16:8 HDTV aspect ratio 2048x1024

[herbstech]

Hello,
I wanted to get some feedback on my idea that HDTV should have been 2048x1024 instead of 1920x1080. The idea there is 2:1 aspect ratio is simpler and easier for computers to handle since it is a perfect multiple of 2 which computers "like" so much (for processing speed). My idea was also to transmit only one HD signal (2048x1024) and have very small TVs "throw away" ever other pixel for an effective resolution of 1024x512 which would be plenty of small kitchen and bedroom TVs such as 10"-19". Intermediate size HDTVs in the 20-29" range would have some models that downscale to 1024x512 and some that have the full 2048x1024 (to give customers a choice of resolution vs. cost savings). The only slight problem I see is 480i signals are not a "clean" downscale from 1024 but this is somewhat minor. If the original SDTV resolution was 512 scanlines then it would have been a "perfect" system. Another advantage is 2:1 aspect ratio would be wider than 16:9 giving more of a theater effect.

Any comments about my "proposal"? Thank you.

[herbstech]

Nobody has anything to say about this? I think it would have been a great improvement and I suspect anyone in the computer field would agree with me. 16:9 is such an oddball ratio and 16:8 is so close but would have been much better. I actually refuse to buy a HDTV partially because of this screwup and for other reasons too. I just got a cheap $50 HDTV tuner card for my 3 Ghz PC and I can capture OTA (over the air) broadcasts and process them for later playback even on slow computers. I can even crop it to 16:8 aspect ratio (which in my opinion is what it should have been to begin with

So I hope someone out there comments and sees that what I am saying has merit.