M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ forBlu-ray, ......

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Blig Merk, Mar 9, 2008.

  1. Blig Merk

    Blig Merk Guest

    This is just so much like Micro$quirm and their zombie army of xflop
    fanbitches that follow in step with their master's marching orders, as
    well as displaying the same contradictory **** psycho-schizo two-
    headed twisted logic.

    It has been kind of unbelievable and yet tediously as expected. First,
    the headlines are "Sony in talks with M$ about Blu-ray". The weenie
    twist with that headline was that it was supposedly Sony that
    approached Micro$quiggle about Blu-ray since Sony "needed help" for
    their electronics section:
    http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/06/sony-microsoft-in-talks-over-xbox-360-blu-ray-drive/
    Sony, Microsoft 'in talks' over Xbox 360 Blu-ray drive

    Which was followed by a denial from Micro$chizo:
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20070521091124.html
    Microsoft Denies Any Plans to Support Blu-Ray

    And then in typical psycho-schizo turn-around, CEO Monkey Boy Ballmer
    (this is the xflop fanitches' hero and leader?) makes a public
    announcement to support Blu-ray:
    http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/07/microsofts-steve-ballmer-talks-blu-ray-support/
    Microsoft's Steve Ballmer talks Blu-ray support

    This has been over the course of the past week, Micro$lippery going
    back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, just like the xflop
    fanbitches in agvx. Yeah, it is really hard to lose an argument by
    taking both sides but you end up looking like a fool or mentally
    deranged doing that.

    The fact is Micro$cared is now in a very tough spot and they know it.
    They know game content and assets are going to rapidly exceed DVD
    streaming storage from here on and it will be very obvious by the time
    2009 arrives. A console's third year is the peak of its life, either
    gaining momentum and skyrocketing upward or going limp and flatlining
    shortly thereafter. This is what happened to the XFLop, it flatlined
    in its fourth year, so even Micro$leepy knew they had to cancel it.

    But if they have to include a Blu-ray drive into yet another SKU, then
    they basically shit all over the existing 18 million install base
    (well, more like 13 million after subtracting 30% failed units). Plus,
    they will be paying a premium to Sony for the BD-ROM drive, adding
    about $200 to the SKU, which if it is a modified 313373, puts the
    price around $699. The evil empire is crumbling.

    The constant contradictory **** psycho-schizo antics sickens me but
    the rest just makes me laugh and laugh and laugh, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

    http://z.about.com/d/paranormal/1/0/3/V/1/two-headed-baby.jpg
    http://www.jonco48.com/blog/twoheadedbabybs3.jpg
    http://science.kukuchew.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/two_headed_snake_by_slug45.jpg
    http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/01/03/0306snake_wideweb__470x336,0.jpg
    http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/animals/assets/two_headed_goat.jpg
    http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/14/images/2006021408230401.jpg
    http://www.spokesmanreview.com/blogs/hbo/media/weirdanimals7.jpg
     
    Blig Merk, Mar 9, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Blig Merk

    Jonah Falcon Guest

    M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray

    And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    game. (chuckle)

    Poor, deluded Bliggy.

    Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.
     
    Jonah Falcon, Mar 9, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Blig Merk

    really real Guest


    >
    > And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    > their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    > content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    > THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    > rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    > game. (chuckle)
    >
    > Poor, deluded Bliggy.
    >
    > Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.


    Can you explain how a downloaded movie can have the same resolution as a
    blu ray movie.

    I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version and
    I think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My old
    one made a nice gift.
     
    really real, Mar 10, 2008
    #3
  4. Blig Merk

    boodybandit Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    "really real" <> wrote in message
    news:ZobBj.68784$pM4.27613@pd7urf1no...
    >
    >>
    >> And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    >> their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    >> content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    >> THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    >> rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    >> game. (chuckle)
    >>
    >> Poor, deluded Bliggy.
    >>
    >> Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.

    >
    > Can you explain how a downloaded movie can have the same resolution as a
    > blu ray movie.
    >
    > I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version and I
    > think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My old one
    > made a nice gift.


