Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!gatech!taco!hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu!kdarling From: kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: CDTV News Message-ID: <1991Jun21.041029.23416@ncsu.edu> Date: 21 Jun 91 04:10:29 GMT References: <30115@know.pws.bull.com> Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: North Carolina State University Lines: 26 In <30115@know.pws.bull.com> ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes: > Note to Kevin: Your too close to the subject and have lost your focus! > I didn't see my girlfriend saying "Those pictures are lacking in quality > just a little bit." She was taken by those pictures, the sound, and > the ease of use of such a machine. Tom, I don't doubt you a bit! Still, that's like having never seen a television before. It's new to her. It'll be a more informative reaction once she's seen something else to compare it to, wouldn't you agree? Hmm. I suppose you're also hinting that technical specs aren't everything. Well, I agree, of course. That's why I only bring them up when someone prints an outright mistake. Isn't that what net groups are partly for, to spread and use true information instead of misinformation? Sure. I've also said, more than once, that carefully chosen pictures may not show any quality loss. Yet the extreme interest all around here in both new video chips and in DCTV, is proof that there _is_ a desire and need for better CDTV graphics. The humorous and hypocritical part of all this is that _if_ CDTV had the better graphics, what the heck do you think would be the first technical spec cited by CDTV boosters? Be honest, guys. BTW, one of the things I try never to discuss is whether CDTV will succeed. So it's a little exasperating to try to keep people informed, and then have someone like Ray continuously put his *own* words of doom into *my* mouth. best regards! - kevin