Spidey BluRay sales disapointing.

[musicman1999]

Ha, well said.


bill

[pixelthis]

The point is, you can ask your questions anywhere you want, and get an answer to support your theories. People that lurk/post on BluRay.com are by definition "movie" people. They MAY play games, but for the most part they are there for the BR MOVIES. So your source already is biased for movies.

Go to www.ps3fanboy.com and you get GAMERS who may or may not watch BR Movies. So although your PS3 is the same, for those 2 sites your audience is different. But I'm sure your aware of that. Because you are citing a source that supports your theory, while ignoring others that dont.




Does it matter? NO. Why? Because those 2 functions are NOT necessary to be considered an "entertainment center". 7 years ago DVD upconverting wasn't even around. SACD isn't required for ANY entertainment center, unless you are trying to cloud the waters to hide your weak base. Could the PS2 do anything that the XBOX could in relation to "media center". NO.




No, actually I wasn't admitting anything. You somehow came to the conclusion that the PS3 is the FIRST "entertainment/media center". Clearly it wasn't, nor is it the definiative "media center" you have deluded yourself about. Did you happen to have Al "I invented the internet" Gore help you write your post?

And your comments on the 360 are subjective. As a BR shill, and a PS3 owner, I wouldn't expect anything less. You are quite the fanboy for not liking games and all.

BTW, you don't need a PC to do those functions, but you CAN. Same as the PS3, so I don't know why your shooting yourself in the foot for me, but keep it up.

As far as the VOD, thats a great arguement to hitch your horse to. Pack your **** up and move to Australia to enjoy it. That and South Korea are the ONLY markets that have it. 360 has had it since inception. And the best part is, the PS3 can't support it in the US, and there are NO plans to bring it here. (At least announced)




?

It plays SACD, and BR movies. Well, I guess if I wanted those I could get them. The PS3doesn't play HD-DVD, or have VOD, or D/L Movies, TV programs, and other entertainment. So I guess its really not a "media center" either.






I am with the topic. You are only too eager to spout off figures about how the PS3 is driving the movie market for BR. It may be, maybe not. But if its that hard to quantifiy, then perhaps the PS3 shouldn't be considered a standalone player.

America is in Australia?
Because I live in AMERICA, and have VOD on my comcast service, with digital sound,
FF,RR,pause, ETC.
Just about every cable company over a certain pop density offers some sort of VOD.
In fact that has been an argument of mine from the git go, if these two "camps" in the format war dont watch it the rental market will be gone , disapeared while they squable.
I have free movies, some HD, payperview, some HD.
And the whole "standalone " crap falls squarely into the who gives a rats a*** categeory.
Do people who buy ps3 buy movies to watch on it?
Of COURSE THEY DO.
All of this folderal is simply a smokescreen to hide the obvious, mainly that BLU is kicking HD's butt, outselling 2 to 1, mostly.
My question is, do you in the HD camp really understand what you're advocating?
Another decade of living with an inferiour format, and why?
The price diff isnt really that much anymore, the Blu machine beats HD in every categeory ,
mostly, are you getting paid by tosh to shill their inferiour crap?
If Beta had won the last big "war" we wouldnt have been saddled with a P.O.S videotape system backed by the darth vader of the video world, RCA, whose motto has always been,
"save a penny a set? DO IT".
Now there are those who want to stick us with a HD disc with HALF the capacity
of the competing format, and thats just one of its deficencies.
I wonder why, are you just addle brained?

[Groundbeef]

America is in Australia?
Because I live in AMERICA, and have VOD on my comcast service, with digital sound,
FF,RR,pause, ETC.
Just about every cable company over a certain pop density offers some sort of VOD.
:

It appears you read my posts as carefully as I read yours.

The discussion was between the 360 offering VOD, and the PS3 NOT offering VOD. And whether or not the PS3 was the "first entertainment/media center" offered.

It isn't no matter how much Sir T tries to polish that turd.

[Groundbeef]

People who go to the gaming half of the forum are just as much gamers as the people on PS3fanboy. They are probably more aware of the functions of their PS3 than most gamers are, but they are just as much gamers as PS3fanboy members are. So your claim of bias is unfounded and inaccurate. Your dodging my question is really telling. .

Can you quantify that or is that speculation? I have a feeling its speculation. I'm not dodging anything, but you seem to relish using sources that support your position, without regard to counter point. By definition BluRay.com is geared towards the BluRay function, not the gaming portion. So, if I'm perusing the BluRay board, the odds are I am interested in movies. Not exclusive to games, but movies are in play. On other more game oriented sites, more gamers are going to be interested in GAMES. So to surmise you would get the same reception on both sites asking the same question is rediculous. At best I am shocked at your niave view, at worst suspect that you are again shading the arguement to fit your narrow view/debate.

There is no proof that gamers do not watch movies. If you can find that proof, please post a link here for all to see. You are doing exactly the same thing as you are accusing me of doing. While I understand there are going to be some people who will not use their PS3 as a bluray player, nobody knows what that percentage is. I know this clearly, but you are attempting to box this thing up in a way that skews things unnecessarily. I am citing this source because it is clear this source understands exactly what the PS3 can do. Going to gamer sites to talk about movies is apples and oranges. I go to where they talk about games AND movies, since the PS3 does both. That is apples to apples. .

Never said they DON'T watch movies, just said that if you ask different pools of users, you will get different responses. Its telling you are unable to belive it.

Several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center. That is because nothing could do all that I mention internally. You obviously do not know what a entertainment center is do you? A entertainment center HAS to be able to do all of what I mentioned, or it would not be the centerpiece of your hometheater. You do not decide what is required in a entertainment center until you build one. Having a high resolution audio device is a component of a entertainment device. Without it, it would be incomplete as a entertainment center. SACD is the only high resolution music format still getting support. So there is nothing to cloud the water here. Could the XBOX do everthing the PS3 does in relation to a "media"center. NO!.

Shocking as it may be, I don't think everyone in the world supports your narrow view. I don't have SACD, but I'll be damned if I don't have an "entertainment center". As far as "several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center" is patently false. I would even suggest you are now lying.

Check out this link:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/sy...erextender.htm

This is for a product that is 7 years old, and yet MS introduced the concept of "entertaiment center" YEARS AGO. Granted it didn't play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but for the day it was the ONLY product that did all work of an entertainment center. All in 1080i too boot. You could stream data from a PC (the PS3 does this as well BTW), show pictures, movies, music, and others. Oh yeah, worked as a PVR. Thats something that even the mighty PS3 CANT DO TODAY!!!!

And the 360 did these functions as well, 13 MONTHS AGO. The PS3 you own doesn't do these functions so I guess according to your definition, its NOT an entertainment center either.

So you can stick your "PS3 is the 1st entertainment center" comment and blow it..

The PS3 is the first self contained entertainment center. That is something that cannot be said about the XBOX, or the XBOX360. Even with the HD DVD add on, can the XBOX360 do lossless audio? Nope. The fact that it requires a add eliminates it as a true entertainment center. The XBOX may have been able to do all that you listed, but it was not optimized to do anything but play games well. That cannot be said for the PS3. .

