This morning I was doing my usual daily reading, which largely consists of looking through a bunch of RSS feeds and occasionally reading an article all the way through. One of the articles that looked promising enough to actually read was by a CNet blogger named George Ou who was ranting that HD from internet video providers isn't "Real HD " because it uses a low bitrate.
 

Forgetting for the moment that he makes claims about what bitrates are used for DVD encoding or required for AVC/VC-1 encoding that simply have no basis in the real world, he's correct that the bitrates typically used by online video providers simply aren't good enough for high quality HD. But that doesn't mean its not HD. HD means high definition, and refers to the resolution of the screen. To say that 720p video isn't HD simply because it's encoded at a low bitrate is preposterous.

When pressed on the issue later, his response was simply that it looks like SD video to him. He declined to elaborate on how his opinion means 720p isn't HD. Later in the day he even posted an update to his blog attempting to illustrate his point about the quality, but still insisted on calling it "Fake HD. " After I once again called him out on the issue he responded that it's "low fidelity. "
 

Now I don't personally care if Mr. Ou is misinformed, but it bothers me greatly to see people making public declarations about video related topics when they can't even manage to use basic terminology correctly. One of the biggest reasons so many people don't understand basic HDTV and digital video technology is because this kind of "expert " analysis is so prevalent. Based on his CNet bio, which lists a bunch of IT experience, he should understand the importance of accurately using technical terms.