|
What you've NOT been told about Blue-Ray!
|
|
|
tripplite
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. March 2008 @ 19:28 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Since you asked so nicely, here:
You conformist pig :~)!
*SNORT* OINK OINK!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Newbie
|
24. March 2008 @ 17:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, isn't it amazing how a public information post (in red) ? to INFORM people - will bring out the industrial operatives to defend, justify, and make excuses for Hollywood greed!
The only difference between Hollywood?s DVD?s and the Oil Industry cartels is in that the oil money-hogs had designed a stronger choke-chain to slip around the necks of consumers than the Hollywood money-hogs do? but, fear not ? Hollywood is working hard to catch-up with the Oil boys latest methods in high effiency consumer screwing.
The bottom line is: It doesn?t matter who wins, the Oil companies or Hollywood ? the only ?known? factor is that the loser is going to be the consumer - the working stiffs who have damn little control over their pay checks and even less over their jobs these days?
But to some numb-nuts (who have mouthed off here) ? Money is no object ? that is, if you live at home off your mom and dad - so you can watch all the stud Celebes with the hot babe?s driving their Rolls down Hollywood blvd., in wide-screen High Def.
Who was that raisin-brain mouthing about prices coming down ? like (Music) CD?s huh? Remember 7, 8 dollar Albums @ about 13 songs? I do. Then (after cassettes), CD came out at 15 and 16 dollars a pop.
The price of albums ?doubled?, for maybe 3 or 4 more songs. When the consumer uprising started, the music industry came back claiming that soon they recovered their investment in the cost of change over to CD?s, music prices would come down ? they never did.
I don?t recall hearing any sympathy from anybody for all the ?musicians? who got the shaft from millions of little screw-worms out here ripping-&-burning their music as fast as their little fingers could type Naptster. So, what makes Hollywood so deserving of compassion and understanding?
One, lead musician (player) has more years of work and training invested in his profession than any ?6? actors or starlet losers combined? None of that seems to matter tho... That is because it never was about musicians OR actors? What it is about is their bosses, their controllers and money managers behind all the stages and spot lights ? they are the ones making the lion?s share of the doe - off the dumb-asses in the stage spot-lights.
The once powerful music syndications are just about crumbled? If I had my pick, I think the ?musicians? are a lot more deserving of surviving than the Hollywood corruption and syndicates are. And that?s why I feel no desire to help Hollywood stick it in me - or to anybody I can help to inform - any deeper.
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
24. March 2008 @ 17:20 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Well, isn't it amazing how a public information post (in red) ? to INFORM people - will bring out the industrial operatives to defend, justify, and make excuses for Hollywood greed!
Hmm, sounded like a rant to me. I'm sure anyone on aD with half a brain, knows pretty well what HDCP is anyways - didn't you get the memo? I'm not trying to backup any Hollywood moguls. I simply stated my opinion about piracy - that is what HDCP is suppose to prevent, right?
Quote:
who have damn little control over their pay checks and even less over their jobs these days?
Yea, if you're a dead beat and didn't succeed well in school. You can do anything you put your mind to. Don't be a cop out like everyone else.
Quote:
But to some numb-nuts (who have mouthed off here) ? Money is no object ? that is, if you live at home off your mom and dad - so you can watch all the stud Celebes with the hot babe?s driving their Rolls down Hollywood blvd., in wide-screen High Def.
I sure hope you aren't referring to me! I'm 25 years old and feel that I have done well in life and with the career path I chose. I didn't read one comment, by anyone here, that would suggest that money is no object to them. Anyways, wtf does that have to do with HDCP?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2008 @ 17:30
|
|
tripplite
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. March 2008 @ 17:48 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Hmm, sounded like a rant to me.
goodswipe the doctors in the house and i diagnose thee(GerryH2u) with being...CORRECT!
Quote:
?musicians? are a lot more deserving of surviving than the Hollywood corruption
well hollywood contributes more to the economy then most American businesses:)
Quote:
Money is no object
what do you mean by that? i'll be working off my university debt the rest of my life....either that or the front lines for me.....so of course when something like HDCP is introduce we get ANGRY:(
-tripplite
-tripplite
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. March 2008 @ 18:53 |
Link to this message
|
Wow this is an old topic. I like to argue about things like this but I also like to stay on the bleeding-edge of B.S. You are all talking about stuff that was a big problem years ago when the DVI-D to HDMI revolution began. HDMI 1.0 didn't even support HDCP WTF!? HDCP is the least of my worries as it mostly holds back CRT HDTV owners which wouldn't benefit from upconversion anyway and who's TVs can't display anything higher than 1080i. The ICT will be very interesting to see. I don't think anyone will ever have the balls to use it.
Now more about that bleeding-edge B.S.....
The real problem with Blu-ray is that the format (unlike HD-DVD) is built on Profiles. Profiles are not just little firmware upgrades they are complete overhauls that require that you upgrade the hardware (which means buy a new player)! Its really hard explaining to my customers, that want to know, what the difference is between HDMI 1.1, .2, .3, and Dolby True This and uncompressed That. Now I have to add in BD player profiles?