Your PS3 can't play HD-DVD so its not an "entertainment center" either. It can't do VOD, so I guess its not an "entertainment center" either. ohhhhh it has lossless audio? Whoopeee.

BTW the 360 does upconvert to both 1080i, and 1080p. So I don't know where you get your info, but you really ought to do better research.

How does not liking games make me a fanboy. This is a stupid comment. So if I am a BR shill, can you tell me how I benefit directly from the sale of anything BR? Shills get paid for what they do right?.

You work for a BR studio. I assume they pay you. So if BR does well, so do you. Hence-SHILL

The PS3 does not need a PC to do any of the things I listed, so it is not the same as the PS3. The XBOX360 does not upconvert DVD's, it just progressively scans them. The XBOX360 cannot do any high resolution audio internally, and it cannot playback HD movies internally either. The XBOX360 can only play CD back at redbook level, the PS3 can upconvert the audio to 176.4khz. The XBOX360 cannot even do DTHD or Dts MA lossless even with the external HD drive installed. So it is a crippled HD player at best. It sole function is a gaming machine, because that is all it is optimized internally for. .

The 360 DOES upconvert provided you use the correct cable. 1080p with the VGA cable, 1080i with component. Now that the HDMI is standard, it can do both through it.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/09/21...ent-1080p-vga/

For you to suggest the "sole function" of the 360 is a gaming machine, you again are lying. No more than the PS3 "sole function" is a gaming machine.

So you are saying it is not possible to design a ATSC tuner to integrate with the PS3 via USB? If it can be done with the XBOX360, it can be done with the PS3. That you cannot deny. If you can design a tuner to work with the PS3 for South Korea and Australia, a simular tuner can be designed for this market as well. .

Well, seeing as the tuner is external for the South Korea, and Autralia, that would kill your definition of the PS3 being a "entertainment center" as its not self contained. Thanks for the reminder. I love it when you make yourself look silly.

Why would the PS3 want to play HD DVD? another stupid statement that is meaningless. If VOD or D/L were available, the PS3 could handle it. It can do anything the XBOX360 does, and more. VOD is nothing. More money is made on disc based media than D/L or VOD. Not having that is not a big deal, even though the hardware could easily support it. However having that, but not being able to fully support HD DVD audio, or not having the ability to support any high resolution audio, or upconverting of video makes it not a media center as well. .

Well, if the PS3 can't play ALL current HD formats then its really NOT an "entertainment center" as you have suggested. Remeber your narrow definition as it ALL needs to be contained? Or that doesn't factor in when it doesn't support your point?

Again with the FUD about upconversion. With HDMI, or VGA you get 1080i or 1080p.

Beef, do not going back to being a idiot again. It is clear that the PS3 is currently driving bluray sales, as 400k base could not be outselling a 550k base 2 to 1. I gave you three defintion of what a standalone is. The PS3 fits it to a tee, so you cannot redefine what standalone means just because you do not understand the meaning of the word.

I've never disputed its a standalone player. Again, trying to square your argument with FUD. What I have said over and over, is that YOUR suggestion that its a 1-1 net gain for BR is false. If 100% of PS3 owners were BR Movie buyers/renters I would agree with you without any problem. But they are not, so its not really right to try and account for them in that fashion.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Can you quantify that or is that speculation? I have a feeling its speculation. I'm not dodging anything, but you seem to relish using sources that support your position, without regard to counter point. By definition BluRay.com is geared towards the BluRay function, not the gaming portion. So, if I'm perusing the BluRay board, the odds are I am interested in movies. Not exclusive to games, but movies are in play. On other more game oriented sites, more gamers are going to be interested in GAMES. So to surmise you would get the same reception on both sites asking the same question is rediculous. At best I am shocked at your niave view, at worst suspect that you are again shading the arguement to fit your narrow view/debate.

In case you didn't know, future games released to the PS3 will be on bluray disc. Alot of the gamers on Bluray.com are members of PS3fanboy as well. Just because you are interested in games does not mean you are not interested in movies as well. To advance the theory that gamers and not interested in movies, and will react negatively to the mention of movies is rediculous. PS2 owners help drive the DVD format. And now PS3 owners are helping to drive the bluray format. Not everyone is as single minded and one dimensional as you are.

Never said they DON'T watch movies, just said that if you ask different pools of users, you will get different responses. Its telling you are unable to belive it.

I went to a pool that is more balanced between movies and games. What good is it to go to a place were there is no interest in movies. The people I went to fully use their PS3, not just use it for one thing.

Shocking as it may be, I don't think everyone in the world supports your narrow view. I don't have SACD, but I'll be damned if I don't have an "entertainment center". As far as "several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center" is patently false. I would even suggest you are now lying.

If you XBOX360 does not have the internal parts to fully support all functions(it does not) then it is not a entertainment center. There is no support for high resolution music. There is no internal HD disc drive. You have to connect these items to the XBOX360 to get these features, and no matter what you do it cannot support not one high resolution audio format, not even those related to HD DVD. Its a entertainment system, not a entertainment center. There is a difference.

Check out this link:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/sy...erextender.htm

This is for a product that is 7 years old, and yet MS introduced the concept of "entertaiment center" YEARS AGO. Granted it didn't play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but for the day it was the ONLY product that did all work of an entertainment center. All in 1080i too boot. You could stream data from a PC (the PS3 does this as well BTW), show pictures, movies, music, and others. Oh yeah, worked as a PVR. Thats something that even the mighty PS3 CANT DO TODAY!!!!

And the 360 did these functions as well, 13 MONTHS AGO. The PS3 you own doesn't do these functions so I guess according to your definition, its NOT an entertainment center either.

It does not say entertainment center, it say media center. Entertainment center came with the PS3, not with the original XBOX. Entertainment centers are optimized internally for all forms of entertainment, not just DVD and CD. The XBOX required external sources to do what it does, so it is just a media center. The only functions that the PS3 does not have(but it can do) is the downloading of TV programs and movies. The rest of it, it can do better than the XBOX and the XBOX360 for that matter. The PS3 has USB ports, so it is easy to add a tuner to it. It already allows you to save video clips to its hard drive, so it is a DVR as well. There is a big difference on whether the hardware can perform the task, or if the task is even offered to the hardware. The PS3 can do everything the XBOX360 can do hardware wise, but the services that the XBOX360 has, the PS3 does not.

As far as the original XBOX doing 1080i, that is not a truthful statement at all. the XBOX360 was the first to do 1080i

So you can stick your "PS3 is the 1st entertainment center" comment and blow it..

I will leave the blowing to you thanks.

Your PS3 can't play HD-DVD so its not an "entertainment center" either. It can't do VOD, so I guess its not an "entertainment center" either. ohhhhh it has lossless audio? Whoopeee.

Your XBOX360 cannot play bluray, so its not an entertainment center. If VOD was offered to the PS3 it could do it. So you do not appear stupid, you might want to distinguish what the hardware can do, and what service is not allowed to the hardware.

BTW the 360 does upconvert to both 1080i, and 1080p. So I don't know where you get your info, but you really ought to do better research.

