Posted by GMAN on 06/24/06 03:29

In article <b6adnXox088NSAbZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@comcast.com>, linonut@bone.com wrote:
>After takin' a swig o' grog, Larry Qualig belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> They won't care which one has marginally better quality video. Most
>> people can can tell the difference between standard video and HD but
>> few consumers will be able to discern the subtle difference in quality
>> between these two formats. The difference in price... that's something
>> they understand.
>
>It is weird. I've not been impressed with the hi-def feeds of the World
>Cup that I've seen. Is it the monitors used, or some limitation in the
>feeds? I though HD would be sharp, but I've only seen that one time --
>in a museum exhibit a few years ago.
>
The same bullshit happened with the Torino Games in february, their pooled
camera HD coverage of the olympics was pathetic whereas the 2002 Salt Lake City
games was a work of art.

[Back to original message]