Toshiba fights back......well kind of

[GMichael]

He's already been out-upgrading me. I can't keep up as it is.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Okay here you go, laz-e-boy.
DOWNLOADING IS THE FUTURE.
Sentence 2...Sir T is riled up in inverse porportion to what affects him, the dl issue affects him because he KNOWS that its the future.
OKAY...carry on

It is the future for folks who like to rent. For those who like to own, not going to happen anytime soon. The analyst who work the film industry all say its at least 10 years down the road. For me it is never until it can match the performance I get on disc. I am sure that is the bench mark for most videophiles. I don't care about convience, I care about quality. For those pro downloaders and VOD'ers like yourself, you don't care about quality, so download away.

[O'Shag]

Isn't HD-DVD supposed to offer a better picture than Blu-Ray? The initial reviews I read suggested that Blu-Ray was somewhat soft compared to HD-DVD. Excuse my ignorance, but I've not yet gotten either. I will at some point in the future though.

[GMichael]

Isn't HD-DVD supposed to offer a better picture than Blu-Ray? The initial reviews I read suggested that Blu-Ray was somewhat soft compared to HD-DVD. Excuse my ignorance, but I've not yet gotten either. I will at some point in the future though.

Some will say that BR has a better picture, but they are really the same for the most part. The audio on BR is better though. And BR holds much more information so that gives them more potential for growth.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Isn't HD-DVD supposed to offer a better picture than Blu-Ray? The initial reviews I read suggested that Blu-Ray was somewhat soft compared to HD-DVD. Excuse my ignorance, but I've not yet gotten either. I will at some point in the future though.

Not to take anything away from Sir G, but a compulation of several of the largest reviewing websites on the net show that since bluray exclusive companies went AVC, bluray PQ has out scored HD DVD by a long shot. Disney has the best PQ and SQ scores of ALL studio. Next is Sony, then Fox, then Warner, Paramount and lastly and deservedly Universal for churning out releases encoded from old masters and DD+

[Groundbeef]

and DD+

Whats wrong with DD+? Oh....wait sorry, now we are talkin' audio...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Whats wrong with DD+? Oh....wait sorry, now we are talkin' audio...

You are on a friggin roll Beef LOL

[GMichael]

You are on a friggin roll Beef LOL

Beef on a roll? Is it summer already?

[L.J.]

Why isn't it over? What advantage does the remaining 2 studios have by staying exclusive? Why not just go neutral and end this thing?

[nightflier]

Apparently, long posts are not to everyone's liking. That's unfortunate, because there is so much nonsense in your thinking that needs to be addressed. I can't make any promises, but I'll really try my hardest to keep this as short as possible (my apologies to everyone else, but lil't needs special handling).

Glad your back, I was bored. The American public speaks with their dollars. Music is different than movies. What works for music does not work for movies. Walmart, Google, and movie gallery have all shut down in 2007. Revenue is flat, and the studios are focusing on growing HDM on disc not movie downloads. Can you explain how Bluray/HD DVD even during a war has grown larger than VOD and downloading put together in terms of revuenue? That is because people want the disc, not a DRM infested low quality download. I do not have to speak for the American public, they speak through their money, and it ain't headed towards downloading whether we are speaking of VOD or XBOX live. How wrong was I about bluray? It turns out not one of your scenarios played out, and yet you are still calling me wrong. You said wait till next year about HD DVD and bluray. It didn't even take that long to play out, just like I stated.

What works for music (and photography, apparently) is also going to work for movies. Revenue has been flat, but that is not what it will be this year. You want trends, well I'll start by what was said at CES, and I'm not just talking about the sales pitches, I'm also talking about what people said. I saw more interest in digital downloads then ever before and it's going to piggy-back on what people are already doing with their music. They will (and have been) storing their movies on the same hard drives that they have their music collections on.

What is really funny is how you keep referring to sales as the only measure. It's absolutely ridiculous to be so narrow minded. Think about this:

1) Just as most people have ripped, copied from friends, and downloaded a large portion of their digital music collections, this is also the case with movies. You are completely dismissing the widespread practice of piracy and semi-piracy between people.