    And while he is at it maybe he can explain how a DD movie will replace
    physical media when only a percentage of people around the world have
    broadband fast enough to handle digital downloads. He is just a PO'ed MS
    fanboy that is mad that BluRay won the Hi Def format.

    Downloads will have their place in the market but it won't replace actually
    owning a disc in hand. How do you share movies with friends and relatives?
    Watch it on more than one display in your home? Broadband companies have
    already went on record stating they will bottle neck bandwidth.

    Dumbasses like Jonah don't actually understand how bad this could be for the
    net if it does in fact become huge. Sorry but I am a gamer first and online
    gaming is already laggy enough. I don't need assholes in my area adding to
    the traffic by downloading movies when they can get their off their fat ass
    and go pick up a superior product at the store.
     
    boodybandit, Mar 10, 2008
    #4
  5. Blig Merk

    Mark Johnson Guest

    boodybandit wrote:
    >
    > "really real" <> wrote in message
    > news:ZobBj.68784$pM4.27613@pd7urf1no...
    >>
    >>>
    >>> And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    >>> their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    >>> content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    >>> THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    >>> rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    >>> game. (chuckle)
    >>>
    >>> Poor, deluded Bliggy.
    >>>
    >>> Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.

    >>
    >> Can you explain how a downloaded movie can have the same resolution as
    >> a blu ray movie.
    >>
    >> I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version
    >> and I think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My
    >> old one made a nice gift.

    >
    > And while he is at it maybe he can explain how a DD movie will replace
    > physical media when only a percentage of people around the world have
    > broadband fast enough to handle digital downloads. He is just a PO'ed MS
    > fanboy that is mad that BluRay won the Hi Def format.
    >
    > Downloads will have their place in the market but it won't replace
    > actually owning a disc in hand. How do you share movies with friends and
    > relatives? Watch it on more than one display in your home? Broadband
    > companies have already went on record stating they will bottle neck
    > bandwidth.
    >
    > Dumbasses like Jonah don't actually understand how bad this could be for
    > the net if it does in fact become huge. Sorry but I am a gamer first and
    > online gaming is already laggy enough. I don't need assholes in my area
    > adding to the traffic by downloading movies when they can get their off
    > their fat ass and go pick up a superior product at the store.


    Plus the fact, that most broadband providers have a download cap of
    around 30gig per month over in the UK and Europe (I don't know about the
    US). So how many HD movies could we watch with such a cap?
     
    Mark Johnson, Mar 10, 2008
    #5
  6. Blig Merk

    Guest

    Microsoft is for Microsoft, and Microsoft is against things they can't
    make money on.

    If you think the situation is any more complicated than that, then you
    need to have your head examined.

    --

    Aaron J. Bossig

    http://www.GodsLabRat.com
     
    , Mar 10, 2008
    #6
  7. On Mar 10, 10:16 am, really real <> wrote:
    > > And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    > > their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    > > content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    > > THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    > > rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    > > game. (chuckle)

    >
    > > Poor, deluded Bliggy.

    >
    > > Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.

    >
    > Can you explain how a downloaded movie can have the same resolution as a
    > blu ray movie.
    >
    > I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version and
    > I think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My old
    > one made a nice gift.


    Total Recall? Really? I heard the video transfer was pretty bad for
    that movie. Most reviews said it's best to wait for another version
    since this one is only marginally better than watching an upscaled DVD.
     
    The alMIGHTY N, Mar 10, 2008
    #7
  8. On Mar 9, 7:46 pm, Jonah Falcon <> wrote:
    > M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    > $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    > $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray
    >
    > And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    > their system.


    Microsoft didn't force the issue because they knew it would pull the
    system out of reach for most gamers in the beginning and they had no
    ulterior motive to build up a movie format.

    > DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    > content anyway.


    How so?

    > Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    > THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    > rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    > game. (chuckle)
    >
    > Poor, deluded Bliggy.
    >
    > Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.
     
