:

    > Switch or not, you're watching a picture that has been digital at
    > some point in the chain. You see MPEG degradation artifacts all the
    > time in analogue TV these days.


    yesh.

    Our cable-station tried to plug the Digital Picture into the Analog
    cable. Like, then it's better....

    It lasted not long.... , maybe some weeks.
    I was almost on the plan to leave the cable-station and go on with a
    analogue reference-receiver with dish etc.
    Even in the public BUS, I heard conversations, like: "In the TV is all
    digital...."

    :-)

    Now it's o.k again, and the origin is fired (normally). Eurosport is
    smooth, ARTE is one of the best, German do have outstanding Equipment
    (LIVE Sport etc., Movies w/o commercial breaks etc.) and some other
    private stations force good analog tapes (quality) as well.


    Artefacts?? well, sometimes.... mainly with struggling
    studio-dig.tapes. But that happened to analog, too.



    Best Regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  12. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    cheveron@gmail.com wrote:

    > Well I've done a bit of research and it seems that SECAM is better
    > than PAL, which is better than NTSC. However, it's about time we
    > ditched all three because all they are doing is overlaying colour on
    > a monochrome image and if we're going to force everyone to switch to
    > digital TV anyway, we should at least reward people with a better
    > picture.



    Hi cheveron@gmail.com!


    I am sure the American can make an outstanding video-system. I am not
    sure if it could beat the good old PAL/NTSC in Power-consuming, but it
    should be so. Giving some hundreds of Watts for Receiver is not
    intelligent and foreseeing. Just imagine the power-consumption of,
    let's say, 500.000,000 Chinese households with Plasma and Digital
    Receiver ;-)

    Digital Camp has forced the Tech too much, IMO. Parting the possible
    market to digital lover and analog TV lover would be the fairer way.

    As I said, good Dig. Tapes are quiet nice, when broadcasted analog.
    They, as that, do not dazzle or lag :-| (e.g still pictures, when too
    much information is in the Pictures. A Prairie for example, or a
    grain-field, when going with DVD), and are smoother and deeper than my
    DVD, IMHO. Although, good analog tapes go a bit deeper, around the
    subjects/objects etc. 'Caligula', 'Cleopatra', 'Alien', 'Superman' and
    such Movies!



    Kind regards,

    Daniel Mandic


  13. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Bohus Král wrote:

    > Yes, during socialism in Czechoslovakia there has been SECAM
    > broadcast, but as I've mentioned before, SECAM is not efficient for
    > mixing colors when editing, thus when they edited something, they
    > must at first place convert it to PAL, and for broadcasting back
    > convert to SECAM. In 80s you couldn't obtain here in our socialistic
    > market a PAL tv set, we've seen austrian broadcascing B/W.
    >
    > B



    Hi Bohus!


    Austrian is (have been ;-() almost the same tech as the German public
    TV...


    Dropped in a depp tech hole, yet.... Hard enforcing of payment, much
    political oriented.


    (They have been very very well in PAL quality, indeed. Great
    'Eurovision' connections for Sport events. That's all gone...
    Just imagine! Even the Soccer-WM 2006 was in digital. I do not
    understand why???? They could have plugged in directly to the German
    PAL+ Picture.
    Eurovision etc. Yes? :-))



    Best Regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  14. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    cheveron@gmail.com wrote:

    > Sorry for the triple post earlier. I swear I only clicked the post
    > button once. It was either Google, IE6 or some other bit of shoddy
    > software.


    Could've been worse. Due to server weirdness, I got six of 'em. And two
    complaints from everybody else.

    > I do have a question though. What is the point of SECAM? All I know
    > about it is that the French use it (still?), that the picture is stored
    > in the same format as PAL but the colour in a different format.


    It's French. I'm not being "funny"; as far as I can tell, that really is
    the point. The French like to have their own stuff.

    "Ze American CNNT[1], 'e eez no good. As we say, eet stands for 'les
    Coleurs Ne sont pas N...' Er. Anyway, we, ze French engineers, les
    ingenieurs francais, 'ave invented a better way. La belle SECAM! What
    you say? Yes, she eez a leedle bit like yore APL[2], but not ze semm. We
    'ave made 'er ourselves, an' she eez entirely French. Now go away."

    [1] Comite National pour des Normes du Television.[3]

    [2] Alternance de Phase par la Ligne.

    [3] Only with accents. Can't get the hang of them under Linux. They were
    dead easy on the Amiga, too...

    --
    Duncan Snowden.

  15. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Duncan Snowden did eloquently scribble:
    > [1] Comite National pour des Normes du Television.[3]


    > [2] Alternance de Phase par la Ligne.


    > [3] Only with accents. Can't get the hang of them under Linux. They were
    > dead easy on the Amiga, too...


    dead easy on linux if you can get digraphs working.
    Try this. Hold down the "menu" key (between right-windows and ctrl) and
    press '. Now press a.
    á
    Most of them are intuitive, like "-"+":"="÷" or "1"+"2"="˝"
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
    | in | suck is probably the day they start making |
    | Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  16. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    ....

    >>[3] Only with accents. Can't get the hang of them under Linux. They were
    >> dead easy on the Amiga, too...

    >
    > dead easy on linux if you can get digraphs working.
    > Try this. Hold down the "menu" key (between right-windows and ctrl) and
    > press '. Now press a.


    Errrm, what "menu" key? What "right-windows" key? My keyboard looks [a
    bit] like this:

    o o o * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --
    * * * | * * * -- * * * * * * * * * * * * --|
    * * * | --- * * * * * * * * * * * * -|
    * * * | * -- * * * * * * * * * * * -----
    --- * | * * * --- --- ----------- --- ---

    ^_^
    (The bottom row contains CTRL ALT SPACE ALT-GR CTRL)

    [Yes, it's left-handed, works fine, and has been transferred between
    machines on their replacement - being the only left-handed user, there's no
    point buying replacements for it as all new machines have come with a
    right-handed keyboard (all of a lower quality than this one)[1].]

    How do I get digraphs working with this one?

    [1] The worst keyboard being that in my notebook: very bad at roll-over
    often missing the second key when two are pressed quite quickly in
    succession; setting into NUM-LOCK mode (LED comes on) *STILL* requires the
    use of the FN key (must be a misteak, shirley) which being at the bottom
    left makes using the keypad (on the right) almost impossible with my
    preferred left hand.


  17. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    Robert Newson did eloquently scribble:
    > Errrm, what "menu" key? What "right-windows" key? My keyboard looks [a
    > bit] like this:


    > o o o * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


    > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --
    > * * * | * * * -- * * * * * * * * * * * * --|
    > * * * | --- * * * * * * * * * * * * -|
    > * * * | * -- * * * * * * * * * * * -----
    > --- * | * * * --- --- ----------- --- ---


    Hmmm, lacking dead keys eh...
    I'm sure it culd be configured to use alt-gr/ctrl or some other key combo,
    but I'm not entirely sure how.
    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  18. Re: a question about Timex Sinclairs

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    > Duncan Snowden did eloquently scribble:
    >
    >> [3] Only with accents. Can't get the hang of them under Linux. They were
    >> dead easy on the Amiga, too...

    >
    > dead easy on linux if you can get digraphs working.
    > Try this. Hold down the "menu" key (between right-windows and ctrl) and
    > press '. Now press a.
    > á
    > Most of them are intuitive, like "-"+":"="÷" or "1"+"2"="˝"


    Ah... hold on... á ŕ. It's not the menu key here, it's right-Windows,
    but it works! Hurrah!

    --
    Duncan Snowden.

+ Reply to Thread