A friend recently asked me for some advice on buying a new TV. Specifically, he wanted to know whether to go with plasma or LCD, but as I started to answer that question I realized there are some other matters that are more important. I mean, I do have some opinions on the different display technologies out there, but I’d find a set with the right features first and then ask what makes it work, and even then just as a conversational point.

Now, personally, following several years of actively lusting after a succession of large-screen beauties, I finally gave up last year and went for a big LCD monitor attached to a multimedia computer. Frankly, the TV manufacturers had let me down by taking too long to develop the right set for me and bring it down to an affordable price. And because I followed the technology so carefully, I kept putting off a buying decision until some new feature or other filtered down to the consumer level. I’d say the market has finally reached an interesting point, but I no longer care.

Take HDMI. That’s the High Definition Multimedia Interface connection, a one-wire solution for getting digital audio and video from its source to a screen and speakers. When it was developed a few years back it existed just on higher-end sets, but it was clearly the way of the future. So, back then, as now, I wouldn’t consider any gear that didn’t have HDMI. These days it’s pretty standard at even the lowest price ranges, but make sure to check that you’re getting it on what you buy (well, at least on TVs, AV receivers, and DVD players).

Next, there’s screen resolution. A constant point of confusion over the past few years has been, “What constitutes actual HD television?” About 18 things, unfortunately. No fewer than 18 different sizes and picture aspect ratios were originally developed under the banner of digital HDTV, but only one of them is actually important: 1080p. That’s the maximum level: a screen that can display a field of 1,920 pixels across by 1,080 vertically and control them line by line (progressive scanning). Anything with an “i” at the end (like 1080i) is interlaced video such as what old-style tube sets use, where every other line of resolution is drawn first, then the alternating lines. You don’t want that.

Anyway, if you’ve managed to wait this long to buy into HDTV, it seems foolish to buy anything less than a set capable of 1080p. True, there’s not a lot of content available at that resolution yet, but if you’re making an expensive purchase for the future, like a fancy TV, why buy a model that’s already on the way to becoming obsolete?

The fact is, if you aren’t already, in the future you’ll be dealing with video in a variety of formats, from low-resolution YouTube clips and regular broadcast TV to high-definition digital cable and a Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc. You might as well get a television that’ll show every possible variant, rather than spend a big chunk of money on a set that gives you everything except the highest quality levels. Sure, a couple of years ago a 720p TV was the best choice you could make at a reasonable price, but with the arrival or the 1080p, you’re getting the last word on resolution for many years. Nobody’s even daring to whisper “Super-HDTV” as of yet.

So, if it were my money at stake, I’d wait until a 1080p set with the screen size I desire became affordable. If you’ve held out until now, there’s no sense in suddenly settling for a product you could’ve bought three years ago—times have changed, and the technology ceiling has finally been achieved. Admittedly, most 1080p sets with large screens (42 inches and up) cost at least $3,000. That seems like a bit of a premium when decent 720p TVs are dropping from $2,000 to $1,000, but all those sets used to cost $3,000 or more themselves. Not only should the price drop on 1080p happen quicker, the present-day price is still a bargain compared with that of the past.

But, what if the TV you currently own abruptly needs to be replaced? Maybe the picture tube burns out or somebody throws a Nintendo Wii controller through it—you have to buy today, but can’t stretch the budget. One option is to try to spend less than $1,000 for a moderate-size (26- to 32-inch) flat-panel set with 720p resolution (or 768p, which is a common dimension among LCD screens). There, you’ve spent the same as a similar-sized tube TV would’ve cost eight years ago and you’ve got a better picture in a cool-looking package. At that price it won’t hurt too much when you do decide 1080p has become affordable and/or the 1080p content available becomes too compelling.

Alternatively, if you wanted to get a bigger screen while staying in the 720p price zone (and are willing to acknowledge you’re buying something you’ll probably be replacing in three to five years), I’d skip over plasma and LCD and get a DLP TV. They’re the ones that shine a light off a circuit chip covered in tiny mirrors to reflect onto the back of a screen. They aren’t as thin as flat-panel TVs, but they are narrower than tube sets. DLPs are low maintenance (after a few years you might have to change a 100-watt light bulb), and very lightweight despite their size (they’re pretty much a hollow box), and the picture is clear and crisp. And a 50-inch set can be had for under $1,500.

Even so, I’d be reluctant to buy in right now at less than 1080p. If I needed an immediate replacement, I’d try to borrow a TV or pick up something cheap on the used market. (People are practically giving away high-quality tube sets.) Besides, the 1080p wait might not be long. I just spotted a $2,700 sale price on a Samsung 56-inch wide-screen 1080p (a DLP set), and you know it’ll be more like $2,000 before the year is out. It won’t be long before all the lower-resolution HDTV sets get pushed out of the marketplace, or at least into the sub-$800 bargain basement.