I think having two distinct numbers makes for a confusing naming convention. That's why HDTVs are 720p, 1080i, 1080p -- the bigger number is obviously better (though the qualifier may matter, for various reasons). I never liked VGA/XGA/etc because in a vacuum, presented with the following list: VGA SVGA XGA SXGA WSXGA+
it's probably not readily apparent which is better, or for what reason. I think we should just adopt the vertical resolution with some character to signify that we're talking about a name -- "I have an x1200 monitor" sounds clearer than "I have a 1200 monitor" -- and would mean 1600x1200 or 1900x1200 depending on aspect ratio, which is probably either obvious (if you're looking at it) or described elsewhere (if you're reading e.g. a spec sheet or ad). It would be much better for me if they said my Nokia 770 had a "wide x480 screen" than "WVGA" or whatever variant they actually use in the literature.
Anyway, the HMD looks pretty cool, but they use the old line about "support" for up to 1024x768 -- they "support" it by crunching it down to 800x600, the actual native resolution. It's worse than the hard drive size lie ^H^H^H marketing you always see. Also, they don't give much info on the "3D" support -- I get the impression each eye is driven separately, but there's only one input of each type (also, I don't see any mention of component, contrary to the original post) so both parts of the stereo signal must come in over one VGA cable. I have the sinking feeling this would mean it works best with only specific video cards, and/or that individual 3D games would need tweaking to work right. I hope I'm wrong -- when these come down in price as the next generation of HMDs becomes available, I might try to ebay one ;-)
The Triumph proved to be one of the better looking and performing pre-paid handsets we'd had the pleasure of holding in our sweaty mitts, but we had one major hangup: the name.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
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.
I think having two distinct numbers makes for a confusing naming convention. That's why HDTVs are 720p, 1080i, 1080p -- the bigger number is obviously better (though the qualifier may matter, for various reasons). I never liked VGA/XGA/etc because in a vacuum, presented with the following list:
VGA
SVGA
XGA
SXGA
WSXGA+
it's probably not readily apparent which is better, or for what reason. I think we should just adopt the vertical resolution with some character to signify that we're talking about a name -- "I have an x1200 monitor" sounds clearer than "I have a 1200 monitor" -- and would mean 1600x1200 or 1900x1200 depending on aspect ratio, which is probably either obvious (if you're looking at it) or described elsewhere (if you're reading e.g. a spec sheet or ad). It would be much better for me if they said my Nokia 770 had a "wide x480 screen" than "WVGA" or whatever variant they actually use in the literature.
Anyway, the HMD looks pretty cool, but they use the old line about "support" for up to 1024x768 -- they "support" it by crunching it down to 800x600, the actual native resolution. It's worse than the hard drive size lie ^H^H^H marketing you always see. Also, they don't give much info on the "3D" support -- I get the impression each eye is driven separately, but there's only one input of each type (also, I don't see any mention of component, contrary to the original post) so both parts of the stereo signal must come in over one VGA cable. I have the sinking feeling this would mean it works best with only specific video cards, and/or that individual 3D games would need tweaking to work right. I hope I'm wrong -- when these come down in price as the next generation of HMDs becomes available, I might try to ebay one ;-)