This is crazy. All the players available in the 1st gen where profile 1.0. Most of the 2nd gen players are 1.0 as well except for the new Panny 30, the Sammy Duo, and the uber-expensive Pioneer. They are profile 1.1 enabled. But the real issue is that Sony is the only one in position to add support for blu-ray profile 2.0 before fall 08/winter 09, its called the Playstation 3. The PS3's true colors are now shown and you should now understand why companies like Microsoft and Intel hate Sony! The DVD format (and HD-DVD format) was much more stable and didn't disenfranchise there loyal customers this way! In fact the HD-DVD format was the equivalent of BD Profile 2.0 since the HD-A1. Oh, I forgot to mention that BD Profile 2.0 enabled Movies are on there way next month (by Sony Pictures of course)!
More on Blu-Ray Profiles by HD Digest:
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1186
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2008 @ 22:43
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
24. March 2008 @ 21:29 |
Link to this message
|
Wow, so informative diablos! I had no idea...
Why do you think no one will ever implement ICT? I can see this happening in the very near future.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2008 @ 21:55
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. March 2008 @ 22:41 |
Link to this message
|
The ICT was a bad idea that only seemed good at that time, when DVD's CSS copy-protection was as easy to bypass as a slow driver on the freeway, to greedy desperate content owners. The big studios liked the idea as it would make the search for a better yet still transparent analog copy protection (think HD-Macovision) a mute point. But as stated before the ICT made it into both high-def standards but was never made mandatory. This happened mainly because the early adopters, the good old folks most likely to buy a high-def movie player first, where furious over the idea. Even if it is used I don't think it will be common place as it will be done on a title to tile bases. The main reason I don't think it will be used however is that the MPAA knows that it has an image problem. Studios like FOX which backed Blu-ray exclusively (they where format neutral in the beginning) simply because Sony promised them that BD+ could never be cracked is starting to take steps toward listening to the customer by offering standard-def versions with there titles. Its not a total consumer victory but it is progress. This kind of thing has been done before.
The Image Constraint Token is a lot like the broadcast flag idea proposed many times to do the same think with HDTV broadcasts. Every year the MPAA lobbies to have this thrown in with the DTV switch-over mandate of 2009 but every year millions of consumers write there congressman/senator and keep it from getting passed. Now that is a major win. Could you imagine not being able to TIVO your favorite HD show in HD because the content owner doesn't want you too? Personally thats just going to far to me.
Thanks,
Ced
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
25. March 2008 @ 07:50 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
But to some numb-nuts (who have mouthed off here) ? Money is no object ? that is, if you live at home off your mom and dad - so you can watch all the stud Celebes with the hot babe?s driving their Rolls down Hollywood blvd., in wide-screen High Def.
Strike one....
EDIT: I'd like to remind everyone, that rule 6 still applies even though this isn't a news item. If someone breaks a rule, don't fall into the trap of breaking the same rule to defend yourself...instead use the offensive post button.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2008 @ 07:52
|
|
Chavo
Member
|
25. March 2008 @ 10:43 |
Link to this message
|
Out of curiosity, would any of you recommend the average Joe planning to buy a Blu-ray player to buy it, or to stay on the sidelines and watch what happens next?
AnyDVD and CloneDVD for life.
"I lie, and I steal.....sometimes."
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2008 @ 10:57
|
|
tripplite
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
25. March 2008 @ 11:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
no its over...they're was some other media the just popped up but it going to where:) dont be like me......wait a bit longer to get a better priced player for a better price!!
BD-R=future....
-tripplite
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2008 @ 11:14
|
|
locobrown
Senior Member
|
26. March 2008 @ 10:12 |
Link to this message
|
I?m one of those HD-DVD disappointed owners. HD-DVD blank discs and movies are considered vintage, going to buy them till the content becomes extinct. The fact is HD-DVD was better in compassion to Blu-ray in regards to picture quality, I?m not a fan of either format even the Best Buy employee could not convince me not to buy a HD-DVD player over Blu-ray. I?m staying away from Blu-ray for the time being and sticking to DVD as I should have done from the get go, less complicated and less DRM schemes.
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
28. March 2008 @ 06:47 |
Link to this message
|
That's nobrainer for sure! I mean hughjars loved his HD-DVD to death but he wasn't so adamant about the whole boycott Blu-ray scheme.
Isn't this whole thread against the Blu-ray section rules? http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/474998
To be honest, I am getting so tired of this whole Blu-ray, DRM-ray, Sony this, HD-DVD that forum trash. If you don't like it... Fine! Please leave others that do like it to do their own thing.
Originally posted by locobrown:
The fact is HD-DVD was better in compassion to Blu-ray in regards to picture quality,
Now, that shows a complete lack of understanding towards both formats. Picture quality is not determined by the optical media format it resides on. If anything, since Blu-ray has a larger capacity per layer and faster data transfer speed, then Blu-ray should have the advantage.
Picture quality will come down to many variables including... Encoders used, bitrate (also determines file size), resolution, filters used during encoding, TV/display being used, the player decoding the media, the cables used etc. The disc format really has the least influence on the PQ, except for the capacity of the media (and transfer speed) as I said above.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. March 2008 @ 06:55
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
28. March 2008 @ 07:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
