|
Home > Archive > Home Theater Forum > February 2007 > Symtoms of failing bulb in a Sanyo Z-4 front projector?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Symtoms of failing bulb in a Sanyo Z-4 front projector?
|
|
| comcastss news groups 2007-01-31, 5:25 pm |
| 2,000 hours stated life for these bulbs.
I'm at about 1,800 hours and I notice the screen will get darker for a
moment and then get bright again. I'm having other issues with my comcast
DVR hd cable box. I'm trying to tell if its the bulb ageing of the cable
box?
What happens when I reach 2000 hours?
TIA
Steve
| |
| Jon Woellhaf 2007-01-31, 5:25 pm |
| I just watched _The Illusionist_ for the first time and thought my projector
lamp was about to go. It turned out that some of the opening scenes are
supposed to flicker. Reminded me of Andy Kaufman's loss of vertical sync
gag.
"comcastss news groups" <srivet@starprintingcorp.com> wrote in message
news:FYednWat6omhmFzYnZ2dnUVZ_oipnZ2d@conversent.net...
> 2,000 hours stated life for these bulbs.
> I'm at about 1,800 hours and I notice the screen will get darker for a
> moment and then get bright again. I'm having other issues with my comcast
> DVR hd cable box. I'm trying to tell if its the bulb ageing of the cable
> box?
>
> What happens when I reach 2000 hours?
>
> TIA
>
> Steve
>
>
| |
| Dave Bugg 2007-01-31, 5:25 pm |
| Jon Woellhaf wrote:
> I just watched _The Illusionist_ for the first time and thought my
> projector lamp was about to go. It turned out that some of the
> opening scenes are supposed to flicker.
Same thing here. It made me think that perhaps a "do not adjust your set"
warning, ala 'The Outer Limits', should be included in the opening credits
:-)
[color=darkred]
> "comcastss news groups" <srivet@starprintingcorp.com> wrote in message
> news:FYednWat6omhmFzYnZ2dnUVZ_oipnZ2d@conversent.net...
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com
| |
| comcastss news groups 2007-02-01, 9:25 am |
| No this dimming is not part of the broadcast.
In the middle of law and order the scene will get very dark for a moment and
then lighten up again.
This just started a few weeks ago.
Steve
"Dave Bugg" <davebugg2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pc9wh.465$6z6.321@newsfe06.lga...
> Jon Woellhaf wrote:
>
> Same thing here. It made me think that perhaps a "do not adjust your set"
> warning, ala 'The Outer Limits', should be included in the opening credits
> :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>
>
>
| |
| Dave Bugg 2007-02-01, 1:25 pm |
| comcastss news groups wrote:
> No this dimming is not part of the broadcast.
> In the middle of law and order the scene will get very dark for a
> moment and then lighten up again.
> This just started a few weeks ago.
This is why I detest top-posting. There is no clear indication, without
scrolling up and down and picking through the posts, just what the heck you
are replying about or to whom.
[color=darkred]
> "Dave Bugg" <davebugg2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:pc9wh.465$6z6.321@newsfe06.lga...
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com
| |
| comcastss news groups 2007-02-02, 5:25 pm |
| I detest bottom posting, I have to scroll all the way to the bottom to read
the post.
Get a life!
"Dave Bugg" <davebugg2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eKqwh.25$LY3.0@newsfe04.lga...
> comcastss news groups wrote:
>
> This is why I detest top-posting. There is no clear indication, without
> scrolling up and down and picking through the posts, just what the heck
you
> are replying about or to whom.
>
>
>
> --
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>
>
>
| |
| Dave Bugg 2007-02-02, 5:25 pm |
| comcastss news groups wrote:
> I detest bottom posting, I have to scroll all the way to the bottom
> to read the post.
>
>
> Get a life!
Expected reply from a knuckle-dragging slob.
No one said anything about bottom posting, or that folks shouldn't trim
posts to which they are responding. Bombastic, it's-all-about-me simpletons
could care less about the proper context for reading, and taking
responsibility to trim posts of extraneous text, because it only matters
what they want, not what's best for the group. I bet you piss in your
neighbors pool because it would be an inconvenience to excuse yourself to
the restroom.
The fact that you fail to understand that reading context is vital in a
text-based medium is not surprising, given your response. What YOU "detest"
is of no importance to anyone but you. The fact remains is this: a response
never proceeds a question or a statement in verbal conversation. You don't
read chapter 12 in a book before reading chapter eleven. Context is
important to the flow of conversation, and top-posting removes the context.
Now, please, proceed with the mouth-foaming, the incoherent
rationalizations, and the penis-waving displays of your withering sense of
self-esteem.
Were all waiting.
--
Dave
| |
| comcastss news groups 2007-02-08, 1:25 pm |
| So do you ever help people out by responding to their questions or just go
around critiquing their posts?
While you have some valid points on posting, I haven't found top posting to
be a problem. I'm sure you didn't have to reread the posts to know what I'm
talking about now.
You shouldn't take yourself so seriously, lighten up.
your the only one "waiting"
Steve
"Dave Bugg" <davebugg2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_4Nwh.29$hD1.19@newsfe06.lga...
> comcastss news groups wrote:
>
> Expected reply from a knuckle-dragging slob.
>
> No one said anything about bottom posting, or that folks shouldn't trim
> posts to which they are responding. Bombastic, it's-all-about-me
simpletons
> could care less about the proper context for reading, and taking
> responsibility to trim posts of extraneous text, because it only matters
> what they want, not what's best for the group. I bet you piss in your
> neighbors pool because it would be an inconvenience to excuse yourself to
> the restroom.
>
> The fact that you fail to understand that reading context is vital in a
> text-based medium is not surprising, given your response. What YOU
"detest"
> is of no importance to anyone but you. The fact remains is this: a
response
> never proceeds a question or a statement in verbal conversation. You
don't
> read chapter 12 in a book before reading chapter eleven. Context is
> important to the flow of conversation, and top-posting removes the
context.
>
> Now, please, proceed with the mouth-foaming, the incoherent
> rationalizations, and the penis-waving displays of your withering sense of
> self-esteem.
>
> Were all waiting.
>
> --
> Dave
>
>
| |
| Dave Bugg 2007-02-08, 8:25 pm |
| comcastss news groups wrote:
[Top-posting corrected]
> So do you ever help people out by responding to their questions or
> just go around critiquing their posts?
Oh My Gosh, what a snappy retort. I believe you are the first person in the
history of usenet to make this point to anyone. Congrats on your
breakthrough.
> While you have some valid points on posting, I haven't found top
> posting to be a problem.
Of course you don't, bubba, 'cause it's all about *you*. And when it's all
about *you*, your only concern is with whatever makes *you* happy. Forget
others, forget context, forget style.
> I'm sure you didn't have to reread the
> posts to know what I'm talking about now.
Really? You always make these kinds of assumptions? The fact never occured
to you that, given the length of time since my reply, I had forgotten all
about you? Or did you think that, like you have been doing with my posts, I
had been doing nothing but breathlessly awaiting your next post? As a matter
of fact when I saw your post, I had to scroll down to read my posted reply
to you, then scroll back up to read your post to keep things in context.
> You shouldn't take yourself so seriously, lighten up.
Yet another blast of originality. Do I appear "heavy" to you?
> your the only one "waiting"
You're just *full* of snappy comebacks, aren't ya. Come, come now; you can
do so much better.
|
|
|
|
|