    The alMIGHTY N, Mar 10, 2008
    #8
  9. Blig Merk

    T.B. Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    "The alMIGHTY N" wrote:

    (snip)

    >> I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version and
    >> I think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My old
    >> one made a nice gift.

    >
    > Total Recall? Really? I heard the video transfer was pretty bad for
    > that movie. Most reviews said it's best to wait for another version
    > since this one is only marginally better than watching an upscaled DVD.


    I have the Blu-Ray version and the old dvd version that came in the round
    "mars" tin box. The blu-ray version is a improvement over the dvd but not a
    lot. Definitely what I'd call an average at best HD transfer with room for
    improvement. I got it for under 10 bucks during one of Fry's holiday sales
    late last year knowing it wasn't a reference quality title but as I liked
    the movie, it was worth picking up at that price. That said, it's not a
    total piece of crap like the first blu-ray release of "Full Metal Jacket" or
    "The Fugitive" or "U2 - Rattle and Hum."

    T.B.
     
    T.B., Mar 10, 2008
    #9
  10. Blig Merk

    Blig Merk Guest

    T.B. wrote:
    > I have the Blu-Ray version and the old dvd version that came in the round
    > "mars" tin box. The blu-ray version is a improvement over the dvd but not a
    > lot. Definitely what I'd call an average at best HD transfer with room for
    > improvement. I got it for under 10 bucks during one of Fry's holiday sales
    > late last year knowing it wasn't a reference quality title but as I liked
    > the movie, it was worth picking up at that price. That said, it's not a
    > total piece of crap like the first blu-ray release of "Full Metal Jacket" or
    > "The Fugitive" or "U2 - Rattle and Hum."


    Some of the older film masters are not in good shape to begin with.
    Hollywood is finding out the hard way that different types of
    celluloid can degrade at different rates plus it depends on how the
    master was handled, whether it was stored in carefully controlled
    temperature and humidity rooms or just supposedly dry storage vaults.
    Films are essentially "analog" meaning they have to be scanned in
    (digitized) to become digital. The actual film grain can be a problem
    to get digitized without artifacting making it appear worse once it is
    in digital form. It is like taking a very old photograph and scanning
    it in to your PC at very high resolution. It can look really bad. With
    photos, there is something like Photoshop to reduce noise, moire
    effects and pixelation artifacts. But that is just one frame, in
    essence. Films are thousands and thousands of frames and processing on
    a frame by frame basis can be very difficult, not only in terms of
    time and cost, but since it is moving, to have different processes
    varying from frame to frame causing even more undesired appearances.

    That is part of the problem with going Hi-Def, once you get used to
    it, everything else looks disagreeable in comparison. So, with modern
    films being filmed with high-resolution in mind, the transfer to Hi-
    Def looks very good. But with older degraded emulsion films, the
    transfer, no matter how good it is, can't match modern media. As the
    High-Def market grows, there is more incentive to spend the time and
    money to process older films for High-Def transfers. Also, the image
    processing software as well as computer processing speed is getting
    faster and better, so the effort is not as difficult or time
    intensive. A lot of people keep doubting re-releases will ever happen
    but time is showing almost any prior inferior release is followed by
    improved re-releases, not all the time, but more and more as time goes
    by.
     
    Blig Merk, Mar 10, 2008
    #10
  11. Blig Merk

    Blig Merk Guest

    Again, Dope, Blu-ray is a GAMES CONTENT FORMAT *AS WELL AS* A GENERAL
    DATA FORMAT, plus it is a movie format. Again, Dope, Blu-ray is not
    only a high-def movie format. Just think, Dope, Blu-ray is a game
    content format, a general data format and a high-def movie format. Do
    you still not see what that means to Micro$tink? BTW, when was the
    last time Office, Windhoze and Veesta were downloadable content? Seems
    like Micro$quat would be all over that since they are insisting DLC is
    the future...

