This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Telecommunications This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Television This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Where's the source regarding how the Nintendo Virtual Console works? Many VC games do not work via component cable and according to some Nintendo responses this would be due to the Wii outputting a non-standard resolution which seems to contradict the statement here that all games would be upscaled to 480p. Troed 10:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Wii line doubles Mega Drive games (Runs them at 480i/576i), rather than 240p. Which is stupid, the Wii is perfectly capable of 240p in Composite and Component (Tested it with homebrew emulators that supported said output). I've 'corrected' the article, I'd like some proof the Virtual Console games even bother running at 240p. Flygon (talk) 01:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you the one who inserted the craziness about loads of consoles and computers OUTPUTTING 240p? In which case can you at least give some named examples and preferably link us some reliable published data, maybe even schematics proving that they did it and how? For a start, it would mean the manufacturers are making one hell of an assumption that the majority of TV sets and other equipment their device is going to be connected to will support a non-standard, officially disallowed resolution and scan rate... with either additional flicker, or heinous scanlining (IF the input signal has any bearing on actual line placement, rather than just providing sync pulses and leaving the set to figure it out). Why wouldn't they just hold the same single-field image for two scan durations whilst feeding it to the commodity composite/RF generator? The output would be more compatible, produce a better looking picture, and be far simpler to implement. I've never seen it done that way, only with line/field doubled 480/576i (and typically, a smaller, bordered window within that).

BUT... It would explain the bizarre, ugly "scanlines!" mode that a lot of old-console emulators seem enamoured of, and my only argument about it is "OR" and common sense, which governs very little in the televisual field. Therefore I haven't "been bold" and deleted these claims. They would however benefit from a bit of backup, rather than just adding in wild unverified "facts" that you may well have just made up. Is it maybe an NTSC-only phenomenon, hence my not witnessing it (living in a PAL country... mind that I have had access to machines that quite happily output NTSC signals if requested to do so, e.g. user-requested 60hz mode switching in games for 16-bit computers, or import titles for modded Playstations) and "your" reliance on 240/480 without acknowledgment of 288/576-line modes.193.63.174.10 (talk) 10:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are using a CRT TV with old games consoles (NTSC and PAL systems) you can actually see the blank scanlines if you look carefully. I think you might be slightly confused about how 240p/288p works, so I have added some references to the article as requested, which I hope will help explain it in greater detail. Link83 (talk) 21:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I try to find out what resolution of 240p.

I can't found direct link on standart 240p.

Then I open video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G-n9p28Yh8w ), right click on video and select "Show video info", and change standards: 240p, 360p, 480p.

Resolution for 360p (640x480) in YouTube is different than in end of section "Sources" in "Low-definition television" article (540x480). — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaLeonis (talk • contribs) 10:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the current iPod touch 4 has a 960x640 display. Should it be changed? Anish9807 _{t c} 16:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

==

I do not think this is legal to link to a leaked Nintendo SDK document (VI.pdf) which is obviously protected by some NDA. The link seems to be dead but it would be wiser to remove it completely, even if it is a valid proof that Nintendo Game Cube & Wii (and a lot of VC titles) still supports 240p — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.241.89 (talk) 08:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...I think, though I haven't yet confirmed, that this is 256x144 16:9 - would it be worth adding to the list alongside the 4:3 176x144, as one of the most easily accessible and likely to be experienced examples of truly low-definition video broadcasting that most internet users will come across? 193.63.174.211 (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article needs to be updated

YouTube offers 480 and its derivatives: 360 (75%) and 240 (50%). But European resolution 576 would have the derivatives 432 (75%), 288 (50%) and 144 (25%). Is this just a coincidence and YouTube did go for 10% of 1440? There's no source given, so no proof of either.
Liggliluff (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]