Many good comments about talent vs. gear have already been posted. Better equipment does not make up for lack of training/skills/raw talent but it does open the doors for more people to give it a try.
Remember when Desktop Publishing was going to make everyone a professional writer and typesetter? Yeah, that didn't happen, but the landscape did change a bit as those with the relevant skills adapted to the new technology.
Just for fun, I thought I'd pull the following two quotes.
From the Canon website: "The stylish Canon HV20 gives you the ultimate in HD video and digital photo quality with advanced features for the knowledgeable and demanding videographer." Ultimate? For some reason Sony doesn't have a problem selling their HDC-F950 for $110k. Silly pros not realizing all the money they're wasting!
From the referenced article: "... but the (sic) Premiere and Vegas are the only "cheap" NLEs for Mac or Windows that support 24p (which is important if you want to edit movies, TV shows or simply your own HV20 24p footage)
Movies? TV shows? The quality of such a camcorder is simply too poor except for perhaps use as a stunt camera or for a consumer camera viewpoint. Most of the folks I talk to who are hobbyists don't realize that the camera makers are doing a number on them by promoting "professional" features (HD, 24p) that don't overcome the basic limitations of the camcorder -- tiny imager, lousy depth of field, crappy lenses, poor audio circuitry, extreme compression, limited dynamic range, etc. Putting headers and wheelie bars on an AMC Gremlin doesn't really make it into a sports car. (And yes, I've seen one decked out like that.)
I used to be a hobbyist videomaker. It's fun. Good for those who enjoy it, but there is a whole industry built around creating the illusion that by having gear with the right bells and whistles you'll be catapulted into being a pro.