"AJ" wrote: > There is no need for anything greater than 720p on a 32-inch screen.
On the contrary, you have no idea how near or far individual users will be when viewing their televisions—or even if the televisions will be viewed in living rooms rather than restaurants or bars or lobbies or kiosks or mounted on walls in hallways or wherever else—and since most LCD televisions can double as computer monitors, wanting more than 720p or even the 720p-ish 1,366 x 768 is perfectly reasonable. Just because *YOU* cannot think of a need for higher resolution in a 32-inch display does not mean that everyone else shares your limitation.
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
There is no need for anything greater than 720p on a 32-inch screen.
"AJ" wrote:
> There is no need for anything greater than 720p on a 32-inch screen.
On the contrary, you have no idea how near or far individual users will be when viewing their televisions—or even if the televisions will be viewed in living rooms rather than restaurants or bars or lobbies or kiosks or mounted on walls in hallways or wherever else—and since most LCD televisions can double as computer monitors, wanting more than 720p or even the 720p-ish 1,366 x 768 is perfectly reasonable. Just because *YOU* cannot think of a need for higher resolution in a 32-inch display does not mean that everyone else shares your limitation.