3 ms·
Note that they never say you can watch videos in HD. They always say you can watch HD videos or HD content or HD entertainment. You're just watching that HD s
by smackfu 15y ago
Note that they never say you can watch videos in HD. They always say you can watch HD videos or HD content or HD entertainment. You're just watching that HD stuff on a non-HD screen.
I should be a marketer!
- jinushaun 15y agoNYT article is link bait. Things that can play/receive in HD don't always necessarily display in HD. Nook is not the first or last manufacturer to do this. If only "true" HD devices were allowed to decode HD video, that would eliminate virtually all mobile video devices, including the iPhone 4S which records in 1080, but only has a 960 display.
- timwiseman 15y agoWhile technically true, it is extremely misleading to your average potential purchaser. At the very least a difference like that should be spelled out clearly in terms the target audiance would understand.
- jinushaun 15y agoIMHO, that sounds ever more confusing to consumers... Compare the confusing packaging at Best Buy with grids of tech specs to the simple and easy to understand packaging at the Apple Store. I'm turning boxes at Best Buy upside-down and inside-out just to figure out what the asterisk is referring to! Consumers don't need more asterisks. The fact that a famous tech blogger for the NYT can't even understand that distinction doesn't give me hope for the general public. Tech-savvy consumers will go to the website and clearly see that the tech specs for the Nook tablet lists a resolution of 1024x600.
- MrSourz 15y agoI made the same note when reading the article. That something can play a file with HD content is actually somewhat of a feature, especially with a smaller screen. I'd rather not have to re-encode like I did with my old video iPod. The iPod headphones & speaker example really showed me that the author was not thinking along these lines. It in my mind is not a lie.