2) Just as music is being re-engineered and re-recorded to suit a different palate that eliminates things like dynamic range to reduce file size, the same is happening with movie content. Extras, unwanted sound format, languages, and other junk is all stripped out of pirated movies, but now there are programs that change the video and sound within the film to be more applicable to small portable devices and flat screens. And don't think this is just happening with pirated content, either, because that is also what the cable companies, VOD distributors, and the Amazons are doing. It's actually ironic that they are taking a cue from the pirates, just as the music industry did with music pirates and downloading.

3) BR will be valuable for collectors who want to own, but is that population growing or shrinking? You're been raving about how BR movies have so many more new releases, but that means very little to collectors. How many B&W classics are available on BR? And why would anyone bother? How many 70's, 80's, & 90's blockbusters on BR? Not too many I gather. The problem with BR is that it tries to cater to collectors, but it is releasing mostly content that appeals to the renters. Isn't that a kick in the pants?

4) Renting, by the way, is the crux of the argument and (big surprise) you want to downplay that. You mentioned Netflix as a better alternative to downloads, but those are exactly the people that will be drawn to downloading. The truth is that it's just a simple switch for them from receiving disks to downloading the content right to their TVs. Hence the reason the company is now offering downloads - they have wisely read the writing on the wall. People that rent will make downloading the dominant medium. This is because I believe that most people no longer have a desire to own movies - they want to watch them once and move on to other content. For these people, the "DRM-infestation" that we lament here on this board is a minor inconvenience, if they even notice it at all.

5) Speaking of renting, you're completely dismissing the habits millions of Americans who every week or so set their recorders to record what they plan to watch: your Tivo, PVR, and yes, even the VHS crowd. These people have grown accustomed to waiting for content - they will cue it up and download it - movies, tv shows, infomercials, documentaries. Much of what is being cued up for viewing, by the way, is movies from the movie channels. Since people have already paid for their pound of flesh to the cable company, this is essentially "free". Sure it's not as fresh as more current blockbusters, but for that they can use PPV and VOD. I truly believe that the downturn in DVD sales has far less to do with BR or the quality of the movies now coming out of Hollywood, then the simple fact that there is so much more free content available everywhere that people are watching instead.

The bottom line is that your dogged narrow-minded focus on sales figures misses some really big factors in this discussion. So what if VOD sales were stagnant for the past five years? That says very little about what is actually out there in digital format and being enjoyed by millions.

Oh, yes, and if the studios don't like it because they can't squeeze as much blood out of that stone, well the public has plenty of other options for entertainment as I've pointed out above. The studios will either get on board with it, or they'll go the way of the dodo. The "buying public" has no qualms about starving the studios out since they see them as bloated with money already or obsessive about copy-protection and harbor no love for them (just read the online posts). And yes, as much as you might hate to hear it, they see you, lil't, the little insider with the fat paycheck, in the same light.

Amazon sells FAR more disc than downloads, FAR MORE. Netflix rents more disc than downloads as well. There are way more titles on disc than Imovie.

Sure Amazons does, because they have a wide catalog that caters to collectors. Tell me lil't, isn't it true that NetFlix's download business is growing? Are you even willing to admit how much, with your insider info? Funny, you bring Apple's stake in this since they don't actually sell movies on disk. Let's see, we'll compare apples to nothing. Guess what? They are different! You don't say!

What you don't seem to get is downloading movies is not a growing market, is not economically feasible at this time, and not where analyst see the consumers spending their money. Analyst who follow the movie industry(as opposed to someone who does not seem to know anything about it, and couldn't get his last prediction right) believe that Bluray will be where the consumer puts their money now that the war is pretty much settled. The trend is already there(as evidenced by the fact that bluray alone is already a larger market than both VOD and downloading combined), and whatever cultural shift you predict will happen has not even learned to walk yet.

As I pointed out above, just because it's not where analysts are telling the studios they will make the most money (duh), that says nothing about its growth. The fact is downloaded digital video content on the internet is the fastest growing medium / file-format by far. Just because the studios can't figure out how to make money off of it, doesn't mean it's not growing. So the studios are going to doggedly push disk sales over downloads, is that what you're proposing? Well guess what? It didn't work for the music studios, now did it?

This shows how much you know. BR is already farther along than DVD was at this time period. And once again you are incorrect. PPV came to the bay area in 1997, the same year that the DVD was introduced. It was heavily advertised and very visible. People didn't take to it then. In terms of the comparison, you are wrong. Wooch and I have pointed out that every gauge to measure growth that was there is here now.

