Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > Is HiDef really an upgrade?

Reply
Thread Tools

Is HiDef really an upgrade?

 
 
Derek Janssen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2007
Doug Jacobs wrote:
> Richard C. <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>MANY also have HD feeds.

>
> True, but it's still not the majority - and there are some rather odd
> gaps. For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD?


For the same reason not every 1966 show was in color--
Until we have wider saturation, HDTV has been used to sell movies,
travelogues, sports, nature and cooking, but nobody's yet had a demand
for Carlos Mencia in 16:9.
Still, unfortunately, it's more a matter of When, Not If. -_-

> The movie channels do offer HD, but I don't subscribe to those.


(Well, when we get personal-choice comments like that, unfortunately,
the proper response is "Then SIDDOWN, junior, and let the experts talk!")

> Even those channels that do have a HD feed, don't always carry the same
> programming. Food Network HD has a totally different schedule compared to
> the regular, non-HD Food Network. This is probably because not all of
> Food Network's shows (or even episodes) are HD.


....Gosh, THINK so? There's a radical theory, not sure if the academy's
going to accept that one.

Derek Janssen (admit it, we're down to our last few remaining arguments
and just defending the snarky-battlements, aren't we?)
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Doug Jacobs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2007
Derek Janssen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > True, but it's still not the majority - and there are some rather odd
> > gaps. For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD?


> For the same reason not every 1966 show was in color--
> Until we have wider saturation, HDTV has been used to sell movies,
> travelogues, sports, nature and cooking, but nobody's yet had a demand
> for Carlos Mencia in 16:9.
> Still, unfortunately, it's more a matter of When, Not If. -_-


So, people with HD don't watch Sci-Fi, Comedy Central...?

Since these channels do show movies, I would think there would be an
incentive to move to HD.

Yes, yes, matter of time and all that.

> > The movie channels do offer HD, but I don't subscribe to those.


> (Well, when we get personal-choice comments like that, unfortunately,
> the proper response is "Then SIDDOWN, junior, and let the experts talk!")


Riiight. So the fact I don't want to subscribe to the movie channels (HD
or otherwise) suddenly makes my opinions and observations totally null and
void? Nor does this change my original statements about how network shows
make up a minority of what I watch, and how many channels aren't offering
HD yet.

I guess I could further clarify the second statement by saying my
experience is only with DishNetwork - not DirecTV or Comcast. If Dish has
fewer HD channels, then that would certainly affect my perception, now
wouldn't it.

> > Even those channels that do have a HD feed, don't always carry the same
> > programming. Food Network HD has a totally different schedule compared to
> > the regular, non-HD Food Network. This is probably because not all of
> > Food Network's shows (or even episodes) are HD.


> ...Gosh, THINK so? There's a radical theory, not sure if the academy's
> going to accept that one.


*shrug* I find it annoying, that's all.

> Derek Janssen (admit it, we're down to our last few remaining arguments
> and just defending the snarky-battlements, aren't we?)


I certainly hope so....


--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Derek Janssen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2007
Doug Jacobs wrote:
>
>>>True, but it's still not the majority - and there are some rather odd
>>>gaps. For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD?

>
>
>>For the same reason not every 1966 show was in color--
>>Until we have wider saturation, HDTV has been used to sell movies,
>>travelogues, sports, nature and cooking, but nobody's yet had a demand
>>for Carlos Mencia in 16:9.
>>Still, unfortunately, it's more a matter of When, Not If. -_-

>
> So, people with HD don't watch Sci-Fi, Comedy Central...?


Well, Battlestar Galactica, maybe, but Torchwood in HD?...Nnnnot for me,
thanks, I'm driving. >_<

>>>The movie channels do offer HD, but I don't subscribe to those.

>
>>(Well, when we get personal-choice comments like that, unfortunately,
>>the proper response is "Then SIDDOWN, junior, and let the experts talk!")

>
> Riiight. So the fact I don't want to subscribe to the movie channels (HD
> or otherwise) suddenly makes my opinions and observations totally null and
> void? Nor does this change my original statements about how network shows
> make up a minority of what I watch, and how many channels aren't offering
> HD yet.


Uh, when you decide to turn what you
want/feel-like/can't-afford/cant-get in your area into Broad Sweeping
Statements About How HDTV Is the Pathetic Corporate-Conspiracy Swindle
of the 00's....yyyah. Pretty much nullers.

> I guess I could further clarify the second statement by saying my
> experience is only with DishNetwork - not DirecTV or Comcast. If Dish has
> fewer HD channels, then that would certainly affect my perception, now
> wouldn't it.


Well, it's good to se that we're working on that "Subjective perception
vs. reality" thing. A little more practice, it's coming along nicely.

>>>Even those channels that do have a HD feed, don't always carry the same
>>>programming. Food Network HD has a totally different schedule compared to
>>>the regular, non-HD Food Network. This is probably because not all of
>>>Food Network's shows (or even episodes) are HD.

>
>
>>...Gosh, THINK so? There's a radical theory, not sure if the academy's
>>going to accept that one.

>
>
> *shrug* I find it annoying, that's all.


