How could it even be close to a triplet when the other two have 6 years or so worth of games it does not have? It also makes no real sense considering they have not gained all third parties. I hope they do not because than it will practically be a triplet. They probablly wont so all is good.

The HD twins are mostly the same, but if you own both and buy both 1st parties including move and kinect they really are not twins. Very close though.

lol

HD is 720p or higher resolution.

PAL SD is 576p (or 576i).

The Vita's screen is 544p, making it lower resolution than PAL SD. It is not HD.

Aielyn
SD is 480p or 576i
HD is 720p and beyond
the Vita is 544p so its more than SD but far less than HD
so Vita IS NOT HD
its just marketed that way to atract fools...

Well, seeing as how it's not even available yet, I would say no.
Nintendo is in its own little generation right now.

Actually, 576p is also SD (or, sometimes, "ED", but EDTV is not a standard term), and the Vita is lower resolution than 576p.

Anyway, just wanted to address that one point. The real point stands - it's not HD.

i think 480p is 576i but with the progressive scan
anyway, truth is Vita is marketed as an HD device to atract the HD console owners, but it isnt, so i dont know if that could be indictable...

No, 480p and 576p are equivalent to each other, but are the resolutions of NTSC and PAL, respectively. NTSC has 480 lines but refreshes at 60 Hz. PAL has 576 lines but refreshes at 50 Hz. There is also PAL60, which is 480p and refreshes at 60 Hz, but uses the PAL colour set rather than the NTSC colour set (PAL is superior in terms of colour).

Anyway, I suspect that they're using a loophole, to call it HD. Strictly speaking, 720p and higher are "high definition", not "HD". "HD" is just an abbreviation. So long as they don't actually claim "high definition", they can use "HD" as much as they want. I also don't think that the term "HD" (or "high definition") is legally enforced - I think it might only be a standardised term in the industry.

but that HD can be considered misleading advertising, its not true that the Vita provides High Definition, so its false, ergo it should be indictable...

well it should be because i'm sick of sub par picture on my bought and paid for and made me broke tv. I do have direct TV but some of there hd channels piss me off and this I think is the best of the best with HD. So I think HD should be legally enforced. I like to use my Samsung tv's power.