"Consumer friendly, cheaper, better featured HD DVD to have won would have been better." -- If anything the "better featured" player was less consumer friendly than the Blu-Ray players. How many main stream consumers want to, or even understand how to run a network connection to their DVD player? How many consumers understand interactive features? Just play the damn movies. That's why I don't give a rip about Blu-Ray 1.1 or 2.0. My movies will still play. And don't even get me started on the mistake of pitching "cheap" to the High Definition Television owning audience.
"What a pitiful excuse for an article, trying to lift the flagging hit rate, this site is now paying the price for it's one eyed stand." -- Seems like it worked, they got your hit. Obviously people are interested. Why wouldn't they continue to post articles of interest on the EngadgetHD site?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mugatu @ Feb 23rd 2008 1:18AM
"Consumer friendly, cheaper, better featured HD DVD to have won would have been better." --
If anything the "better featured" player was less consumer friendly than the Blu-Ray players. How many main stream consumers want to, or even understand how to run a network connection to their DVD player? How many consumers understand interactive features? Just play the damn movies. That's why I don't give a rip about Blu-Ray 1.1 or 2.0. My movies will still play. And don't even get me started on the mistake of pitching "cheap" to the High Definition Television owning audience.
"What a pitiful excuse for an article, trying to lift the flagging hit rate, this site is now paying the price for it's one eyed stand." --
Seems like it worked, they got your hit. Obviously people are interested. Why wouldn't they continue to post articles of interest on the EngadgetHD site?