Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

I am retired. My time has no monetary value.

It is not about monetary value directly. It is about what you can do with that time. We all have a limited time on this earth and no matter how much one is willing to pay to extend it, it just won't happen. You can watch a few more shows you are interested in, spend a bit more time with people you like.... Everyone's time has some value.

The monetary value is used for comparison, if there is a 20$ difference (to keep stuff simple, is it worth the time it adds-up to in a month.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

The under statement of the month!!!!!

I have had to deal with some very slow learners in my time but don't recall ever dealing with a no-learner such as that poster. It is really , makes me wonder why I have not communicated just a tiny bit of technical information to him.

I think Le is just bored out of his mind and he thinks it is funny to post stupid stuff on here.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

It is not about monetary value directly. It is about what you can do with that time. We all have a limited time on this earth and no matter how much one is willing to pay to extend it, it just won't happen. You can watch a few more shows you are interested in, spend a bit more time with people you like.... Everyone's time has some value.

The monetary value is used for comparison, if there is a 20$ difference (to keep stuff simple, is it worth the time it adds-up to in a month.

My time is my own to use as I see fit. Why anyone would chastise me for watching brief ads on shows I really want to see is truly baffling. And the best part is the cost: a buck a month. For Hulu and another buck for STARZ. Unbeatable deals IMO.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I think Le is just bored out of his mind and he thinks it is funny to post stupid stuff on here.

I am never bored. I have my TV, my other forums and I read 2 or 3 books a week.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

My time is my own to use as I see fit. Why anyone would chastise me for watching brief ads on shows I really want to see is truly baffling. And the best part is the cost: a buck a month. For Hulu and another buck for STARZ. Unbeatable deals IMO.

No one is chastising you. You can waste your time any way you choose too. The point is all those seconds per ad add up.

[crutzulee]

I'm really glad that the OPPENHEIMER UHD was released at the same time as the other home options. Even still, I almost contemplated the stream over the disc because I absolutely detest shifting aspect ratios...

As things turned out, I was able to use my projector's internal masking to perfectly lock the presentation to my screen's native 2.20:1 aspect ratio. I also used my amp's DTS X PRO upmixer on the 5.1 track... the results were truly "reference" quality! What an amazing 3 hour experience. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

No one is chastising you. You can waste your time any way you choose too. The point is all those seconds per ad add up.

To what? Most of the ads are interesting - at least watchable. HULU has very few drug ads. Half are for HULU content - trailers.

Drive a car? How many minutes per day do you spend either waiting for a red light to change green or stuck in traffic? Would you consider them wasted minutes? Of course not - that doesn't fit your argument. You reject anything with your holier than thou attitude.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by bhampton

The streaming version of movies are small files optimized for watching over Wifi on mobile devices.
Having the ability to transfer 100Mbs doesn't matter when the source is 5.5Mbs.

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

The under statement of the month!!!!!

I have had to deal with some very slow learners in my time but don't recall ever dealing with a no-learner such as that poster. It is really , makes me wonder why I have not communicated just a tiny bit of technical information to him.

You guys are the ones that don't learn, you hang on to old ideas. I told you guys a long time ago that the Streaming Providers will use Adaptive Streaming. This is a Technique that detects Bandwidth and CPU Capacity in real-time and adjusts the Streaming Quality to the highest level according to devise and Internet Connection. Like I said IMO it's Disc Quality!

https://www.bing.com/search?q=do+str...&ghacc=0&ghpl=

[cheez avenger]

Decided to re-watch the series "Manhattan" on Tubi, Since I no longer subscribe to AMC. I did notice that S1 on BD might be OOP because it now goes for $50+.


Season 1 is great but they rushed S2 since it got canceled midway through and they had to wrap it up quickly and as best as they could.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I think Le is just bored out of his mind and he thinks it is funny to post stupid stuff on here.

I was making reference to the following poster.

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys are the ones that don't learn, you hang on to old ideas.

Actually many did learn and the idea of having the best available to enjoy is in fact a very old idea.

And once again, we were streaming a/v over T3 before the days of DVD.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys are the ones that don't learn, you hang on to old ideas. I told you guys a long time ago that the Streaming Providers will use Adaptive Streaming. This is a Technique that detects Bandwidth and CPU Capacity in real-time and adjusts the Streaming Quality to the highest level according to devise and Internet Connection. Like I said IMO it's Disc Quality!

https://www.bing.com/search?q=do+str...&ghacc=0&ghpl=

Bear in mind, even with adaptive streaming, lower bit rates are still the order of the day across all devices, even taking into account notable and necessary picture/compression improvements on a smart tv. Also, you now have to pay extra for 4K generally, which is a bummer. Netflix and the like are fine and look quite good for limited series and tv shows but for movies? I prefer the vast breathing space of 4K disc and Blu-ray. Audio is a different discussion altogether.

So, to summarise it’s not the highest quality for said device, it’s a “suitable” quality for each device. Suitable as in the masses think it’s good enough. Don’t confuse that with high quality.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by crutzulee

I'm really glad that the OPPENHEIMER UHD was released at the same time as the other home options. Even still, I almost contemplated the stream over the disc because I absolutely detest shifting aspect ratios...

