When is BD50 going to arrive? (Funny Amazon Message Board Post)

[Lincoln6Echo]

OK, I bet you're thinking right?

Well, get a load of this quote:

Sony is not relevant anymore. Their TV (though not all of them) department is behind the times. The audio has been a joke for 30 years. The playstation is third behind Xbox and Wii and sinking fast. Sony had to win the HD-DVD/Blu Ray war, or they would have sunk. The BD50 "format" (as Sony wants it to be) should have already occured. HD-DVD already had EVERYTHING that Blu Ray just now has, including a greater capacity (which is what the BD50 is for). Sony wants BD50 to be seperate, not and extension...therefore making it take longer to get to market. Typical Sony.

So after reading that, with its reference to HD-DVD, you'd think the date of this post was from 2006 or something, right?

No...it was from...YESTERDAY! 6-16-2010.

It's from a dude on Amazon in the Blu-ray Community forum by the name of, get this...A/V Guru.

He goes on to say in other posts that he has playback issues (hiccups as he calls them) with BD50 discs, even though he says they don't exist yet.

Do yourself a favor and go check this thread out here and check out any post by this "A/V Guru" dude. It truely is a experience. And take note of his thoughts on the Avatar release.

[Beta Man]

I'll move this to General Chat, as it's not 'news' but an example of ignorance amongst people regarding the Blu-ray format..........

[Blove23]

"Let the Truth Set People Free"
In this forum people are going to blast that post on Amazon because they don't truly understand the truth.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Blove23

In this forum people are going to blast that post on Amazon because they don't truly understand the truth.

And what is the "truth"?

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

I'll move this to General Chat, as it's not 'news' but an example of ignorance amongst people regarding the Blu-ray format..........

OK, no problem...didn't know exactly where to post this.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Blove23

"Let the Truth Set People Free"
In this forum people are going to blast that post on Amazon because they don't truly understand the truth.

Do you mean people here don't understand the truth? Or the person on Amazon doesn't understand the truth?

[Steel Panther]

I don't even know how to comment on this. Outside of his argument of the PS3 being behind the other 2, I don't think he's said one thing that's remotely intelligent. The Wii is only the #1 selling console because for the longest time, it was the cheapest and most affordable. Considering how badly the Xbox was outselling the PS3, Sony did pretty good for itself recovering. Now, I don't remember off hand, but.. didn't single-layer HD-DVDs only store like 15GB while Blu-Ray store like 25GB? I haven't been in kindergarten for well over 25 years, but last time I checked, 25 > 15. Okay, so maybe his argument was that the DL HD-DVDs stored more data than the SL Blu-Ray because DL Blu-Ray "doesn't exist". I mean, the DD Plus audio (lossy) is the only audio that was "superior" to the Blu Ray. Every lossless audio track on Blu-Ray smoked HD-DVD. The DTS HD Hi-Res Audio (Lossy) on Blu-Ray is twice what it was on HD-DVD. By all rights, if history repeated itself (as VHS destroyed BETA, as the porn industry opted to support VHS), HD-DVD should have won out, but it didn't. A Vastly superior format won. Maybe I'm 100% wrong in everything I said, who knows, it's what I remember. Maybe years of drinking and recreational fun destroyed my memory.

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by Steel Panther

I don't even know how to comment on this. Outside of his argument of the PS3 being behind the other 2, I don't think he's said one thing that's remotely intelligent. The Wii is only the #1 selling console because for the longest time, it was the cheapest and most affordable. Considering how badly the Xbox was outselling the PS3, Sony did pretty good for itself recovering. Now, I don't remember off hand, but.. didn't single-layer HD-DVDs only store like 15GB while Blu-Ray store like 25GB? I haven't been in kindergarten for well over 25 years, but last time I checked, 25 > 15. Okay, so maybe his argument was that the DL HD-DVDs stored more data than the SL Blu-Ray because DL Blu-Ray "doesn't exist". I mean, the DD Plus audio (lossy) is the only audio that was "superior" to the Blu Ray. Every lossless audio track on Blu-Ray smoked HD-DVD. The DTS HD Hi-Res Audio (Lossy) on Blu-Ray is twice what it was on HD-DVD. By all rights, if history repeated itself (as VHS destroyed BETA, as the porn industry opted to support VHS), HD-DVD should have won out, but it didn't. A Vastly superior format won. Maybe I'm 100% wrong in everything I said, who knows, it's what I remember. Maybe years of drinking and recreational fun destroyed my memory.