    Jonah Falcon wrote:
    > M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    > $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray, M
    > $ + Blu Ray, M$ + Blu Ray
    >
    > And by the way, now you know why Microsoft didn't force an HD drive on
    > their system. DVDs and high def DVDs are losing to downloadable
    > content anyway. Mediocre games sell $1M in 2 months on the 360 -
    > THAT'S what developers and publishers want to hear. They don't give a
    > rat's ass if they can play high def movies if no one is buying the
    > game. (chuckle)
    >
    > Poor, deluded Bliggy.
    >
    > Just so you know, I don't buy high def movies. Waste of $$$.
     
    Blig Merk, Mar 10, 2008
    #11
  12. Blig Merk

    terryfied Guest

    > And while he is at it maybe he can explain how a DD movie will replace
    > physical media when only a percentage of people around the world have
    > broadband fast enough to handle digital downloads.


    Something like this...

    http://tinyurl.com/3xtjme
     
    terryfied, Mar 10, 2008
    #12
  13. Blig Merk

    Doug Jacobs Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Blig Merk <> wrote:
    > approached Micro$quiggle about Blu-ray since Sony "needed help" for
    > their electronics section:
    > http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/06/sony-microsoft-in-talks-over-xbox-360-blu-ray-drive/
    > Sony, Microsoft 'in talks' over Xbox 360 Blu-ray drive


    > Which was followed by a denial from Micro$chizo:
    > http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20070521091124.html
    > Microsoft Denies Any Plans to Support Blu-Ray


    > And then in typical psycho-schizo turn-around, CEO Monkey Boy Ballmer
    > (this is the xflop fanitches' hero and leader?) makes a public
    > announcement to support Blu-ray:
    > http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/07/microsofts-steve-ballmer-talks-blu-ray-support/
    > Microsoft's Steve Ballmer talks Blu-ray support


    > This has been over the course of the past week, Micro$lippery going
    > back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, just like the xflop
    > fanbitches in agvx. Yeah, it is really hard to lose an argument by
    > taking both sides but you end up looking like a fool or mentally
    > deranged doing that.


    Uh, blig? Next time you try using articles to "prove" something, make
    sure you get them in chronological order. Specifically, the article from
    xbitlabs.com is over a year old - AND was refuted by statements made later
    in 2007 by Microsoft in which they said they would consider making a
    blu-ray drive for the 360, if blu-ray were to win.

    There's never been a question about IF there would ever be a blu-ray drive
    for the 360 assuming that blu-ray won the war only WHEN.

    > The fact is Micro$cared is now in a very tough spot and they know it.


    Are they now? Their console still has the lead over the PS3, and is
    selling many, many times more software than the PS3. Oh, yes, POOR
    MICROSOFT!

    > They know game content and assets are going to rapidly exceed DVD
    > streaming storage from here on and it will be very obvious by the time
    > 2009 arrives.


    And you can say this with certainty...why? Where are the articles from
    developers crying about the constraints of DVD for the 360? So far, all
    but 2 titles for the 360 have fit nicely onto a single disc. The 2 titles
    that don't are JRPGs - a genre that's been multi-disc since consoles
    started using optical media. As for the PS3 and blu-ray, so far the only
    games that have shown that they needed the extra space have either been
    because of data-replication tricks to speed up transfers, or included a
    dozen different locales of the game on the disc. While the latter is
    nicer for manufacturing (1 version, vs. 4 or more for different regions)
    it's hardly a ringing endorsement for blu-ray over DVD.

    > A console's third year is the peak of its life, either
    > gaining momentum and skyrocketing upward or going limp and flatlining
    > shortly thereafter. This is what happened to the XFLop, it flatlined
    > in its fourth year, so even Micro$leepy knew they had to cancel it.


    Way to misread history, blig. Microsoft dropped the Xbox first - in
    response to not being able to get the chips anymore. They were also
    eagerly working on the 360, so it was only inevitable that they would
    encrourage folks to move from the Xbox to the 360. You can argue that
    Microsoft had a very short lifecycle for the Xbox, but even that wasn't
    entirely their fault. Even so, with the last generation closing down, it
    only made sense for Microsoft to basically cut their losses and move
    forward with the hopes of doing better. While there's been some major
    stumbles (the no-HDD core, RROD issues), for the most part, it appears
    that Microsoft's strategy of striking first in the current generation is
    paying off.