Sorry, but it does not deinterlace the video correctly, so there are artifacts according to Secret of Hometheater testing. It did not pass the 3:2 pull down cedence test for either video or film. It also fail the stands and flag testing on the video essentials disc. It does not upconvert DVD's to 1080i, it upconverts games. It does not do below black , its white levels are too low. The PS3 passed all of these test, does below black, and properly display white levels.

You work for a BR studio. I assume they pay you. So if BR does well, so do you. Hence-SHILL

This is very stupid and illogical since my work is not directly related to BR specifically. I mix movies for theatrical release, not specifically for bluray release. I did the same thing before bluray. If bluray didn't exist, I would still be mixing movies for theatrical release. My studio still payed me before BR existed, and if bluray loses(which i highly doubt) my studio would still pay me. You are nightliar really show just how ignorant you are of the movie studio business. So I suppose a secretary that works for a bluray exclusive studio is also a shill. Idiotic!

The 360 DOES upconvert provided you use the correct cable. 1080p with the VGA cable, 1080i with component. Now that the HDMI is standard, it can do both through it.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/09/21...ent-1080p-vga/

Even after the software upgrade this fall, via component cables, the Xbox 360 will still only upconvert DVDs to 480p, and will play HD DVD movies at a maximum resolution of 1080i. To get 1080p output for movies, you must use a VGA cable, which is not subject to the same copyright restrictions

It does not upconvert DVD's, and only outputs HD DVD at 1080i. VGA is not copy protected, and the DVD forum does not allow copy written material to be played through insecure hook ups. VGA to HDMI connections are frought with issues, because of aacs copy protections.

For you to suggest the "sole function" of the 360 is a gaming machine, you again are lying. No more than the PS3 "sole function" is a gaming machine.

Does the XBOX 360 have a internal HD DVD drive? no!. Does it have the necessary audio codecs to fully support HD DVD? Nope. Does it have the ability to pass high resolution audio? Nope. Then the machine is optimized for games only. The PS3 does support all of the audio codecs for bluray, has a internal bluray drive, and support high resolution audio internally. It is a fully internally optimized digital device for audio and video, something the XBOX360 is not.

Well, seeing as the tuner is external for the South Korea, and Autralia, that would kill your definition of the PS3 being a "entertainment center" as its not self contained. Thanks for the reminder. I love it when you make yourself look silly.

The XBOX360 does not have a internal tuner either, so whats you point?

Well, if the PS3 can't play ALL current HD formats then its really NOT an "entertainment center" as you have suggested. Remeber your narrow definition as it ALL needs to be contained? Or that doesn't factor in when it doesn't support your point?

Doesn't this apply to the XBOX360 as well, it does not play bluray disc, and it does not have a internal HD DVD drive. The PS3 was designed to play bluray disc with its internal drive, that is all that is needed for it to be considered a entertainment center. Not be able to play HD DVD is not necessary, its not apart of the bluray standards. The XBOX360 was never designed to play HD DVD disc, that was an after thought.

Again with the FUD about upconversion. With HDMI, or VGA you get 1080i or 1080p.

Only the premium XBOX 360 has HDMI. The standard XBOX360 does offer 1080p over VGA, but how many televisions have VGA hookups? Next to none. It does do 1080i over component for HD DVD, but it does not upcovert DVD's because of copy protection.

I've never disputed its a standalone player. Again, trying to square your argument with FUD. What I have said over and over, is that YOUR suggestion that its a 1-1 net gain for BR is false. If 100% of PS3 owners were BR Movie buyers/renters I would agree with you without any problem. But they are not, so its not really right to try and account for them in that fashion.

You are lying. You did say it was not a standalone, you said it cannot be counted as a standalone because it plays games. Unfortunately that does not square with the definition of standalone. Be a man boy. If you made a mistake, admit it. It does not matter how many people use it as a BR player, it has a built in drive just like a traditional standalone, with makes it as much as standalone as the traditional ones.

I never stated it was a 1-1 gain, that has never been apart of my arguement. I have stated that it has a internal drive, and that what makes it a standalone. You cannot lie you way out of this bro.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Thats the point. It would be nice to know the ratio. Then you couldn't continually flog that every PS3 owner is a BR movie lover. And that every PS3 translates directly into BR sales.

I never said any of this. Your reading skills suck dog nuts. I said it has an internal bluray drive, and that makes it as much as standalone as a BDP-S1.

Right, so when Toshiba sells at a loss, and gives away movies its a mortal retail sin, but when Sony does the same thing, its ok. Sure, I understand. Sort of a kind of "Don't do what I do" kinda mentality for BR. Thanks for clearing that up for all of us.

Sony is not selling its traditional bluray players at a loss. The PS consoles have always been sold at a loss. The PS3 is being sold at a loss because just like the XBOX360 games are much more profitable to both Sony and Microsoft. The model for the PS3 is not the same as the model for Sony traditional bluray players. The traditional players do not have games it can rely on to create profit later.

Right, the whole "industry insider" scoop. And TOTALLY unbiased.

A game plan has no biases smartness. It is a game plan.

Oh I love it when your wrong. Again. Here's two links for your viewing pleasure. Actually my viewing pleasure and everyone else that wants to see you eat crow.

Tell me is it yummy? I've schooled you before on GAME machines, and once again you troll in waters you are clearly out of step with.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/826/826128p1.html

http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-.../dp/B000TVT8PI

I thought I'd throw in the first link for our Japanese pals. Since you seem so stuck on what other countries offer, but not for US consumption on the PS3, enjoy it.

The second one is available right here in the good old USA.

You forgot this little gem in small print on your amazon link

Purchase a PlayStation 3 between October 1, 2007 and January 31, 2008 and receive 5 free Blu-Ray movies via mail-in offer. While supplies last

Now why would they offer five free movies for a game machine??

Why would walmart offer 15 free movies for just a GAME MACHINE?

http://digg.com/playstation/Wal_mart...vies?offset=51

Maybe you need to get schooled a little here

http://www.kickstartnews.com/reviews...station_3.html

Notice the words Entertainment Console at the top of the page. And these words in the body of the text;

First things first. The PlayStation 3 is not just a game console. It's designed to be the center of a home entertainment system which includes gaming, music, video, movie and the internet

or this

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...3_brier22.html

This post was a waste of your time, and did nothing to further your point.

[Mr Peabody]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.

[pixelthis]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.

Where to start?
First , the viewing is INSTANTANEOUS.
There is no "download", buy the movie and its pretty much on, and you can watch it as often as you want in 24 hours. Its saved to the DVR like everything else you get.
And its not just movies, its also tv shows, music videos and concerts, etc.
The greatest thing is if you have a premium channel you get to watch their vod
offerings FOR FREE.
When the fourty year old virgin was on I went to on demand, and there it was, in high def,
hit a button and thats it.
Something you really want it will be in the video store a few weeks earlier, but I CAN USUALLY WAIT.
As for " tech savy" how much knowledge do you need to hit a ondemand button and navigate a few menus?
The free movies are a bit limited right now, but how many gems do you find in blockbuster?
Basically the system is server based, the movies are on harddrive, basically it all boils
down to server capacity.
Dont think this is a threat to rental stores?
Do you think Texas instruments thought LCD was a "threat" five years ago with a fifteen inch screen selling for 2 grand?
Most dont want to "collect" movies, one watch would do, with VOD you dont have to get in the car, etc.
This tech has amazing possibilities and is only in the infant stages.
Trust me, its going to be a real problem for the rental market.
As for quality we have comcast and charter in my area, Comcast DOES call their service digital, they also have an analog service.
A lot of people do think charter sucks.
People love the comcast service but hate the price.
But when you watch everything through a digital cable box, everything, even standard def looks great. Tin man looked amazing.
I think sci-fi is next in the HD upgrade dept

[pixelthis]

AND I like and respect you mr p, but websurfing drunk is something best left to the
professionals

[drseid]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.