As things turned out, I was able to use my projector's internal masking to perfectly lock the presentation to my screen's native 2.20:1 aspect ratio. I also used my amp's DTS X PRO upmixer on the 5.1 track... the results were truly "reference" quality! What an amazing 3 hour experience. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!

Looking forward to getting stuck into this film.

[sapiendut]

Alchav said “imo it’s disc quality”. LOL. What disc look as bad as streaming?

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Two issues
1)A maximum wage law would never pass even if it is a direct democracy.
let me put it this way , what do you think will happen if the CEO says to employees "if this law passes and I can only make 100x what you make I will fire you and hire people in a different country to do the job?" (or even if it crosses the mind of the people working at the company.

2) A maximum wage law would be useless

a) let's say it passes, let's say it is an industry like mining or restaurants where employees need to be on the spot so they can't artificially raise what the CEO can make based on removing cheap labour. Right now plenty of companies have fake headquarters in other countries for the sake of skimming on the taxes they pay. What o you think if the CEO of of one of the companies that moved the headquarters to Cayman islands, goes "Hay Cayman we now have a small office there with our fake headquarters would you allow me to imigrate there so this new law won't negatively affect my income?

b) you are assuming wage is important. It is to the normal person, but the top brass of large companies. For example, Steve jobs in 1997 decided he will work for 1$ a year (not picking on him but it makes a great example). But then you have share options, bonuses, benefits...... that means that they don't have t live on their official wage.

If I'm not mistaken, Warren Buffett has a $1/year contract, and has had one for decades. He's still one of the richest people in the world. So clearly that's a BS plan to make billionaires look humble.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys are the ones that don't learn, you hang on to old ideas. I told you guys a long time ago that the Streaming Providers will use Adaptive Streaming. This is a Technique that detects Bandwidth and CPU Capacity in real-time and adjusts the Streaming Quality to the highest level according to devise and Internet Connection. Like I said IMO it's Disc Quality!

https://www.bing.com/search?q=do+str...&ghacc=0&ghpl=

Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man. - YouTube

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Drive a car? How many minutes per day do you spend either waiting for a red light to change green or stuck in traffic? Would you consider them wasted minutes? Of course not - that doesn't fit your argument. You reject anything with your holier than thou attitude.

yes I drive but what does that matter if someone is driving or sitting in a passenger seat or even walking/biking... to the intersection with the red light they all need to wait at that light just the same.

As for your question the answer is absolute yes. Aren't you smart enough to realize that you would be there those minutes earlier if you got to the intersection and it was green?

The reality is that in most circumstances the whole drive is a waste of time not just the lights. But it is a necessary waste of time, I am at point A and I want to be at point B and I need to waste that time getting there, there is no choice.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys are the ones that don't learn, you hang on to old ideas. I told you guys a long time ago that the Streaming Providers will use Adaptive Streaming.

lol. I don't remember you needing to tell anyone that adaptive streaming exists.

the issue is (numbers for ilustration purposes) Adaptive streaming right now for streamer X gives you the choice of a 2-6 depending on what the streaming provider and the network as a whole can handle when you are watching something. Right now with physical media you can go with something that can score an 8 and one day we (at least myself) hope a 9-10 will be an option.

adaptive streaming does not mean you can stream something that will score a 10 just because it can adapt from 2-6 depending on conditions because it is not available from the streaming providers and the issue is that adding better options (one that will hit a 7) will cost the streaming providers many hundreds of millions more and when the streamers say "I want cheap" and "it looks fabulous" there is no reason for them to offer better quality.

Look I don't know f you made a typo in your previous post but you said

Originally Posted by alchav21

My ISP gives me Symmetrical 100\100Mbps

but the https://www.speedtest.net/global-ind...d-states#fixed
United States Median Country Speeds October 2023 for Fixed Broadband download is 215.72Mbps
your connection is way more than what is needed for streaming and several people can watch at the best quality on your network, but it is very low compared to most Americans so I don't know why you think you have anything near an exceptional y good A/V quality experience compared to anyojne else that streams. The simple reality (and the re is nothing wrong with that) is you are willing to accept that quality and decide to call it fabulous while others live with that quality but hope for better and others sday why not hhave something better since it is available.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Shane Rollins

If I'm not mistaken, Warren Buffett has a $1/year contract, and has had one for decades. He's still one of the richest people in the world. So clearly that's a BS plan to make billionaires look humble.

I did not mean Jobs was the only one that pulled that stunt, he was the first name to pop in my head.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

To what? Most of the ads are interesting - at least watchable. HULU has very few drug ads. Half are for HULU content - trailers.

Drive a car? How many minutes per day do you spend either waiting for a red light to change green or stuck in traffic? Would you consider them wasted minutes? Of course not - that doesn't fit your argument. You reject anything with your holier than thou attitude.

If I could pay a small fee to avoid all traffic and stop lights I absolutely would. But apparently you wouldn't because your time is worthless.

[russweiss1]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

If I could pay a small fee to avoid all traffic and stop lights I absolutely would. But apparently you wouldn't because your time is worthless.

Thanks for this post. It made me laugh.