Commentary from the Insiders Thread

[mikevommit]

Moderated for language

[David Vaughn]

Wow Mike...very mature of you.

[Jamh]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

Jamh, I know that is your hope and a lot of other peoples as well, but the reality is that either side could win right now. Before the Paramount news broke, I was convinced that it was just a matter of time until BD won, now that matter of time is indefinite and both may end up surviving if there is profit to be made on both sides.

I find that hard to believe with all the support behind Blu-ray these days. You've got pretty much the entire CE industry on their side, most of Hollywood, all the major PC manufacturers, one of the largest production/film groups in China, and several exclusive retailers. Paramount and Universal are the only things keeping HD-DVD alive right now and judging by their announced release schedules they'll cause some sales spikes, but they won't topple Blu-ray in the numbers. If HD-DVD goes an entire year without outselling Blu-ray once how is that going to look to retailers?

[Rob Zuber]

Originally Posted by MovieTime

David I hear you there. I have been to BB 3 times in the last 3 weekends and have been close to buying a HD-DVD player but have yet to pull the plug, I too want all the HD content I can get. Tomorrow I will once again go to BB but this time it is going to happen. This war will never end and I am tired of not being able to watch some of my favorite movies on HD-DVD along with BD. I will still favor BD over HD-DVD but the war is over. No One can win. There will be 2 formats. Sucks but it is what it is.

You have a very interesting post history here.

[MovieTime]

Originally Posted by Rob Zuber

You have a very interesting post history here.

Thank You.

[Chris Beveridge]

Originally Posted by mikevommit

David Vaughn is half a dumbass

Knock it off with the personal attacks. Not only is it rude but it's against basic forum rules.

[Bombthroat]

Originally Posted by Teazle

If it's true that the 51GB discs won't play in existing HD-DVD players, it's tantamount to introducing a totally new format all of the players for which just happen to play the older HD-DVD discs too. When you get down to it, the TL51s would not be HD-DVDs (as we now understand the format) except in name.

Maybe that's why they are trying to make the player prices so cheap. You're going to have to buy a new one every year or so as they update their specs to match Blu-ray.

Say what you want about profiles, at least Blu-ray will still be able to play back the feature film.

[oldmike]

if the war is to long nether format wins i dont see how any one not see that
MS is hopeing that they can keep it going. they want to get every one useing the VOD and downloads and if the war is still going on many will go that way why buy a disk and player that will be worthless in 2 years

[reiella]

Originally Posted by oldmike

if the war is to long nether format wins i dont see how any one not see that
MS is hopeing that they can keep it going. they want to get every one useing the VOD and downloads and if the war is still going on many will go that way why buy a disk and player that will be worthless in 2 years

MS wins with VOD.
Toshiba wins with DVD royalties.

[Bombthroat]

Originally Posted by oldmike

if the war is to long nether format wins i dont see how any one not see that
MS is hopeing that they can keep it going. they want to get every one useing the VOD and downloads and if the war is still going on many will go that way why buy a disk and player that will be worthless in 2 years

To answer your rhetorical question directly, I bought Blu-ray to enjoy the highest quality high-definition movies I could get. Will my player stop working in two years? No. I'll still be able to play all the movies I have purchased and will purchase until no new movies are made available. So, is it worthless? No, I'll get immeasurable enjoyment out of it.

To make an analogy, I see the M$ download movies like I see MP3 (minus the success). That is one of a completely inferior format that has for all intents and purposes killed the market it is in by inundating it with an inferior (aural quality) product.

I for one will not download ultra-low-bit-rate 720p movies with crippled sound quality and wear a sh*t eating grin. YMMV!

[damandan05]

Originally Posted by Bombthroat

To answer your rhetorical question directly, I bought Blu-ray to enjoy the highest quality high-definition movies I could get. Will my player stop working in two years? No. I'll still be able to play all the movies I have purchased and will purchase until no new movies are made available. So, is it worthless? No, I'll get immeasurable enjoyment out of it.

To make an analogy, I see the M$ download movies like I see MP3 (minus the success). That is one of a completely inferior format that has for all intents and purposes killed the market it is in by inundating it with an inferior (aural quality) product.

I for one will not download ultra-low-bit-rate 720p movies with crippled sound quality and wear a sh*t eating grin. YMMV!

I really like how you put that together. I for one have a 360 (well had it broke for the second time). If i can't trust their faulty product why would i dl more movies from them. Plus pay 200 dollars for a harddrive to actually support that kind of downloads.

And adding to higher posts, why support both your just making it worse on everyone else by helping prolong the war.

edit: oh yea like to add, warners totalhd idea is a bad one at that, will not purchase them dont care what movie is on it.