I agree 100% here. I have a couple gripes with VOD. One is I like something tactile for my money (like a disc). The other main gripe is what you mention above about waiting for the downloads. I can deal with the relatively long load times my BDP-S1 and HD-A1 have, but those are only a couple minutes... With even a high speed connection, it would take me what would seem as long as the movie to download it. If I am going to wait that long and have to pay for it, I would rather go to the theater and see it there.

---Dave

[drseid]

Where to start?
First , the viewing is INSTANTANEOUS.
There is no "download", buy the movie and its pretty much on, and you can watch it as often as you want in 24 hours. Its saved to the DVR like everything else you get.
And its not just movies, its also tv shows, music videos and concerts, etc.
The greatest thing is if you have a premium channel you get to watch their vod
offerings FOR FREE.
When the fourty year old virgin was on I went to on demand, and there it was, in high def,
hit a button and thats it.
Something you really want it will be in the video store a few weeks earlier, but I CAN USUALLY WAIT.
As for " tech savy" how much knowledge do you need to hit a ondemand button and navigate a few menus?
The free movies are a bit limited right now, but how many gems do you find in blockbuster?
Basically the system is server based, the movies are on harddrive, basically it all boils
down to server capacity.
Dont think this is a threat to rental stores?
Do you think Texas instruments thought LCD was a "threat" five years ago with a fifteen inch screen selling for 2 grand?
Most dont want to "collect" movies, one watch would do, with VOD you dont have to get in the car, etc.
This tech has amazing possibilities and is only in the infant stages.
Trust me, its going to be a real problem for the rental market.
As for quality we have comcast and charter in my area, Comcast DOES call their service digital, they also have an analog service.
A lot of people do think charter sucks.
People love the comcast service but hate the price.
But when you watch everything through a digital cable box, everything, even standard def looks great. Tin man looked amazing.
I think sci-fi is next in the HD upgrade dept

Those "instantaneous" HD VODs on at least my cable system (Cox) are not particularly good quality, overpriced, and *extremely* limited in supply only about 10 relatively stale releases at a time. All this, driven by a horrible interface that is slow as molassas, ugly and user unfriendly. If this is the future of HD, I want none of it. I think BR and HD offer much better options for my dollars.

---Dave

[kexodusc]

I dunno about back home in the USA, but here in Canada my digital VOD service has improved dramatically in the last 2 years.
I can click an HD title, and watch it in about 20 seconds through the menu system. No downloading first, it's seems to be a more dynamic connection to whatever title I select.

The picture quality, well, it's somewhere between the best DVD and HD-DVD/BluRay, though in my experience is better than a lot of HD content from CBS, Fox, etc.
The audio is of course limited to Dolby Digital, sometimes at 384 k, sometimes at 448. That's for now. Not great, but still very enjoyable.

If I had to choose between going to Blockbuster to rent a movie vs VOD, I'd choose VOD. Why? Simple - less time and travel, no return obligation, and overall a superior experience. And in my area, new releases are tiny bit cheaper with VOD. I may be losing some audio quality in the lower bit-rate Dolby Digital compared to DVD (and especially DTS), but it's definitely not a huge loss most of the time. DTS is so rare now that it's dismissable. Comes down to better pic quality vs possibly slightly inferior sound quality that's noticeable sometimes. Now, for something like LOTR or Star Wars or whatever, I'd probably sacrifice the pic quality for the better sound, but then, I'd probably buy the movie if it was any good so renting vs VOD is moot.

For all but the most heavily special-effects laden films, it's an easy choice. And keep in mind, I'm someone who appreciates the audio quality more than video quality when watching movies. Most people are video-first.

Now, if VOD evolves and continues to improve as bandwidth goes up over time, then I'm afraid I'll have to side with Pix on this one. Start sending DTS or better than DVD quality sound and things are going to get ugly for the rental industry very fast.

You pay for convenience.
I'm a person who travels an aweful lot in his job, is away from home often, and values his free time at a rate higher than his salary would pay him per hour. That convenience element can't be ignored. On that front Blockbuster just can't compete at all.

[GMichael]

I still like the idea of being able to throw in a disk when company asks, "Do you have such-n-such on DVD?" On demand still has too few choices right now. Maybe in the future there will be more to pick from. Till then, I hate being restricted to what they are offering.

[Groundbeef]

In case you didn't know, future games released to the PS3 will be on bluray disc. Alot of the gamers on Bluray.com are members of PS3fanboy as well. Just because you are interested in games does not mean you are not interested in movies as well. To advance the theory that gamers and not interested in movies, and will react negatively to the mention of movies is rediculous. PS2 owners help drive the DVD format. And now PS3 owners are helping to drive the bluray format. Not everyone is as single minded and one dimensional as you are. .

No, only in your world are two different audiences the "same" when it fits your needs. I never said that gamers don't watch movies, or Movie watchers don't play games. If your going to state as fact that you got 10 pages of responses to your query on a MOVIE board, I suggested you would get a different response on a GAMING board. Really, is it that hard for you to understand?

I went to a pool that is more balanced between movies and games. What good is it to go to a place were there is no interest in movies. The people I went to fully use their PS3, not just use it for one thing. .

No, you went to a board frequented by MOVIE buffs, who also MAY play games. Not a GAMING board with viewers who MAY watch movies. Big difference.

If you XBOX360 does not have the internal parts to fully support all functions(it does not) then it is not a entertainment center. There is no support for high resolution music. There is no internal HD disc drive. You have to connect these items to the XBOX360 to get these features, and no matter what you do it cannot support not one high resolution audio format, not even those related to HD DVD. Its a entertainment system, not a entertainment center. There is a difference. .

While I appreciate your arguement, its self fufilling for YOU. However, I can't find any definition of an "Entertainment Center" that stipulates 1. Must have internal BR player. 2. Support SACD. Its just in your little world.

It does not say entertainment center, it say media center. Entertainment center came with the PS3, not with the original XBOX. Entertainment centers are optimized internally for all forms of entertainment, not just DVD and CD. The XBOX required external sources to do what it does, so it is just a media center. The only functions that the PS3 does not have(but it can do) is the downloading of TV programs and movies. The rest of it, it can do better than the XBOX and the XBOX360 for that matter. The PS3 has USB ports, so it is easy to add a tuner to it. It already allows you to save video clips to its hard drive, so it is a DVR as well. There is a big difference on whether the hardware can perform the task, or if the task is even offered to the hardware. The PS3 can do everything the XBOX360 can do hardware wise, but the services that the XBOX360 has, the PS3 does not.