    Had Sony not stumbled so badly during their 2006 launch, and then
    throughout 2007, they really should have been able to catch Microsoft,
    even with its ~7 million customer lead.

    > But if they have to include a Blu-ray drive into yet another SKU, then
    > they basically shit all over the existing 18 million install base
    > (well, more like 13 million after subtracting 30% failed units). Plus,
    > they will be paying a premium to Sony for the BD-ROM drive, adding
    > about $200 to the SKU, which if it is a modified 313373, puts the
    > price around $699. The evil empire is crumbling.


    I doubt VERY much that Microsoft would actually stick a blu-ray drive into
    the 360. They're more likely to just replace the now discontinued external
    hd-dvd drive with an external blu-ray drive, and that's that. After all,
    why should Microsoft shove a glorified movie player into their game
    console? People are buying the 360 for the games - unlike the PS3 which
    is being bought for the movies.

    Microsoft has been very consistant with their thoughts on blu-ray. It's
    always been "they would consider it if hd-dvd dropped out", so really, it
    shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone to hear that Microsoft and
    Sony are in talks about a blu-ray drive for the 360.

    --
    It's not broken. It's...advanced.
     
    Doug Jacobs, Mar 10, 2008
    #13
  14. Blig Merk

    Doug Jacobs Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Blig Merk <> wrote:

    > Some of the older film masters are not in good shape to begin with.
    > Hollywood is finding out the hard way that different types of
    > celluloid can degrade at different rates plus it depends on how the
    > master was handled, whether it was stored in carefully controlled
    > temperature and humidity rooms or just supposedly dry storage vaults.
    > Films are essentially "analog" meaning they have to be scanned in
    > (digitized) to become digital. The actual film grain can be a problem
    > to get digitized without artifacting making it appear worse once it is
    > in digital form. It is like taking a very old photograph and scanning
    > it in to your PC at very high resolution. It can look really bad. With
    > photos, there is something like Photoshop to reduce noise, moire
    > effects and pixelation artifacts. But that is just one frame, in
    > essence. Films are thousands and thousands of frames and processing on
    > a frame by frame basis can be very difficult, not only in terms of
    > time and cost, but since it is moving, to have different processes
    > varying from frame to frame causing even more undesired appearances.


    That's all good and even factual, however, there's this thing called a
    "computer" which is very good at handling very repitive tasks very
    quickly. These "computers" are used in remastering films for DVD, so it's
    not a big stretch that they could also perform the same work for creating
    blu-ray discs.

    > That is part of the problem with going Hi-Def, once you get used to
    > it, everything else looks disagreeable in comparison. So, with modern
    > films being filmed with high-resolution in mind, the transfer to Hi-
    > Def looks very good. But with older degraded emulsion films, the
    > transfer, no matter how good it is, can't match modern media. As the
    > High-Def market grows, there is more incentive to spend the time and
    > money to process older films for High-Def transfers. Also, the image
    > processing software as well as computer processing speed is getting
    > faster and better, so the effort is not as difficult or time
    > intensive. A lot of people keep doubting re-releases will ever happen
    > but time is showing almost any prior inferior release is followed by
    > improved re-releases, not all the time, but more and more as time goes
    > by.


    The issue I have is that there's still tons of stuff that hasn't been
    released onto DVD, and now we're moving into blu-ray. Does that mean
    we'll be sitting here in 10-15 years looking at some new-fangled
    technology, while complaining about various things that didn't even make
    the jump from DVD to blu-ray, and most likely won't make the jump to
    whatever new format we may be seeing in the future?

    --
    It's not broken. It's...advanced.
     
