Smokey - first off, DVDs are encoded in 480i, not 480p. The DVD player or the TV (depending on the type of set you have, and whether it can even display a 480p signal) deinterlaces the interlaced frames of the 480i encoded DVD to create 480 progressive lines. There is no loss in quality when doing this, because the de-interlacing, at its most basic level, just holds the first frame (odd lines) while the second frame (even lines) is displayed. This de-interlacing process helps to smooth out screen flicker and scan line problems. So, no matter what, the DVD signal from the DVD to the progressive scan monitor/display device is ALWAYS going to be altered, unless an interlaced signal is displayed.
Next, I agree with you, in principle, regarding whether it you will get a "sharper" or "better" picture displaying a DVD on a monitor with a resolution of 480 pixels or using one with 720 pixels. Whenever you can get 1:1 pixel mapping, and you remove a level of processing, your image SHOULD remain closer to the source. This is because, when upscaling, or scaling in any sort, for that matter, complex algorithms are applied to the image in very quick fashion and in a constantly changing fashion. The algorithms often make mistakes, incorporating errors into the picture. On the other hand, some scalers are very good at what they do. They analyze pixels over time, looking at the surrounding pixels, interpretting these changes as movement. From this, it can predict or interpolate which pixels should go in the spaces between encoded information. This often results in what you have called "softness" but which others may refer to as "smoothness" with less pixelation, making it harder to see individual pixels, resulting in a more film-like picture. I guess it's a matter of choosing your poison - do you want a large image that is 1:1 pixel-mapped, but which might look pixelated or blocky when blown up to 100 inches, or do you want a slightly smoother picture that eliminates some of the pixelation when blown up. Most choose the latter, since the eye doesn't necessarily see this "softness" as decreased resolution.
That said, I think the original poster was getting at whether there is a real difference between 720p and 1080p, from normal viewing distances. Applying your logic, it would appear that the television with a higher resolution would make his DVD images softer. I doubt you will find that quote on the projector boards said by anyone reputable. GIVEN SOME UPSCALING, which is assumed in the original post, and also assuming a decent scaler, I view the question as is 1080p better than 720p? And if so, is it that much better to justify the difference in price. My answer is - I don't know - I haven't viewed a 1080p set. But, my guess is that, given some upscaling is going to take place, I choose the set with the ABILITY to resolve more detail. Is it worth the price difference - I have heard that from normal viewing distances or screen sizes less than 50 inches or so, the answer is "No". We will all find out soon enough.
In any event - take what I have to say with a grain of salt, as I have little experience with large screen HD projectors (my brother in law has a large screen, 480p projector - that I don't think looks that great when projected at 85 inches - I woudl bet dollars to donuts that the picture would improve if his projector had a higher resolution, and could "create" in between pixels, thus reducing the blocky look of his image), but ease the personal attacks a little and try to have a more constructive conversation. You claim that these boards are for educating people, not misguiding them. Yet you sling sh*t like you think Ape culture is on the verge of extinction. Heed your own advice, and use the boards for constructive discussion, not ad hominem attacks on other posters.
