|
|
Posted by <normanstrong on 04/22/06 17:04
"Joshua Zyber" <jzyber@mind-NOSPAM-spring.com> wrote in message
news:uZc2g.10921$i41.5869@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> "L Leed" <lluck98@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1145633184.288547.24200@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>> http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/#film2
>>
>> Consumer electronics writers have begun to weigh in on the new HD DVD
>> players distributed by Toshiba this week, and most are unimpressed.
>> Several cite an intolerably long boot-up period, a confusing menu
>> system, and incompatible sound. But nearly all express disappointment
>> in the picture. On smaller sets, the writers agree, the difference
>> between HD DVD and a conventional DVD is virtually undetectable.
>> "Bottom line is that HD DVD is great, but will you notice?" asks Ben
>> Drawbaugh on HDBeat.com. Writing in the Los Angeles Times David Colker
>> remarked that on larger screens he could detect a subtle difference. He
>> added: "I tested my perceptions by switching between the two formats. I
>> asked a colleague to close his eyes while I chose a version, then had
>> him open them and guess: DVD or HD DVD? He got it right only about 75%
>> of the time. So, yes, it's better. But don't expect the dramatic leap
>> in quality that came with the transition from VHS to DVDs in the
>> 1990s."
>
> The LA Times writer admits in his article that he hooked the player up by
> the Composite Video cable (which any idiot should know will not transmit
> High Definition video) and demonstrates complete ignorance of how to
> correctly display a movie's aspect ratio. That "review" is an
> embarrassment to the profession of journalism.
If composite connection will not transmite HD video, what analog connection
will?
Norm Strong
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|