I guess we'll never agree on this. I categorically disagree with you that the market was anything then like it is now because the change in the internet over this time period makes any comparison impossible. It doesn't look like we'll be able to agree on this, so let's just let the readers who suffer through this thread (my apologies) decide that for themselves.

Player sales have nothing to do with internet downloads. Disc sales have nothing to do with internet downloading. Apples to apples mean directly comparing DVD players sales at two years, with Bluray/HD DVD players sales at two years. There is no need to evaluate anything but these two comparisons. You do not bring the internet in this equation at all unless all you are trying to do is derail clarity. Camparing apples against apples shows that HD on disc is growning faster than the DVD did at two years both in player sales, and disc purchased. It is just that clear.

I was not talking about player sales, I was talking about PVR, Tivo, xBox, and AppleMovie hardware sales. If I wanted to be a real stickler, I could have added media server sales, computers, and routers, but that is getting too computer-ish and I understand you've got a phobia there, so we'll stick to what you can get your little head around. Anyhoo, because these devices offer up the capability to download, they very much have something to do with it. And talking about just players (which you seem insistent on doing) ignores my 5 points above. How convenient. Again trying to limit the scope of the discussion to just the items that agree with your own argument. We'll I'll point out your obfuscations everytime - you don't seem to learn very quickly, do you?

I was the one that told you that DVD sales were down. And you attempts to tie downloading into that equation is not possible because downloading in terms of revenue is stagnant. ...There is absolutely no indication that folks were looking elsewhere for their entertainment as you assert... With revenues stagnant, they are not looking to downloads, and that is apparent. If downloading WAS the reason, you would see a correlation between the DVD decline, and a rise in income from movie downloads going to the studios. It ain't happen bro.

Again, so it's clear: "downloading in terms of revenue" is only a small part of the picture. Don't you get that? You don't want to get that because it flies in the face of your argument. Well just for once, can you please look at the whole picture and not just your little corner? If people were not looking elsewhere for their entertainment, where were they looking? DVD sales were down, were they not? Where did people turn? They turned to renting, free content, and yes, my little nit-wit, the big bad Internet. They, oh my gosh, watched downloaded content on their computers and their portable devices. And they did this, cover-your-ears-Mabel, without "paying" for it! And this isn't the end of civilization as we know it, there sparky. It may be indicative of a decline in the the studios, but life will go on.

There is no growth. At least no growth in revenue for the content providers. If you are speaking of free television programs, video off youtube and google, and other free services, you cannot compare that with DVD which is mainly a movie driven medium. Movies are not free. They cost on VOD, and through downloading services like Imovie and XBOX live. Free content is always free whether it is downloaded via Live, or through VOD. You cannot compare that with DVD because there is nothing free on a DVD.

Well my little fruity cavalier, I am comparing it to DVD (and BR) anyway. So sue me. If people are watching it instead of movies, then it's a useful comparison. And you're forgetting one of my main points, movies from cable movie channels, while not legally "free," are a large part of this unmeasurable content you seem to have such a hard time with. If people are making a digital copy and enjoying a 2-year old movie that aired on cable, then it's sorta "free" and it's keeping them busy from buying that shiny new disk, isn't it? So what if it's not HD quality? It's 2 years old, remember? No need to see it in HD. As long as people are watching something that they did not pay for on disk, it's competing directly for their attention, so yes, the comparison very much applies here. And I haven't even mentioned TV series (24, Prison Break, 6 Feet Under, Battlestar Galactica, etc.). They are a huge draw for digital downloaders, and guess what, they are freely available online! Tell me that doesn't cut into those DVD sales, and then we'll have something to talk about.

So? If it is not movies, then how do you think just downloading low quality video from youtube is going to effect a movie driven format like DVD and Bluray? Those two are about movies first, and television programs second. Snippets of video cannot compare with that.

It's funny how you keep using YouTube, perhaps the lowest quality video provider on the internet, as an example. If that is all you've seen online, no wonder you're so confused. Try surfing the web a little. Sidereel.com is a good place to start. And if you doubt that people are actually downloading these to watch them on their computers of TVs, just look at the download numbers. Now imagine being able to do that from your TV screen? So the quality is not HD, who cares? Well you (and me) and most collectors care, but what kind of economic impact does our little minority have? You might get a lot of support for ownership on this board, but how representative is that really of the general public? If this public is satisfied with 128kbs MP3s, they'll be satisfied with 640x480 in basic DD surround sound. Heck they don't get much better from most cable or satellite channels, so why should this be any different?

