Actually, fps stands for frames per second, a.k.a. FRAMERATE -- 60fps is always better, but for a scene with very little or no motion such as this here still shot of the house across the street, 1080p (1920x1080 progressive) 30fps will produce a much sharper image than 720p (1280x720 progressive) 60fps, whereas if you're recording a high movement scene, such as a sports game or cars on a highway, 720p 60fps will look much more fluid. Of course, making 720p video not stand out like a sore thumb in a production published in 1080p is no small feat. And then there's the whole argument about whether most people can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a screen smaller than 50 inches diagonal... IMO Stick to 720p to be safe, even though you will get a better picture from 1080p in certain situations.

You're probably wondering what the "progressive" part means... basically, "progressive scan", or just "progressive" or "p", is where the entire frame is drawn/captured/broadcasted/etc in one pass. This is compared to "interlaced", where the frame is instead drawn in two passes, first drawing the even-numbered lines, and then the odd ones. Why? Well, besides conserving broadcast bandwidth, there's no point to interlacing on modern TVs... just a matter of history.

If you want more information than that, try these:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlacing

Btw, thanks for the third-party sample videos of this camera. I just saw it at Wal-Mart today for $200 and was blown away that an HD camcorder could be that cheap. I will definitely be getting one.