I follow you on eveything there except for the bolded part. Don't you mean (lossless) for that one?

But ayway, I have no idea what the guy was talking about when it came to BD50s giving him hiccups on his equipment. Which ironically was a Sony BD player. And it seemed ironic also that the majority of the discussion from all sides had to do with PS3s. But ya know, after reading through all of his posts, it seemed like he was a plant from Toshiba who was still fighting the format war, or at least a very disgruntled former HD-DVD fanboy.

But yes, a DL HD-DVD only held 30 GB. (15 for a SL)

And as for the ratio of BD50 discs to BD25 discs, I have 99 titles (including a couple TV seasons in there as well) and only 12 of them are on BD25s. I was actually shocked by a couple of them. But for the most part, they're relatively short films (~90 min) using the VC-1 codec.

[Steel Panther]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

I follow you on eveything there except for the bolded part. Don't you mean (lossless) for that one?

But ayway, I have no idea what the guy was talking about when it came to BD50s giving him hiccups on his equipment. Which ironically was a Sony BD player. And it seemed ironic also that the majority of the discussion from all sides had to do with PS3s. But ya know, after reading through all of his posts, it seemed like he was a plant from Toshiba who was still fighting the format war, or at least a very disgruntled former HD-DVD fanboy.

But yes, a DL HD-DVD only held 30 GB. (15 for a SL)

And as for the ratio of BD50 discs to BD25 discs, I have 99 titles (including a couple TV seasons in there as well) and only 12 of them are on BD25s. I was actually shocked by a couple of them. But for the most part, they're relatively short films (~90 min) using the VC-1 codec.

As I said, I could be wrong. I thought that the HD-High Res Audio was lossy and the HD-Master Audio was lossless. Ah well. Shoot me. =). I've never seen a "hiccup" watching any Blu Ray. My bad if I'm wrong. I'd bet you're right however on him being disgruntled though.

[dobyblue]

That Steve Burke guy sure set him straight though eh?

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by Steel Panther

As I said, I could be wrong. I thought that the HD-High Res Audio was lossy and the HD-Master Audio was lossless. Ah well. Shoot me. =). I've never seen a "hiccup" watching any Blu Ray. My bad if I'm wrong. I'd bet you're right however on him being disgruntled though.

Well, sure, DTS-HD Master Audio is lossless, but I've never heard of HD-High Res Audio. What is that? Or are you referring to 640Kbps DD tracks?


In any case, it sounds like his problem with BD50s (and I'm not sure it really is even related to that), is actually with his player's handling of BD-Live. And judging from his player's model, it sounds like a, perhaps, recet firmware update may have screwed things up rather than fixing them. I don't know. It's just that for a fella who uses the moniker of "A/V Guru" surely doesn't know jack about the BD format, although he seemed at times to rattle off technical data. But where he got off on that Avatar tangeant about it having capacity issues and folks at James Cameron's camp complain about it, was like .

[beefytwinkie]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Do you mean people here don't understand the truth? Or the person on Amazon doesn't understand the truth?

The truth is out there.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Well, sure, DTS-HD Master Audio is lossless, but I've never heard of HD-High Res Audio. What is that? Or are you referring to 640Kbps DD tracks?

dts-hr is anything above the 1.5 Mbps core.
There are lossy dts-hr tracks out there with CBR's of 3Mbps or more.

[Nielsb90]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Well, sure, DTS-HD Master Audio is lossless, but I've never heard of HD-High Res Audio. What is that? Or are you referring to 640Kbps DD tracks?