These people do not buy movies. They rent. Different market, different consumer, and different expectation of quality. You may be comfortable with this, but I do not know anyone who has chosen to wait 2-3 hours for something they can pop in a player and get in 30 seconds. Especially if they go through netflix to get the disc.

With regard to renting, see my points 3 & 4 above. Waiting 2-3 hours? What does that matter if it's in the middle of the night when they are sleeping? Or in the middle of the day when they're at work? Ever heard of Slingbox? I bet you wish you would have bout stock in that little upstart, huh? Now think of queuing up movies (as well as TV shows and everything else) the same way you do with NetFlix or Blockbuster. But instead of their limited catalog you now have access to theirs as well as those of Amazon, Apple, and a whole host of others? Now add the possibility of queuing up movies that haven't even come out yet? Want to watch the NBA Finals but you have to work? No problem, queue it up now.

Far fetched? Not at all. I purchase my movies from a queue: as soon as they are available on disk, they ship to me, it's all automated. Someday in the near future, I'll be forced to join that bandwagon and do my movies digitally, too - it's called progress, bub. Actually, I've been downloading the presidential debates and watching them on my computer at lunchtime. Yes it takes some time to download, but it's all done in the background and I hardly think about it. I have so much content downloaded, I could watch stuff for days and still have stuff left. I'll probably not even watch it all, but I've got plenty of what I need. It's only a matter of time before I do this for those movies I don't really care to own (and considering what's been belching out of these profit-above-quality studios, that's probably 90% of them).

There is also the possibility that the studio don't even offer the movie on VOD or for downloading. That is a much larger chance than not finding it at their retailer. Question to you, have you ever heard of a title being offered for download day and date with the DVD? Not a chance, there is always a window for sale through FIRST, and rental and downloading second.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but for those who absolutely need to see the movie before it's out, they can get a pirated version. Movies and shows almost always appear well before release. I wouldn't be surprised if the first episode of Lost isn't already floating around out there. But for non-crackers, they won't mind waiting. Why do I say that? Because the decline in theater ticket sales tells me so. If it's too expensive or inconvenient and it will appear on video soon, people will forgo the theater. What is really going to bake your noodle is that digitally, video can easily made available much sooner than it can be distributed on disk - so actually digital downloads into households will appear much faster then disks on shelves. Maybe that fact alone will be a nail in that coffin for movies on disk.

What if that dozen you choose won't all fit you your hard drive? Then you have to give up something you already saved and want to keep to accomodate new things. That does not happen with disc media.

Utter nonsense. This is where your lack of knowledge of technology is most apparent, lil't. Take the Tivo Series 3, for example. It has a SATA external drive hookup. I can plug in a 1Tb drive into that sucker and keep myself watching for some time. And as far as this change not happening with movies on disk, the exact opposite is true. I know quite a few people that have ripped all their CDs into a digital format, made several copies and are perfectly happy getting rid of the disks (I'm always on hand to help out with that part).

The fact is that most people don't want to hold on to the vast majority of their DVDs because they take up so much room - far more than a couple of hard drives, by the way. Of course, there are some disks we all want to keep (Godfather, Citizen Kane, Great Escape, and of course my whole Clint collection), and for those I'll probably eventually get the BR version, but that's not enough for the studios to build a business model on. After all, how happy do your think they will be with a loss of some 90% of their disk revenue (assuming people will only want to own about 10% of the movies they see). If that is what your insider-salary depends on, I'd be a little worried too. No wonder you've got your panties in a bunch over this and want to get as many people as possible to buy BR players. If I were you, I'd buy some Western Digital stock with that fat bonus you got this year, because the on-disk party is almost over....

Okay stupid little uninformed wanna be no nothing, it was stated at CES (which is why Warner made the switch to end the stalemate). It was stated at IFA 2007, and only a stupid little azz like you would trade a $42 billion dollar market for a $200 million dollar one. That is why they run studios, and you get on the internet and make some of the stupidest claims I have ever read. If any studio thought digital distribution was ready for prime time, they would have jumped all over it. The market is too small(its smaller than Bluray), nobody amoung the studios believes its time to abandon disc for download. Did it ever occur to your pee brain that is why you can get more titles on disc than you can get on VOD and downloading? You think to small, and perhaps that is because of your reduced brain size.