[Robmx]

Originally Posted by Bombthroat

To answer your rhetorical question directly, I bought Blu-ray to enjoy the highest quality high-definition movies I could get. Will my player stop working in two years? No. I'll still be able to play all the movies I have purchased and will purchase until no new movies are made available. So, is it worthless? No, I'll get immeasurable enjoyment out of it.

Have found myself saying the same thing to others. Its BLU for me or NOTHING !

[David Vaughn]

I have watched one movie with OnDemand because it was free, and it was the worst experience I had. What Comcast called HD was worse than an average DVD. I won't ever download either, I want to own my movies that I like, not rent them over and over.

But we have to remember, the studios (all of them) main drive in business is to sell us the same movie as many times as possible!

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Chris Beveridge

Twin Format or TotalHD? If Gary means Twin Format, then it does see some limited use both here and abroad. Bandai Visua Japan/USA has been using it for their Freedom releases.

I'd certainly prefer to see that used in place of combos.

The twin already comes in a two layer form (one layer each of HD DVD and DVD). The extension of TL is a single-sided combo. Although obviously one of the formats must be compromised.

Gary

[gand41f]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

The twin already comes in a two layer form (one layer each of HD DVD and DVD). The extension of TL is a single-sided combo. Although obviously one of the formats must be compromised.

If the DVD layer is the third layer, will I need a new DVD player to play this one?

enjoy
gandalf

[richard lichtenfelt]

Originally Posted by frank_t

Yep - I do the same. keep it wired.

When I was attempting to stream some AVCHD video I shot on my Panny over wireless, it was terrible.

The PS3 truely is an amazing piece of hardware. I wish Sony could figure out an effective marketing campaign for gamers and movie buffs. Or perhaps they have some kind of "wink-wink, nudge-nudge" agreement with other BD hardware makers to not push the PS3 too hard.

Afterall, for $499, it is one of the best BD players out there.

Their weren't enough PS3 systems available last holiday season. Now there will be plenty of them in retail stores. Most game makers don't want to release when such a shortage of systems exist because people rather buy new games than ones that came out a year before they got their PS3.
Giant game titles are coming out in the next few months that should really shake things up. Look for the PS3 to break out before the end of the year.

[Bombthroat]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

But we have to remember, the studios (all of them) main drive in business is to sell us the same movie as many times as possible!

Then it is their burden to come up with something that makes me want to part with my money again.

I can tell you this, offering up the same movie in a lesser quality is not going to win my dollars.

[WickyWoo]

Please read again, as it appears some people did not get the message the first time:

FEEL FREE TO CHALLENGE DAVID, AGGRESSIVELY IF YOU SO CHOOSE

But attacks NOT using fact, logic and reason such as but not limited to namecalling(and I and the other mods decide what qualifies, ARE NOT KOSHER

Therefore, I will start handing out suspensions and move from there for people who violate that simple mandate. THIS GOES EQUALLY FOR BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUEMENT. We've got a good thing going here, please don't ruin it.

[RedSnoddyBLU]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

I have watched one movie with OnDemand because it was free, and it was the worst experience I had. What Comcast called HD was worse than an average DVD. I won't ever download either, I want to own my movies that I like, not rent them over and over.

But we have to remember, the studios (all of them) main drive in business is to sell us the same movie as many times as possible!

I think you're being a tad hard on Comcast. It's true that you'll never see HD programming OnDemand that matches what you could get with either Blu-ray or HD-DVD, but everything I've watched is significantly better than an average DVD.

Your point about the studios trying to sell us the same movie is quite valid.

As an aside to all the "hate on David Vaughn" stuff that goes on, name calling is childish, and I'm glad to see the mods here are willing to punish people that cross the line. Here's something I read in one of your reviews that made me like your opinion on things:

The narration by David Attenborough is very succinct and informative. The US release on the Discovery Channel had Sigourney Weaver doing the narration, but I preferred the sophisticated sounds of the English accent.

Now I don't know that I preferred Attenborough's narration due to it sounding more sophisticated than Weaver's, I think it's more to do with the fact that upon hearing Attenborough I'm not waiting for him to say "Get away from her you *****" to the lion getting ready to take down the gazelle. It still boggles my mind that the Discovery Channel thought the need to replace his narration with Ripley's.

Anywho, I very much respect the fact that you've been so willing to come over here from AVS and have a dialog with people who are as devoted to their format as the vast majority of posters here are.

On a completely unrelated note, did anyone see LSU beat the tar out of VT? Them Tigers look damn good!

[gand41f]

Originally Posted by RedSnoddyBLU

On a completely unrelated note, did anyone see LSU beat the tar out of VT? Them Tigers look damn good!

Nope. No cable for me, as the local cable company doesn't offer high definition options. (I know I know...what century is this. )

I get local channels in OTA though, and they look about 1/2 as good as Blu-ray.

enjoy
gandalf