Re: Review of HD1000 at Digital Producer. (Not entirely positive)

Charlie White has been known to review components/equipment without regards 
as to whether or not it's the current software rev or even the current 
hardware version.  I site a Pinnacle CineWave review he did a couple years 
ago based on old software and even older (dis)information.  In the case of 
the HD-1000, publicly passing judgement on a complete product line based on 
his experience with one obviously defective individual unit is thoroughly 
unprofessional in my opinion.  Maybe there are a few bad ones out there, 
but that's a quality control issue not a design problem (as he implies) 
!  I've worked with at-least six or eight different HD-1000 boxes and I've 
never seen one that was the least bit unstable.  I push these critters to 
the limit too, often playing 30 to 40 megabit 1080i HD materials sometimes 
for days and weeks at a time.  My HD-1000's have been completely stable and 
reliable.  Sorry (about yours) Charlie !  Why don't you return that 
defective unit for a healthy replacement (there is a 30 day 
return/replacement policy) and do an honest review of the product ?  Or is 
it just more fun (more lucrative) to trash a piece of equipment just 
because you're in the position to do so ???

Bart

P.S.  I'm cancelling my subscription to the DMN newsletter effective today !!!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bart Harrison
MPA - The HD Suite

HD Editing Systems, Consulting, Production & Post, Exhibition & Distribution
www.hdsuite.com
954-894-1221



At 11:44 AM 5/28/2004 +1200, you wrote:
>http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=25831-0
>
>The reviewer clearly had alot of difficulty with the unit crashing, and also
>commented that the response times were very slow, and that the interface
>left much to be desired.
>
>I haven't yet played with an HD1000 myself, so I'm not in a position to
>comment on the issues raised here.  Is this maybe an earlier release of the
>OS, or are these known bugs that are being addressed?
>
>I'm still keen to get one of these for my clients, based solely on the
>screensaver feature, and from having read this reveiw it seems the
>screensaver is not affected by the problems the reviewer had.
>
>Cheers,
>Hamish
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Roku-tech mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.rokulabs.com/mailman/listinfo/roku-tech

_______________________________________________
Roku-tech mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rokulabs.com/mailman/listinfo/roku-tech