In any case, it sounds like his problem with BD50s (and I'm not sure it really is even related to that), is actually with his player's handling of BD-Live. And judging from his player's model, it sounds like a, perhaps, recet firmware update may have screwed things up rather than fixing them. I don't know. It's just that for a fella who uses the moniker of "A/V Guru" surely doesn't know jack about the BD format, although he seemed at times to rattle off technical data. But where he got off on that Avatar tangeant about it having capacity issues and folks at James Cameron's camp complain about it, was like .

HD-High Res audio is used on a few titles.. My copy of The Orphanage only has DTS-HD High Res Audio.. I believe its better than DTS but not quite as good as DTS-HD Master Audio

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Blove23

"Let the Truth Set People Free"
In this forum people are going to blast that post on Amazon because they don't truly understand the truth.

They are blasting it because the guy is "a sandwich shy of a picnic". "The lights are on, but nobody's home". His "elevator doesn't go to the top floor". He's "one brick short of a load". He's "a few beers short of a six-pack". He's "as nutty as a fruit cake". Or as the Australians say "He has a kangaroo loose in the top paddock".

Most anti-Sony moon-bats are in the same boat.

[Jwilly019]

Originally Posted by Nielsb90

HD-High Res audio is used on a few titles.. My copy of The Orphanage only has DTS-HD High Res Audio.. I believe its better than DTS but not quite as good as DTS-HD Master Audio

You are correct.

Justin

[Rblu-Dblu]

Wow, its just amazing that he kept going after being proven wrong time and time again. I don't get it. Do people get enjoyment out of trolling?

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by Rblu-Dblu

Wow, its just amazing that he kept going after being proven wrong time and time again. I don't get it. Do people get enjoyment out of trolling?

My moment was when he talked about Avatar. About how the Cameron camp was complaining about BD capacity and how they couldn't fit any extras on it as such. As we all know, that release was intentionally done that way. The real question will be will there be any on-disc special features on the movie disc itself for the 6 minute extended edition. I can see at least a commentary, that if Cameron's up to it, but any more than that and it might jeapordize the high bit-rate transfer. Secondly, what about th 3D version? Do 3D BDs have higher capacity?

But anyway, it seems this guy was using 3-4 year old information to justify his arguements. OT, but it's like using the "no WMD" arguement to continue justifying opposition to the Iraq War 6 years into the conflict. 6 years in, that arguement has no relevance, true or not. So for Mr. Guru there, talking about HD-DVD and its "superior" capacity of 30GB over BD's 25GB and the supposed "BD50" and its 50GB capacity, just sounded .

[Rblu-Dblu]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

My moment was when he talked about Avatar. About how the Cameron camp was complaining about BD capacity and how they couldn't fit any extras on it as such. As we all know, that release was intentionally done that way. The real question will be will there be any on-disc special features on the movie disc itself for the 6 minute extended edition. I can see at least a commentary, that if Cameron's up to it, but any more than that and it might jeapordize the high bit-rate transfer. Secondly, what about th 3D version? Do 3D BDs have higher capacity?

But anyway, it seems this guy was using 3-4 year old information to justify his arguements. OT, but it's like using the "no WMD" arguement to continue justifying opposition to the Iraq War 6 years into the conflict. 6 years in, that arguement has no relevance, true or not. So for Mr. Guru there, talking about HD-DVD and its "superior" capacity of 30GB over BD's 25GB and the supposed "BD50" and its 50GB capacity, just sounded .

The funny part is when his stance went from there is no BD50 to BD50's will only play in a computer drive to his bd player wont play BD50's without a hiccup if isn't connected to the internet. Which is it?

[brettallica]

Originally Posted by Rblu-Dblu

The funny part is when his stance went from there is no BD50 to BD50's will only play in a computer drive to his bd player wont play BD50's without a hiccup if isn't connected to the internet. Which is it?

Well duh. Of course a BD50 won't play if it's not connected to the internet...because BD50s don't exist.