Darren New wrote:

> What the heck are you paying £20,000 for?

Nothing. My point is, anything that says "HD" on it - whether it's a TV 
or a coffee mat - instantly becomes drastically more expensive than the 
"non-HD" version. Which seems silly, given the minimal difference in 
quality.

It just puzzles me that if they were going to make everything 
incompatible so they could up the resolution, why didn't they up it to 
something really high? You know, so you can *see* a difference?

Then again, I suppose you usually sit sort of 12 feet away or something...

>>> I do like bluray better than hddvd. I'm glad they won.
>> ...there's a difference between them?
> 
> Stick with analog.

Not an opion, sadly.

>> In reality, we just swapped analogue distortion for compression 
>> artifacts. 
> 
> True, but missing the point of what I was sayign.

...OK...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message