    Doug Jacobs, Mar 10, 2008
    #14
  15. Blig Merk

    Doug Jacobs Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Blig Merk <> wrote:
    > Again, Dope, Blu-ray is a GAMES CONTENT FORMAT *AS WELL AS* A GENERAL
    > DATA FORMAT, plus it is a movie format. Again, Dope, Blu-ray is not
    > only a high-def movie format. Just think, Dope, Blu-ray is a game
    > content format, a general data format and a high-def movie format. Do
    > you still not see what that means to Micro$tink? BTW, when was the
    > last time Office, Windhoze and Veesta were downloadable content? Seems
    > like Micro$quat would be all over that since they are insisting DLC is
    > the future...


    Yeah, yeah, we all know that blu-ray is just a new storage media.

    However, just because it's new doesn't mean it's necessarily BETTER. The
    only advantage a blu-ray disc has over DVD is storage capacity. DVD is
    still superior for now in the areas of speed, ubiquitousness, and cost.
    While this will change as BD goes forward, it remains unclear just how
    large the market share for BD will be. Even using DVD as a model, it will
    still be years before BD overtakes DVD, and it'll be almost a decade
    before DVD drops off shelves completely.

    However, while the introduction of DVD eventually killed off VHS, it
    DIDN'T kill off CD. CDs, CD-Rs and CD-RWs are still readily available in
    stores. CDs are even still used for a lot of software distribution even
    though the DVD drive has long since eclipsed the CD ROM in terms of sales
    and whatnot.

    I suspect BD will remain much the same way - happily existing next to CD
    and DVD. Heck, it's not even guaranteed that BD will EVER overtake DVD in
    either the home video OR computer markets. Heck, if BD goes down in
    history as a more sucessful version of LaserDisk, Sony et. al, should
    thrilled.

    --
    It's not broken. It's...advanced.
     
    Doug Jacobs, Mar 10, 2008
    #15
  16. On Mar 10, 2:07 pm, terryfied <> wrote:
    > > And while he is at it maybe he can explain how a DD movie will replace
    > > physical media when only a percentage of people around the world have
    > > broadband fast enough to handle digital downloads.

    >
    > Something like this...
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/3xtjme


    This is useless if the ISPs take their ball and go home. The ISPs
    determine what the limit is for us peons.
     
    The alMIGHTY N, Mar 10, 2008
    #16
  17. On Mar 10, 12:51 pm, "T.B." <> wrote:
    > "The alMIGHTY N" wrote:
    >
    > (snip)
    >
    > >> I just bought Total Recall in blu ray to replace my regular version and
    > >> I think I got my money's worth, watching it in high definition. My old
    > >> one made a nice gift.

    >
    > > Total Recall? Really? I heard the video transfer was pretty bad for
    > > that movie. Most reviews said it's best to wait for another version
    > > since this one is only marginally better than watching an upscaled DVD.

    >
    > I have the Blu-Ray version and the old dvd version that came in the round
    > "mars" tin box. The blu-ray version is a improvement over the dvd but not a
    > lot. Definitely what I'd call an average at best HD transfer with room for
    > improvement. I got it for under 10 bucks during one of Fry's holiday sales
    > late last year knowing it wasn't a reference quality title but as I liked
    > the movie, it was worth picking up at that price. That said, it's not a
    > total piece of crap like the first blu-ray release of "Full Metal Jacket" or
    > "The Fugitive" or "U2 - Rattle and Hum."
    >
    > T.B.


    I have "The Fugitive" on Blu-Ray and it looks pretty good. It's not
    stellar but then again it's a catalog title.

    I've seen "Total Recall" on Blu-Ray and it definitely was not good
    enough to shell out decent money for it. $10, I would consider it...
    but then again that's $10 I'd have to spend instead of just watching
    my Mars tin DVD.
     
