The new iPhone has almost 5 times as many pixels as the Zune HD...
LOL! OH, well in that case...
🙄
...and yet you attempt to juxtapose the two so you can indirectly call MacRumors members hypocrites.
I didn't really have to do much work. It happens on its own now.
I don't really care what kind of fairy tales people need to believe in, but this kind of thing does get old after a while.
What
"Fairy Tale" is this you think I'm trying to believe in? My only point here, and one that was easily proven by a large number of posts in this very thread, is that when Apple produces a device, the members here will bend over backwards to praise it. And conversely, when a competitor produces a device or product, the members here will quickly move to denounce it and claim it as a failure. That is what gets old.
No, HD is a pair of letters that sometimes is an abbreviation for 'high definition' (and sometimes 'high density' or 'heavy duty' or any number of things, including nothing at all [e.g. Sennheiser HD-595 earphones]). Even 'high definition' is a term that only sometimes refers to the HDTV video specifications.
I don't think you meant to, but you are just proving my point. The term
"HD" means nothing. It is just marketing. We both totally agree on that. My theory, which was proven true in this thread, was that when a competitor uses the term, it will get mocked and laughed at. But if Apple does the same, well that changes everything. I mean hell, look at what the discussion here devolved into. Even if Apple doesn't describe the screen as
"HD", lets look at what happened here..
With regards to display devices, the term
"HD" has a widely-known general specification. If a device can display 720p or 1080i/p, that is what almost everyone considers an
"HD" display. Can this new screen show either of those resolutions? No. It is very high-res, especially for its size, but it isn't
"HD" capable. So what did the users here do when presented with that knowledge? Obviously, they changed the measurement for
"HD" capability, in order to justify this meaningless term and praise Apple.
First is was the fact that the screen is only 3.5" wide. Even though 960x640 isn't
"HD", at that size it is...
HD is relative to screen size. 960x640 on a screen this size is HD.
960 X 640 may not be officially 720p resolution, were talking about a 3 inch screen. At that size, 720p resolution would be completely pointless and retarded. 960 X 640 is more than enough and will look insanely sharp which qualifies as HD to me.
Next it moved on to
"pixels-per-inch", or ppi. Even though
ppi has never been a measure of
"HD" capability, on this screen it is. Hell, apparently it is
BEYOND anything we've seen before...
Find me a High Definition 1080P television with 320 DPI. A 50" wide screen with 320 DPI would have 16,000 pixels across... now that's just a smidge higher definition than 1,920 is it not?
Seriously, what am I missing here? I might be wrong but this rumored screen seems ultra high def, not just high def....
It also ventured into fully hilarious territory...
Apple's use of HD here might mean "high density" rather than high definition.
It is just as HD as video game consoles. The Call of Duty: Modern Warfare games run at 1024x600, which is the same number of pixels as the next iPhone. (not that I'd call COD:MW high definition in the first place)
Look, I'm an Apple computer user, and have been for a long time. I also love my iPhone, and more than likely will be getting this new 4th Gen iPhone, because my 3G is due for upgrade. But this type of thing is happening more and more, and it really wears on me. I used to laugh at the term
"Reality Distortion Field" as just a silly term, used to poke fun at Apple users. But, the only thing that is getting old to me, is the fact that it isn't a joke.
Oh well. Trying to break the RDF is impossible for some people here it seems. I'm just going to go back to the
"Console Games" section here. As illogical as the discussions can get there, they are nothing compared to other parts of this board.