You know, this kind of brings up a good point...in the same sense that some HDTV manufacturers have false advertising by calling their 1024x720 resolution HD, I think that content providers should be subject to some of the same requirements (they may already be...I don't know for sure but it doesn't seem like it). I mean, you can call something HD because you recorded it or sent it to the affiliates in atleast 1280x720, but if there's so much compression that it doesn't even meet DVD quality standards, then what's the point of all that resolution? In other words, I think technically you could have a terrible picture that meets resolution standards (as I've heard of some of the conversions onto HD-DVD/BD have been), but I don't really consider that HD.
“The other one is a biggie, and it's something very noticeable in the videos: touch sensitivity is pretty bad. Using the virtual keyboard proved to be far too painful, and we're pretty sure it wasn't multitouch-friendly.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
You know, this kind of brings up a good point...in the same sense that some HDTV manufacturers have false advertising by calling their 1024x720 resolution HD, I think that content providers should be subject to some of the same requirements (they may already be...I don't know for sure but it doesn't seem like it).
I mean, you can call something HD because you recorded it or sent it to the affiliates in atleast 1280x720, but if there's so much compression that it doesn't even meet DVD quality standards, then what's the point of all that resolution?
In other words, I think technically you could have a terrible picture that meets resolution standards (as I've heard of some of the conversions onto HD-DVD/BD have been), but I don't really consider that HD.