Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari
You're not serious, right? This from someone who advocated for Blu Ray on a 13" screen? Who argued with me when I said it was overkill?
|
Ah, but you're missing the point my friend - this isn't a matter of display, it's a matter of input. Let's say there was a laptop that had a Blu-ray player in it, but only had a 1280 x 720 screen....720p, but not 1080p, which is the point of Blu-ray. So you have a laptop that can't display the full resolution of the Blu-ray disc. Just like the Zune HD that can play back a 720p video file, but not display the full resolution on the screen.
You'd say that was worthless right? I say it's not. I say the value in having a laptop with a Blu-ray drive is that if you have Blu-ray DVDs and you want to watch those DVDs, that's what matters most, not whether it's the "proper" resolution. Just like if you have HD video files, the ability to watch them on the Zune HD is what matters. HD is about crispness and clarity, and I'm quite certain that a 720p video scaled down with a powerful GPU will make that video look really good on the 3.3 inch OLED screen. But we'll see...if I'm wrong I'll be the first to cry foul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari
In all seriousness, though, calling a device HD because you can play HD through it to a television with an optional dock, to me, smacks of being "technically" correct, not honest. Bam indeed.
|
My Panasonic point and shoot camera can capture HD video at 720p, but when I preview it on the screen, it's not HD resolution (it's VGA I believe). So according to you it couldn't be called an HD device. I say it is.
I think this is just splitting hairs over whether calling something HD means it has to be able to
play back HD content, or
display HD content. Blu-ray players don't have screens, but they can play back HD content. You wouldn't dispute that they're HD players though, right?