Then find it annoying. We'll buy the disks, sets, players, Playstations
and cable channels in the meantime.
You can hop on for curiosity's sake, or you can be annoying yourself.

Derek Janssen (taking bets on which one Doug's going to choose)
(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
ChairmanOfTheBored
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:03:26 -0000, Doug Jacobs <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Richard C. <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> MANY also have HD feeds.

>
>True, but it's still not the majority


You're an idiot.

> - and there are some rather odd
>gaps.


Between your ears.

> For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD? Then
>there's the hilariously mis-named "Tech TV" which isn't in HD. I heard
>Cartoon Network recently started a HD feed, though Dish Network hasn't
>started offering it yet.


You're on Dish? Bwuahahahahaha! That says a lot.

> Then again, I have to wonder...what is the
>purpose of CN in HD at all?


The gap between your ears is rearing its ugly head again.

> Most of their shows are still going to be 4:3
>SD. None of the news channels offer HD, which again seems rather silly.
>CSPAN doesn't...well, who watches CSPAN anyways?
>
>The movie channels do offer HD, but I don't subscribe to those.


And some aren't really HD either.

>Some of the smaller local channels by me don't offer HD - like KTSF, which
>carries a lot of non-English programs, including the Chinese
>comedy/variety programs my wife likes.


I'll bet they have a Digital broadcast/cablecast though. Form factor
doesn't matter.

>Even those channels that do have a HD feed, don't always carry the same
>programming.


No ****, Dip Tracy.

> Food Network HD has a totally different schedule compared to
>the regular, non-HD Food Network. This is probably because not all of
>Food Network's shows (or even episodes) are HD.


More likely because you guess at everything you spew.
 
Reply With Quote
 
ChairmanOfTheBored
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:26:34 -0000, Doug Jacobs <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Riiight. So the fact I don't want to subscribe to the movie channels (HD
>or otherwise) suddenly makes my opinions and observations totally null and
>void?



No. The huge gap between your ears takes care of that assessment.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Doug Jacobs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
Derek Janssen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Riiight. So the fact I don't want to subscribe to the movie channels (HD
> > or otherwise) suddenly makes my opinions and observations totally null and
> > void? Nor does this change my original statements about how network shows
> > make up a minority of what I watch, and how many channels aren't offering
> > HD yet.


> Uh, when you decide to turn what you
> want/feel-like/can't-afford/cant-get in your area into Broad Sweeping
> Statements About How HDTV Is the Pathetic Corporate-Conspiracy Swindle
> of the 00's....yyyah. Pretty much nullers.


What? When'd I ever claim that?

> > *shrug* I find it annoying, that's all.


> Then find it annoying. We'll buy the disks, sets, players, Playstations
> and cable channels in the meantime.
> You can hop on for curiosity's sake, or you can be annoying yourself.


I'll make the jump to HD video when I think it's a better buy. Right
now...too risky. And I'd rather buy a 360 for HD gaming goodness

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Derek Janssen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
Doug Jacobs wrote:
>
>>Then find it annoying. We'll buy the disks, sets, players, Playstations
>>and cable channels in the meantime.
>>You can hop on for curiosity's sake, or you can be annoying yourself.

>
> I'll make the jump to HD video when I think it's a better buy. Right
> now...too risky. And I'd rather buy a 360 for HD gaming goodness


....Enjoy that pretty Red Ring of Death.

(As one poster on our hi-def board .sigs, "Now I know why they call it a
360: It burns out, you send it to Microsoft, and they circle it back to
you!")

Derek Janssen
(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Brent Geery
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:03:26 -0000, Doug Jacobs
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Richard C. <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> MANY also have HD feeds.

>
>True, but it's still not the majority - and there are some rather odd
>gaps. For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD?


Sci-Fi *IS* in HD.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Doug Jacobs
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2007
Brent Geery <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >True, but it's still not the majority - and there are some rather odd
> >gaps. For instance, why don't Sci-Fi and Comedy Central offer HD?


> Sci-Fi *IS* in HD.


On which provider? Dish doesn't offer it.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
 
Reply With Quote
 
ChairmanOfTheBored
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2007
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:42:32 -0000, Doug Jacobs <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>I'll make the jump to HD video when I think it's a better buy. Right
>now...too risky.


Risky? What do you think it is somehow going to fall on its face?

> And I'd rather buy a 360 for HD gaming goodness


$50 - $60 per title. If parents had boycotted the asswipes, the price
of games would have fallen quite a bit.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HiDef.com has HD Images Direct-From-Disc HD-DVD THE LAST SAMURAI HiDef.com DVD Video 21 09-08-2006 12:45 PM
Awesome! HiDef.com has HD Images Direct-From-Disc HD-DVD SWORDFISH! HiDef.com DVD Video 6 08-31-2006 01:39 AM
NEW! HIDEF.COM HD-DVD IMAGE QUALITY SNEAK PEEK - THE PERFECT STORM HiDef.com DVD Video 0 08-24-2006 08:26 PM
Looking to pay for some help for HiDef.com!! HiDef.com DVD Video 1 08-01-2006 12:57 PM
Hacking the Toshiba HiDef Player TB DVD Video 1 04-22-2006 12:46 AM



Advertisments