    The alMIGHTY N, Mar 10, 2008
    #17
  18. On Mar 10, 1:28 pm, Blig Merk <> wrote:
    > T.B. wrote:
    > > I have the Blu-Ray version and the old dvd version that came in the round
    > > "mars" tin box. The blu-ray version is a improvement over the dvd but not a
    > > lot. Definitely what I'd call an average at best HD transfer with room for
    > > improvement. I got it for under 10 bucks during one of Fry's holiday sales
    > > late last year knowing it wasn't a reference quality title but as I liked
    > > the movie, it was worth picking up at that price. That said, it's not a
    > > total piece of crap like the first blu-ray release of "Full Metal Jacket" or
    > > "The Fugitive" or "U2 - Rattle and Hum."

    >
    > Some of the older film masters are not in good shape to begin with.
    > Hollywood is finding out the hard way that different types of
    > celluloid can degrade at different rates plus it depends on how the
    > master was handled, whether it was stored in carefully controlled
    > temperature and humidity rooms or just supposedly dry storage vaults.
    > Films are essentially "analog" meaning they have to be scanned in
    > (digitized) to become digital. The actual film grain can be a problem
    > to get digitized without artifacting making it appear worse once it is
    > in digital form. It is like taking a very old photograph and scanning
    > it in to your PC at very high resolution. It can look really bad. With
    > photos, there is something like Photoshop to reduce noise, moire
    > effects and pixelation artifacts. But that is just one frame, in
    > essence. Films are thousands and thousands of frames and processing on
    > a frame by frame basis can be very difficult, not only in terms of
    > time and cost, but since it is moving, to have different processes
    > varying from frame to frame causing even more undesired appearances.
    >
    > That is part of the problem with going Hi-Def, once you get used to
    > it, everything else looks disagreeable in comparison. So, with modern
    > films being filmed with high-resolution in mind, the transfer to Hi-
    > Def looks very good. But with older degraded emulsion films, the
    > transfer, no matter how good it is, can't match modern media. As the
    > High-Def market grows, there is more incentive to spend the time and
    > money to process older films for High-Def transfers. Also, the image
    > processing software as well as computer processing speed is getting
    > faster and better, so the effort is not as difficult or time
    > intensive. A lot of people keep doubting re-releases will ever happen
    > but time is showing almost any prior inferior release is followed by
    > improved re-releases, not all the time, but more and more as time goes
    > by.


    Some classic films look pretty damn good, though. Casablanca looks
    great. I'm not a fan of the movie but I can't argue with free.
     
    The alMIGHTY N, Mar 10, 2008
    #18
  19. Blig Merk

    boodybandit Guest

    Re: M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, M$ against Blu-ray, M$ for Blu-ray, ......

    "The alMIGHTY N" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mar 10, 2:07 pm, terryfied <> wrote:
    >> > And while he is at it maybe he can explain how a DD movie will replace
    >> > physical media when only a percentage of people around the world have
    >> > broadband fast enough to handle digital downloads.

    >>
    >> Something like this...
    >>
    >> http://tinyurl.com/3xtjme

    >
    > This is useless if the ISPs take their ball and go home. The ISPs
    > determine what the limit is for us peons.


    Exactly.
    And business comes before pleasure.
     
    boodybandit, Mar 10, 2008
    #19
  20. Blig Merk

    really real Guest


    >
    > Total Recall? Really? I heard the video transfer was pretty bad for
    > that movie. Most reviews said it's best to wait for another version
    > since this one is only marginally better than watching an upscaled DVD.


    I'm new to this game and so maybe I'm a sucker for HD. Marginally better
    was good enough for me. I thought it looked pretty good.
     
    really real, Mar 10, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Grand Inquisitor

    Prediction: studios back Blu-Ray over HD-DVD

    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 20, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    466
    Grand Inquisitor
    Jun 20, 2004
  2. R420
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    831
    Jordan Lund
    Aug 7, 2004
  3. Joe Thousandaire

    Re: BLU-RAY Confirmed for PS3....Well, Almost

    Joe Thousandaire, Aug 5, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    413
    Joe Thousandaire
    Aug 5, 2004
  4. Allan

    Blu-ray Movie Disc Format Unveild

    Allan, Aug 15, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    415
    Allan
    Aug 15, 2004
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,162
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page