Black Out Fall Out

Right now we are on the verge of high definition. We are promised a lot to come by everyone who seems to have a thumb in the pie, not least Microsoft and Sony. However, is this a little misplaced?

I've no doubt high definition is great and will mark a step forward but I'm not really complaining at the resolution of my current TV. I don't complain and wish things looked better when watching 24 or the football. Sure they look really nice on HDTV but it's not something I really must have right now, especially when these are among the only few things I can currently enjoy on HDTV.

I think the thing most consumers want is choice and options, as well as having something tangible that they can get good use out of (if that fails hype things up and hope general stupidity kicks in).

When DVDs started out, I was impressed but I held out for quite a long while. The initial batch of DVDs were quite light (feature wise) and awkward. There were no extras and were on double sided discs you had to flip midway during a movie. On top of this, the player cost a hefty sum but the quality leap over VHS was clear.

What personally got me hooked was the added value we seemed to get. Trailers, documentaries, commentaries and other gubbins; it all rounded out to a great package which trumped what VHS could offer. This was some time afterwards, once discs became single sided and people were starting to realise the potential by sticking extras on. This was a time when titles were abundant and the quality of each had improved.

So how does this apply to HD? At the moment, buying a HD television won't do much aside from future proofing me. I've only got a handful of things to look forward to if I do take a plunge. There's the prospect of buying a Sky HD reciever and the Xbox 360.

Going ahead with a Sky HD reciever, I'm looking at 5-6 channels for an extra £9.99 a month. Let's consider the channels, we have Sky One HD (only good for 24 which is on once a week), Sky Movies 9 and 10 HD (quite good), Sky Sports HD (we're looking at a few football matches here) and then I believe the only other channel aside from Box Office pay-per-view stuff is Artsworld HD (wtf?). The Xbox 360 is self explanatory, playing games in HD could be quite cool.

Breaking it down, it's quite a poor selection and hardly that enticing, especially at that price a month. 24 would be nice to watch, as would the movies and the occasional football match. Maybe a few games on the Xbox 360 look cool but it has hardly hit its stride. I'm not sure it requires the HDTV just yet to show off the full extent of the graphical goodness (not that this has bearing on the quality of game but heck I'm ranting on how to make use of your HDTV).

Nothing right now seems to scream "you need a HDTV as it's hella tits". What we needed was for Sky to release a full package of channels all broadcasting in HD. Namely, all the movie and sport channels they have (Sky Movies 1-10, Sky Cinema, Sky Sports 1,2, 3 and Extra). Having Sky One and anything else would only help matters. By offering all the key channels right now, you are effectively saying to people, if you go out and spend money, we'll give you the chance to make the best of it. I want a real incentive to go out and buy now.

As it is, it is prudent to hold back on all HD purchases for a year or two before jumping in, with good reason that you might get burnt. Prices will no doubt tumble, technology will have got better and current wrangles like the HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray debacle should have reached a conclusion (ensuring you don't pick the Beta of this generation or are able to pick up a dual format device). It all seems so messy, so very messy. There's nothing better than buying new technology, gadgets and gizmos but it's no point in having something cool when you cannot get proper use out of it.

To put it simply, you don't buy a Ferrari, only to never drive it above 10mph