I need a reality check on some things that are confusing me. I am hearing a few different things that don't seem to make sense. These include: - Progressive DVD on a native 480p display is better than 480i and a display that scales it to 480p or 1080i. - Home Theater PCs sending Dvd signals to a projector running at a native resolution is better than a standard dvd player being sent and scailed inside the projector. - A progressive scan DVD player with a native 480p display (like sony hdtvs) is better than a display that scales a signal up to 1080i. - DVI is going to be great (assuming the whole HDCP issue gets fixed) because you have digital signals going straight from your dvd to each pixil of your digital display. Here is why I am confused. Unless you have a display that is capable of showing a dvd at the exact resolution and framerate it was recorded at, it has to go through conversions. All of these conversions have loss whether they are digital or analog. My understanding is that DVDs have no way of being displayed without conversion within the player even if it is PC based or progressive. It is still being converted from a 480i 60fps signal coming out of the mpeg 2 chips. Since conversion has to happen anywhere, the fact that system A is using a progressive dvd player with a native 480p display and system B is using a normal 480i dvd player with the scaling happening in an hdtv that converts to 1080i doesn't really matter. Is this correct or am I missing somethign? It seems that with any system, there is a point of conversion and any system is only as good as the quality of that converter, whether it is digital, analog, in the player or in the display. I may be missing something here, but aren't we just looking for the best device with the best conversion? It seems that the only way our display gets better is with the source material (HD-dvds, dvhs). Am I on crack?