As far as the original XBOX doing 1080i, that is not a truthful statement at all. the XBOX360 was the first to do 1080i .

No, actually the PS3 can't play HD-DVD either. So according to your definition its not an "entertainment center" because it doens't support ALL formats of HD movie playback. If you use the USB then its an EXTERNAL device. If you can count that for the PS3 (Tuner) then what the hell is the difference between that and the HD-DVD for the 360? NOTHING.

And heres a link for the XBOX Component Cables. Mind you, this was for a machine 7 YEARS ago. Games were optimized for 1080i output. (Not every game, but plenty of them). So, you can take your "not a truthful statment" and blow it out your ass. Again, you are clueless about gaming machines and what they are capable of. The 360 was NOT the first to do 1080i. The original XBOX WAS.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/h/hdavpack/

Your XBOX360 cannot play bluray, so its not an entertainment center. If VOD was offered to the PS3 it could do it. So you do not appear stupid, you might want to distinguish what the hardware can do, and what service is not allowed to the hardware. .

The PS3 cannot play HD-DVD, so its not an entertaiment center.

Sorry, but it does not deinterlace the video correctly, so there are artifacts according to Secret of Hometheater testing. It did not pass the 3:2 pull down cedence test for either video or film. It also fail the stands and flag testing on the video essentials disc. It does not upconvert DVD's to 1080i, it upconverts games. It does not do below black , its white levels are too low. The PS3 passed all of these test, does below black, and properly display white levels. .

It can upconvert DVD's using either VGA or HDMI. As far as the testing goes, its irrelevant to the arguement. Perhaps its not as "good" as the PS3, but it DOES upconvert. Your arguement about the PS3 is just as invalid. Unless a consumer is using an HDMI cable, they will not have upconverson either.

This is very stupid and illogical since my work is not directly related to BR specifically. I mix movies for theatrical release, not specifically for bluray release. I did the same thing before bluray. If bluray didn't exist, I would still be mixing movies for theatrical release. My studio still payed me before BR existed, and if bluray loses(which i highly doubt) my studio would still pay me. You are nightliar really show just how ignorant you are of the movie studio business. So I suppose a secretary that works for a bluray exclusive studio is also a shill. Idiotic! .

I'm neither ignorant, nor stupid. If you worked for a HD-DVD exclusive studio, I very much doubt you would argue with the same voracity for BR as you do now. I'm not suggesting you don't truly belive in what you say, but lets be honest. You do have a financial stake in the sucess of the BR format. No more idiotic than being shocked at a checker at Lowes doesn't praise the benefits of shopping at Home Depot!

Even after the software upgrade this fall, via component cables, the Xbox 360 will still only upconvert DVDs to 480p, and will play HD DVD movies at a maximum resolution of 1080i. To get 1080p output for movies, you must use a VGA cable, which is not subject to the same copyright restrictions

It does not upconvert DVD's, and only outputs HD DVD at 1080i. VGA is not copy protected, and the DVD forum does not allow copy written material to be played through insecure hook ups. VGA to HDMI connections are frought with issues, because of aacs copy protections. .

HD-DVD is output at 1080p with HDMI cable. Just like the PS3. Stop spreading FUD. If you use componet cables with the PS3 you are subject to the same restrictions.

[

Doesn't this apply to the XBOX360 as well, it does not play bluray disc, and it does not have a internal HD DVD drive. The PS3 was designed to play bluray disc with its internal drive, that is all that is needed for it to be considered a entertainment center. Not be able to play HD DVD is not necessary, its not apart of the bluray standards. The XBOX360 was never designed to play HD DVD disc, that was an after thought. .

No, it wasn't an "after thought" it was a design. MS decided not to cram an unecessary accessory into an already expensive machine. Sony went another route, and made the machine quite expenisive. I suppose only you will praise Sony for its rather bloated, overpriced GAME machine, and its lackluster sales for the 1st year. Only recently after its price was cut from the stratosphere is it beginning to see sales.

Only the premium XBOX 360 has HDMI. The standard XBOX360 does offer 1080p over VGA, but how many televisions have VGA hookups? Next to none. It does do 1080i over component for HD DVD, but it does not upcovert DVD's because of copy protection.
.

Once again, out of water. ALL XBOX brands carry the HDMI output. Only the "Elite" comes WITH the HDMI cable. Not even the PS3 comes with that! If you are still unsure check here:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/c...htm?WT.svl=nav

Notice where HDMI is "sold separately" on ALL Console's. Again, with the misinformation and spin. Shame on you T, I thought better of you.

And how many TV's in homes have HDMI? Its getting larger, but not even close to a majority of households. So for every 360 that has to use component, or composite, so does a PS3 owner. BTW nice of Sony to include COMPOSITE cables in with even their 80 GB premium line. What resolutions does that handle again?

You are lying. You did say it was not a standalone, you said it cannot be counted as a standalone because it plays games. Unfortunately that does not square with the definition of standalone. Be a man boy. If you made a mistake, admit it. It does not matter how many people use it as a BR player, it has a built in drive just like a traditional standalone, with makes it as much as standalone as the traditional ones.

I never stated it was a 1-1 gain, that has never been apart of my arguement. I have stated that it has a internal drive, and that what makes it a standalone. You cannot lie you way out of this bro.

No, I said it shouldn't be counted as a standalone if you were going to dis-allow the HD-DVD addon for the 360 not to be counted. Go back and check. Thats always been the arguement. You don't want the 360 HD-DVD drive counted, but want to include EVERY PS3 sale as a "BR Unit". Thats asinine.

[Groundbeef]

Sony is not selling its traditional bluray players at a loss. The PS consoles have always been sold at a loss. The PS3 is being sold at a loss because just like the XBOX360 games are much more profitable to both Sony and Microsoft. The model for the PS3 is not the same as the model for Sony traditional bluray players. The traditional players do not have games it can rely on to create profit later.

Your right, Sony can rely on the PS3 games (whenever they actually come out) to supplant their huge loss on each unit. However, just like Toshiba they run the risk of hurting their partners by lowering the expectation of price by undercutting the market. Granted, at this time prices HAVE fallen, but initially the PS3 was hundereds of $$ cheaper than the the other BR player offerings.

Similar to Toshiba offering HD-DVD players at unrealistic, low prices.

You cannot with a straight face or honest arguement suggest that the PS3 didn't exhibit a downward price pressure on other BR player makers. So to suggest that somehow Sony is differnent than Toshiba in lowering margins on other suppliers is false.

Your lack surity in answering this question shows that you do not really know. You are free to call it whatever suits you, but its official nomenclature is a Digital Entertainment center. That is what it is called in the instructional manual, and that is how it is marketed by Sony. Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

You forgot this little gem in small print on your amazon link

Purchase a PlayStation 3 between October 1, 2007 and January 31, 2008 and receive 5 free Blu-Ray movies via mail-in offer. While supplies last

Now why would they offer five free movies for a game machine??

