On Wed, 31 May 2000, Robert Blazewicz wrote:
> The core difference from my view point with NTSC vs PAL was cost.
Really? For me it's the 60 Hz (NTSC) vs. 50 Hz (PAL) thing, since each
standard is intimately tied to the AC power distribution infrastructure in
its respective geographical area. The French kind of went off and did
their own thing with SECAM, but I'm sure they regret having done so now.
> Part of the world wanted predictable colors and liked the PAL model.
> The others wanted to sell a product at a much lower cost and so went
> with NTSC (never the same color).
Didn't NTSC pre-date color broadcasting? As I understand it, the addition
of color to the television broadcast signal was done (with the addition of
the color burst and phase differences) in a manner such that black and
white television sets could still display the signal, but color television
sets could also pick up the needed color information. That would suggest
that NTSC existed before color broadcasting was invented, but I'm not a
historian of television or anything.
Paul Hart
--
Paul Robert Hart ><8> ><8> ><8> Verio Web Hosting, Inc.
hart@xxxxxxxxxxx ><8> ><8> ><8> http://www.iserver.com/
--
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
