Andrew Bowden wrote: > > > The public don't know what they want! ;) Problem is they'll settle > for naff quality because they don't realise exactly what kind of > quality can be achieved from the technology, they merely accept the > broadcasted quality because they don't believe they can do anything > about it, and there we have it. If you ask the early adopters what > the quality was like at start as opposed to today, they all take our > standpoint (it's rubbish now). > > > TV pictures are a similar one. You wouldn't believe the number of > people who can watch 4:3 signals on Freeview, stretched out to 16:9 on a > naff LCD and think it's the best picture they've ever seen. Yet it > makes me cringe every time. But try telling people that you're right... ;) > > > And lets not forget that we've now got a culture growing whereby > teenagers listen to music via appalling mobile loudspeakers on buses > (well that is until I loom over then and threaten to ram the confounded > thing down their throat anyway! ;)
Funny thing that - I'm sure I recall a study that said that size is more important than quality for enjoying video. [I suspect volume is more important for enjoying music.] Note, "enjoying", not "appreciating". As we, err, 'mature'; some of us learn to appreciate as well as enjoy. I have a 240cm screen that plays standard def pictures blown up to widescreen - it's fantastic! Sure I notice the fuzz and some artefacts if I look careully - but it behooves me not to. Anyhow, personally I'm stuck until I can get a non-DRM HD signal into my Linux Myth PVR. David - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