Why would walmart offer 15 free movies for just a GAME MACHINE?

http://digg.com/playstation/Wal_mart...vies?offset=51

Maybe you need to get schooled a little here

No, you just embarassed yourself further. I made sure to include your initial quote "Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope. You seem to have forgotten that part. I wouldn't want people to read your response and think somehow you were right.

Because you were not. I never suggested that Sony WASN'T giving away movies. I just wanted to prove you wrong that they don't give away games. Clearly they do, and I am looking forward to you saying: "GB, I was wrong. (again) Clearly Sony has been giving away games, to entice customers to buy our GAMING machine".

I'll be waiting for your admission.

[GMichael]

Dead horse, meet whip.
Whip, meet dead horse.
Glad you two are getting together.

[Groundbeef]

Dead horse, meet whip.
Whip, meet dead horse.
Glad you two are getting together.

That was pretty funny.

[Mr Peabody]

Pix. did you notice the break between paragraphs in my post? VOD is from cable, in my 2nd paragraph I was referring to DL, from internet.

Charter had NOTHING on demand in HD and I don't think anything was even in DD. HBO-HD sounded good, near DVD quality but the HD picture is not as good as Dish's HD picture. If I could get HD-VOD you may sway me. Dish has HD PPV channels but I haven't checked them out yet. One of the other companies needs to buy Charter and put them out of their misery. They won't though because of the cost to upgrade. Have any of your cable companies had a BBB warning over their bundling like Charter? I do have a bit of a mystery though, my sound from Dish is inferior to what I was getting from Charter on HD premium channels like HBO. I'm sure the receiver settings are correct. I'm going to try another digital cable if that don't do it I may see if I can swap boxes to see if any difference. If no difference I will have to except the fact that Dish don't sound as good as the suckiest cable company in the world. I would think though if my cable went bad I wouldn't get sound or the sound would be worse than it is, either with drop out or distortion.

[pixelthis]

Pix. did you notice the break between paragraphs in my post? VOD is from cable, in my 2nd paragraph I was referring to DL, from internet.

Charter had NOTHING on demand in HD and I don't think anything was even in DD. HBO-HD sounded good, near DVD quality but the HD picture is not as good as Dish's HD picture. If I could get HD-VOD you may sway me. Dish has HD PPV channels but I haven't checked them out yet. One of the other companies needs to buy Charter and put them out of their misery. They won't though because of the cost to upgrade. Have any of your cable companies had a BBB warning over their bundling like Charter? I do have a bit of a mystery though, my sound from Dish is inferior to what I was getting from Charter on HD premium channels like HBO. I'm sure the receiver settings are correct. I'm going to try another digital cable if that don't do it I may see if I can swap boxes to see if any difference. If no difference I will have to except the fact that Dish don't sound as good as the suckiest cable company in the world. I would think though if my cable went bad I wouldn't get sound or the sound would be worse than it is, either with drop out or distortion.

I just want to put to rest this "downloading " pap.
My digital vod is as good as a dvd, the hd is better sometimes than broadcast,
and theres a pretty good selection.
I mean, really, go into the video store and how many titles are there that yolu really want.
And the comment about having something "tangible" is quite rediculous.
My movie is on the hard drive in my DVR, I can play it as much as I like in a 24hr period,
and the price is 3.99 for most payperview, and a lot you dont have to pay for at all.
Last time I rented an older title it cost money, same as the new ones.
On vod the free movies are just that...free.
And again, if you buy a premium service they offer free downloads, both hi-def and sd.
Cant beat free.
If you say that every movie is worth buying well, I can see your nose grow.
Some are quite good but dont have that special something that makes you want to own it.
Not that I care, the future of movie rental is VOD. Get used to it.
when you "rent a disc are you paying for the right to have a piece of plastic in your house for a day or two?
Of course not, you're paying for the movie on it.
In the future no one will use precious oil to make a plastic disc so that someone else can use even more precious oil to go rent it.
what HDDVD and BLU-RAY both are "fighting" for is the right to be the archive medium of movie lovers who want a copy of certain movies in their home.
And after the video store goes the way of the dinosaur that will be the SOLE market for a
movie on disc medium, and that market will be a lot smaller than puting out zillions of
discs to sell to rental outlets.
Dont think the video store will disapear?
I used to walk into stores and see shelves full of turntables, and there werent any video stores.
Did you ever think that you'd see record stores fade out like they are now?
Video stores are next

[GMichael]

And the comment about having something "tangible" is quite rediculous.
My movie is on the hard drive in my DVR, I can play it as much as I like in a 24hr period,

And when your friends visit with their 4 year olds who want to see Finding Nemo, will that still be saved on your DVR? What if they want to see the Loin King, or Cars? Do you have all of the possibilities saved? Can you save them ALL to be viewed anytime you like?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No, only in your world are two different audiences the "same" when it fits your needs. I never said that gamers don't watch movies, or Movie watchers don't play games. If your going to state as fact that you got 10 pages of responses to your query on a MOVIE board, I suggested you would get a different response on a GAMING board. Really, is it that hard for you to understand?

I posted my inquiry in the gaming section beef brain. That is where the gamers hang out. In case you have not been there, there is one section devoted to nothing but gaming and the PS3. Gamers watch movies(as evidenced by the PS2 contribution to the DVD format) as well as play games, and that was demonstrated by the 10 pages of response.

No, you went to a board frequented by MOVIE buffs, who also MAY play games. Not a GAMING board with viewers who MAY watch movies. Big difference.

I am sorry, but the movie buffs have their own section, and the gamers have theirs. I went to the gamers section. Please do not tell me what I did, you can't even remember what you say.

While I appreciate your arguement, its self fufilling for YOU. However, I can't find any definition of an "Entertainment Center" that stipulates 1. Must have internal BR player. 2. Support SACD. Its just in your little world.

I didn't say it must have SACD or bluray. I said it must support high defintion audio and video. The PS3 supports both, and the XBOX360 does not. It is that simple.

No, actually the PS3 can't play HD-DVD either. So according to your definition its not an "entertainment center" because it doens't support ALL formats of HD movie playback. If you use the USB then its an EXTERNAL device. If you can count that for the PS3 (Tuner) then what the hell is the difference between that and the HD-DVD for the 360? NOTHING.

I did not say all of nothing. I simply said it must support high definition video and audio. I said nothing about all of the video formats, I said all of the advance audio formats, you know, like DTHD and Dts MA lossless, DD+, Dts HD, and some sort of high definition audio only format. . Big difference for those who can actually read. Since all but the gaming portion of the XBOX360 function are external, it cannot be considered a true media hub. And when all of the devices are hooked up, the XBOX360 cannot even support the audio codecs that support HD DVD. DD and Dts lossy are yesterdays codecs.

And heres a link for the XBOX Component Cables. Mind you, this was for a machine 7 YEARS ago. Games were optimized for 1080i output. (Not every game, but plenty of them). So, you can take your "not a truthful statment" and blow it out your ass. Again, you are clueless about gaming machines and what they are capable of. The 360 was NOT the first to do 1080i. The original XBOX WAS.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/h/hdavpack/

I will leave the blowing to you. I do not care about gaming machines. I care about entertainment centers, which means I do not care about the XBOX360

The PS3 cannot play HD-DVD, so its not an entertaiment center.

