I think it's a bit absurd to say you wouldn't like a channel as much if it isn't in HD. Either you like the content or you don't! HD is great, but it doesn't make a show inherently better... if content sucks, it sucks. HD enhances it, particularly with Discovery, History, and especially sports.... but it doesn't turn a crappy channel into a good one.
Maybe I'm over analyzing the statement, but it seems a bit pretentious.
Not true. Take a series like Planet Earth. I tried watching that in SD, and was not remotely interested in it, however watching it in HD, I loved it. Some shows are greatly enhanced by HD. Some you just don't give a crap about. A lot of the stuff on History HD, even when it's supposed to be HD, not stretch-o-vision, just doesn't wow the eye.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1, much like its Limited Edition sibling that we reviewed last month, is ever-so-slightly thinner than the iPad 2, a slate that most sane individuals (and competitors, for that matter) would confess is the market leader today.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
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.
I think it's a bit absurd to say you wouldn't like a channel as much if it isn't in HD. Either you like the content or you don't! HD is great, but it doesn't make a show inherently better... if content sucks, it sucks. HD enhances it, particularly with Discovery, History, and especially sports.... but it doesn't turn a crappy channel into a good one.
Maybe I'm over analyzing the statement, but it seems a bit pretentious.
Not true.
Take a series like Planet Earth. I tried watching that in SD, and was not remotely interested in it, however watching it in HD, I loved it. Some shows are greatly enhanced by HD. Some you just don't give a crap about. A lot of the stuff on History HD, even when it's supposed to be HD, not stretch-o-vision, just doesn't wow the eye.