Saturday, September 15, 2007
Size?
"...because the new Nano has a much larger screen (two inches diagonal). With 320-by-240 pixels crammed into that space..."
"Much larger screen?" Please. Two inch - diagonal no less - is notthing that I would add "larger" to, unless maybe I was working in a microbiology lab. I think "not as small" would be much more accurate. And there's a lot of reviewers talking about how nice a picture it is??? We have something like a 28" CRT TV at home and I wouldn't consider it large - let alone much larger than anything.
I guess it must be my middle-aged senses screaming for help, but a 2" screen isn't something I'd like to watch a TV show on, let alone a movie. Poor Genie wouldn't have to worry about her belly button shocking Middle America on something like that. I have dust-bunnies in the TV room that would eat a 2" screen for lunch. I really find it hard to believe that there is any kind of market for videos on something that small. Even youtube.com stuff is pushing the limits for me. How can you really enjoy looking at something that is smaller than most pictures in my wallet?
By the way, I think the quote came from a NYTimes article.
Labels: computers, gripes, tech