The XBOX360 cannot play HD DVD without the drive, and even with the drive it only does a half ass job with supporting it. Whether the PS3 can do HD DVD or not is irrelevant, it can do high definition video INTERNALLY, something the XBOX360 cannot do. So it is a Entertainment center. HD DVD is not the only game in town, as long as the box can play high definition video from its INTERNAL drive, it is a Entertainment Center.

It can upconvert DVD's using either VGA or HDMI. As far as the testing goes, its irrelevant to the arguement. Perhaps its not as "good" as the PS3, but it DOES upconvert. Your arguement about the PS3 is just as invalid. Unless a consumer is using an HDMI cable, they will not have upconverson either.

The testing confirms whether the player is opitimized for the format, or not. The PS3 passed all of the test that show it is optimized for both Bluray and DVD. The XBOX360 could not, and that shows that the high definition support for its video side is an afterthought, and not integral to its design. Bad upconversion is like having no upconversion at all.

I'm neither ignorant, nor stupid. If you worked for a HD-DVD exclusive studio, I very much doubt you would argue with the same voracity for BR as you do now. I'm not suggesting you don't truly belive in what you say, but lets be honest. You do have a financial stake in the sucess of the BR format. No more idiotic than being shocked at a checker at Lowes doesn't praise the benefits of shopping at Home Depot!

You do not know what I would do under any circumstances. You are both ignorant and stupid to make this statement. I was working at a bluray exclusive studio and owned a HD DVD player first, bought a bunch of titles, and watch them. That proves that what I do for a living does not effect my personal choices.

You do not know a damn thing about how studio operate, because if you did, you would not make stupid ignorant statements such as this. I have said this over and over, but I will repeat it again for the thick headed. I mix for theatrical release, and yes, the soundtracks I mix do appear on Bluray disc. But they also appeared on VHS, Laserdisc, and DVD. I have remixed soundtracks for bluray disc, but I also remixed for Laserdisc and DVD. If bluray goes away, I still make money. If HD DVD and DVD goes away, I still make money. If film goes away, my job is gone. Now if you cannot understand this, then you are stupid and ignorant, even more so since I have already explain this over and over again.

HD-DVD is output at 1080p with HDMI cable. Just like the PS3. Stop spreading FUD. If you use componet cables with the PS3 you are subject to the same restrictions.

DVD is not upconverted to 1080p, it is only upconverted to 480p. The PS3 can upconvert to 1080p. There is not FUD there, just fact.

No, it wasn't an "after thought" it was a design. MS decided not to cram an unecessary accessory into an already expensive machine. Sony went another route, and made the machine quite expenisive. I suppose only you will praise Sony for its rather bloated, overpriced GAME machine, and its lackluster sales for the 1st year. Only recently after its price was cut from the stratosphere is it beginning to see sales.

If the drive is not internal, then it was an afterthought. The drive became available well after the 360 was released. It does not pass the necessary video testing that supports the notion that HD DVD was on the mind of the designers of the XBOX360. That is supported by the lack of lossless audio as well. No lossless audio, failed video testing is a sure sign that HD DVD was an afterthought. When you add up the cost of the XBOX360, the HD DVD drive, and the necessary support services like live etc, that makes the cost of the XBOX360 more than PS3. You can say GAME machine all you like, it just makes you look stupid. GAME machines do not do what the PS3 does. Games are just ONE thing the PS3 does.

Once again, out of water. ALL XBOX brands carry the HDMI output. Only the "Elite" comes WITH the HDMI cable. Not even the PS3 comes with that! If you are still unsure check here:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/c...htm?WT.svl=nav

So you add a HDMI cable and connection, raise the price $80 over the premium and you have a elite. Someone is getting ripped off here since a HDMI connection adds about $20 in parts to the player, and the cable can be had for less than $10 at monoprice. The 360 elite costs $20 less than the PS3, and the PS3 has the built in bluray drive. Somebody got screwed!

Notice where HDMI is "sold separately" on ALL Console's. Again, with the misinformation and spin. Shame on you T, I thought better of you.

How do you sell HDMI seperately? Either it is on the player, or it is not. It cannot be installed after the player is sold can it? LOL

And how many TV's in homes have HDMI? Its getting larger, but not even close to a majority of households. So for every 360 that has to use component, or composite, so does a PS3 owner. BTW nice of Sony to include COMPOSITE cables in with even their 80 GB premium line. What resolutions does that handle again?

Far more homes have HDMI than VGA, that is for sure. You cannot make a statement that for every360 that has to use component of composite, so does a PS3 owner. You do not know that, and either you enjoy doing what nightliar does and just tell lies, or you are making something up just to make a unsupportable point. Which is it.

It does 1080p to answer your question, that is its native resolution.

No, I said it shouldn't be counted as a standalone if you were going to dis-allow the HD-DVD addon for the 360 not to be counted. Go back and check. Thats always been the arguement. You don't want the 360 HD-DVD drive counted, but want to include EVERY PS3 sale as a "BR Unit". Thats asinine.

The HD DVD is a ADD ON. The bluray drive is INTERNAL. The difference is obvious. Traditional standalones have enternal bluray drives just like the PS3, and unlike the XBOX360. The ADD ON cannot function without the XBOX360 or a computer. The PS3 needs neither, its function are all INTERNAL. As long as the drive is in every PS3 just like it is in a traditional standalone, every PS3 is a bluray player.

I have given you the definition at least 10 times of what the word standalone means. To continue to believe that a ADD ON should be counted like a INTERNAL drive is asinine. You may not like it, but the definition is what it is.

[Groundbeef]

I posted my inquiry in the gaming section beef brain. That is where the gamers hang out. In case you have not been there, there is one section devoted to nothing but gaming and the PS3. Gamers watch movies(as evidenced by the PS2 contribution to the DVD format) as well as play games, and that was demonstrated by the 10 pages of response.

I am sorry, but the movie buffs have their own section, and the gamers have theirs. I went to the gamers section. Please do not tell me what I did, you can't even remember what you say. .

Just as usual, you are blowing smoke. There is no denying Bluray.com is a movie centric board. It may have a "gaming" section, but it's movie centric. By definition, viewers to that site are generally MOVIE buffs, who may play games. Ask a "movie" related question will give you answers by "movie" people.

Go to a game centric site, and you will get "gamers" who may or may not watch movies. Your incessant and loud rebuttles only reinforce the notion that you will never conceed even when faced with insurmountable, and indisputable facts. You will get different answers on different sites.

I will leave the blowing to you. I do not care about gaming machines. I care about entertainment centers, which means I do not care about the XBOX360.

Well, you own a PS3. A GAMING machine, so I guess you do care about them

The XBOX360 cannot play HD DVD without the drive, and even with the drive it only does a half ass job with supporting it. Whether the PS3 can do HD DVD or not is irrelevant, it can do high definition video INTERNALLY, something the XBOX360 cannot do. So it is a Entertainment center. HD DVD is not the only game in town, as long as the box can play high definition video from its INTERNAL drive, it is a Entertainment Center. .

Pull up one of those fancy dictionary sites you always cite. Show me where it defines an "entertainment center" as you profess. If you do, I'll eat my hat.

You do not know what I would do under any circumstances. You are both ignorant and stupid to make this statement. I was working at a bluray exclusive studio and owned a HD DVD player first, bought a bunch of titles, and watch them. That proves that what I do for a living does not effect my personal choices. .

That you own HD-DVD movies in your home is irrelevant to the arguement. You work for a BR studio, and you profess it freely. To suggest that your employment in NO WAY shades your arguements is silly. And makes you look silly.

DVD is not upconverted to 1080p, it is only upconverted to 480p. The PS3 can upconvert to 1080p. There is not FUD there, just fact. .

Wrong again, Mr. T. With HDMI or VGA it upconverts. Your the one with the FUD problem.

So you add a HDMI cable and connection, raise the price $80 over the premium and you have a elite. Someone is getting ripped off here since a HDMI connection adds about $20 in parts to the player, and the cable can be had for less than $10 at monoprice. The 360 elite costs $20 less than the PS3, and the PS3 has the built in bluray drive. Somebody got screwed!.

No, you also get 100GB more storage on the HD. 40GB more than the PS3. Looks like the sap that bought the PS3 with less storage got screwed.

How do you sell HDMI seperately? Either it is on the player, or it is not. It cannot be installed after the player is sold can it? LOL.

Now your really being ignorant. You need to buy the CABLE seperately. Just like the PS3. Or do you really need that pointed out?

Far more homes have HDMI than VGA, that is for sure. You cannot make a statement that for every360 that has to use component of composite, so does a PS3 owner. You do not know that, and either you enjoy doing what nightliar does and just tell lies, or you are making something up just to make a unsupportable point. Which is it.

It does 1080p to answer your question, that is its native resolution. .

I see, so with the included "component" YELLOW cable, your telling me the PS3 pushes 1080p? Thats pretty funny. Even for your FUD tactics that's over the top.

I think this here arguement has run its course. I would like to take this moment to point out that you have been really out of line on your responses. I PM'd you before, and actually had a nice chat with you. I really don't understand the need for the personal insults you insist on throwing around. I've restrained, and not sure why you feel the need to go to the gutter. It takes away from your expertise, and only makes you look like a desperate whiner.

Have a nice evening.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Your right, Sony can rely on the PS3 games (whenever they actually come out) to supplant their huge loss on each unit. However, just like Toshiba they run the risk of hurting their partners by lowering the expectation of price by undercutting the market. Granted, at this time prices HAVE fallen, but initially the PS3 was hundereds of $$ cheaper than the the other BR player offerings.

You analysis is completely flawed. No other BR manufacturer is offering a device like the PS3. And now that you can find a traditional standalone for cheaper than the PS3, you point is moot. The PS3 because of its uniqueness can be sold at a loss because it does support gaming. Traditional standalones are not afforded this kind of break. They must make money on the player because there is no way to make a profit elsewhere. Initially it was the goal of the BDA to get as many players out there as they can. It was not until the prices of the traditional standalones dropped that the PS3 prices have dropped. We cannot talk about initially, initially is gone, never to be lived again.

Similar to Toshiba offering HD-DVD players at unrealistic, low prices.

No it is not simular. The Toshiba players only play movies. You lose money on those players, you cannot make it up. Toshiba does not own a movie studio, therefore it cost them to subsidize with free movies. Players being sold at a loss, and free movies given away is not how the BDA operates, or wants to operate. Now they may give away free movies, but there is a profit made on every player the BDA manufacturers sell.

You cannot with a straight face or honest arguement suggest that the PS3 didn't exhibit a downward price pressure on other BR player makers. So to suggest that somehow Sony is differnent than Toshiba in lowering margins on other suppliers is false.

No it did not. The other BR players that have had there prices lowered were earlier generation model moved to make room for other new generational models. It is normal in the CE industry to do this. The Samsung player just recently dropped in price is making room for another player to be introduce early next year. Panasonic player came in cheaper than the last because Panasonic is producing enough players to become more efficient at making them, and with the benefit of cheaper part prices. This would have happened even if the PS3 was not reduced in price. The Samsung BDP-1000 price was reduced long before the PS3 price was. So BOOM, there goes you arguement.

Toshiba has already admitted that their HD DVD format is losing alot of money. I already provided a link that shows this. BR manufacturers are not losing money. That is the difference.

No, you just embarassed yourself further. I made sure to include your initial quote "Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope. You seem to have forgotten that part. I wouldn't want people to read your response and think somehow you were right.

Because you were not. I never suggested that Sony WASN'T giving away movies. I just wanted to prove you wrong that they don't give away games. Clearly they do, and I am looking forward to you saying: "GB, I was wrong. (again) Clearly Sony has been giving away games, to entice customers to buy our GAMING machine".

I'll be waiting for your admission.

You will get no admission here. Amazon is allowed to put together PS3 packages that include free games. Sony does not have to authorize this, and the Amazon package is a Amazon package, not a Sony package. Paidgeek, a Sony executive confirmed that for me. So I am right, Sony does not give away games. Amazon may as a promotion to move PS3's, but not Sony. Sony does give away free movies, and so do BR exclusive studios. Gaming retailers are allowed to bundle free software with players without Sony permission to do so. Sony knows this practice moves players, and therefore leads to software sales in the future. It is not the practice of Sony to give away games as a Sony sanctioned promotion. Paidgeek has also confirmed this. So if you are waiting for an admission, please hold your breath, I would love to see the outcome.

[PeruvianSkies]

And when your friends visit with their 4 year olds who want to see Finding Nemo, will that still be saved on your DVR? What if they want to see the Loin King, or Cars? Do you have all of the possibilities saved? Can you save them ALL to be viewed anytime you like?

This has to be hypothetical, I mean I see your point, but come on....Pix...friends....that's a good one!

[Groundbeef]

You will get no admission here. Amazon is allowed to put together PS3 packages that include free games. Sony does not have to authorize this, and the Amazon package is a Amazon package, not a Sony package. Paidgeek, a Sony executive confirmed that for me. So I am right, Sony does not give away games. Amazon may as a promotion to move PS3's, but not Sony. Sony does give away free movies, and so do BR exclusive studios. Gaming retailers are allowed to bundle free software with players without Sony permission to do so. Sony knows this practice moves players, and therefore leads to software sales in the future. It is not the practice of Sony to give away games as a Sony sanctioned promotion. Paidgeek has also confirmed this. So if you are waiting for an admission, please hold your breath, I would love to see the outcome.

Paidgeek is wrong and so are you. Unless your contention is that Amazon actually OPENS each box, inserts a "free" game (Motorstorm), then, in a feat of real action, reworks the box art to include the "Free Game Inclosed" graphic, then repackages the box to include the "free" game.

Your off your rocker.

And as if this isnt enough for you. Heres a link from SONY corp itself showcasing the unit, and a 5 GAME giveaway!

http://www.us.playstation.com/EP/Promotions/296

Heres the picture, now you explain how Amazon bundles this all up without any input from Sony?

Now you can apologize twice. Once for being wrong initally, and now a second time for using a source that clearly doesn't know what he is talking about!