As I said, the movie studios can do what they want. Just because they don't see profit margins as big in downloading, that does not mean it's dead. Personally I think they are missing the boat. It's not unheard of for whole companies to do that, you know. Didn't Microsoft miss the Internet boat? Didn't Yahoo miss the simplicity boat? Didn't the music studios miss the downloading boat? What ultimately happens is that they eventually have to jump on board of risk being left behind. If they don't do it, their shareholders will do it for them.

Microsoft vision is to ditch the disc altogether and move to downloads using microsoft windows, XBOX live, and any device with Microsoft software running it. HDi, and VC-1 are both a part of that world. All HD DVD players and disc use HDi, and 98% of HD DVD movies are encoded with VC-1. Since the Bluray studios primarily use MPEG-2 or AVC, you now have 40% percent of movies that will not be using VC-1(and yes I heard that Warner will be releasing using AVC since they no longer have to port over titles to HD DVD). Paramount is currently in negotiations with the BDA, and word has it they are moving over to bluray as well. That means another studio NOT using HDi and VC-1. Universal will be the last to move(which they certainly will make before christmas season) and that will mean another studio not using VC-1. Everyone knows that Microsoft got behind HD DVD because A) they choose HDi and VC-1, and B) they wanted to split the market and keep the consumer as confused as possible so they would adopt neither format and move to downloads. The digitalbits and DVDfile have both reported this openly. By Warner choosing to move exclusive to one side(thereby giving that side 85% of the sales, and 70% of the titles) now bluray can move forward with their plan to replace the DVD, therby throwing a wrench in Microsofts confusion plans. Microsoft lost because now manufacturers have the confidence to manufacture bluray players(10 new manufacturers announced players at CES), computer manufacturers are not confident in putting bluray drives in their computers(all of the HD DVD drive makers other than Toshiba have switched their support), and there will be hardly any disc encoded with either HDi or VC-1, which means no revenue stream from royalites. If you understood the film industry half as much as you fake, even your pee size brain could logically think this through.

Wow, I can't believe you went through the trouble to list all that FUD. If you think for one second that Microsoft is wrong about the upcoming downloading boom, then I don't think you understand the company at all. It will happen, even if they have to make it happen. Whether they will be riding that wave with their own HDi and VC1, or buy out someone else's technology, I can pretty much guarantee that they've already got their surf boards polished. If these past three years all Microsoft wanted to do was postpone BR & Sony's success with their support for HD-DVD, then they have succeeded. I can almost guarantee you that they will be pushing downloads even harder now. I also expect xBox Live to be a major part of that push. If you think Microsoft is dead in the water, then you're not the first that thought that - take a number behind IBM, Borland, Novell and Apple.

Well price was not a factor, and the things you suggested that could help HD DVD were ludicrous because your knowledge of the industry is nil. Did you forget your little gem about the ship going down in the ocean full of bluray players increasing prices like porkbellies? I didn't say the outcome was certain, but I did state how it was going to play out, and so far, I was right. It doesn't really matter, all of your assertions on the subject were dead wrong, and the momentum is all bluray just like I said it would be.

First of all, I never claimed to be an expert, unlike yourself. I listed some scenarios, that from my experience in the computer industry actually did make an impact there. If I was wrong, is that such a horrible crime? Everyone tries to understand the world around them by using references to things they are familiar with. And just because it did not happen (I never said that it would, by the way), that does not mean it would not have had an impact - yes even the ship sinking example that you love to trot out there like a one-trick pony. The fact is, we'll never find out now, will we? People have paid their nickel. lil't, and they want more than your pathetic re-hashing of the same examples.

Groundbeef did a great job of pointing out how so many of your examples, links, and numbers were outdated and no longer applied. See that's the problem with your fancy stats and sales figures, they are all in the past. You can't seem to move on. Your whole world view is based on the past (kind of like your avatar). Well it's over, lil't, it's time to drag you kicking and screaming like the little child that you are, into the future, and that future is digital downloads.

Now I never said that HD-DVD was going to win anything. I said, starting about 6 months ago, that there were too many possibilities for the fortunes to change in the format war. And more importantly, I also said that both formats will be marginalized in the same way that SACD and DVD-A would be. Sure you had lots of reasons for trying to sabotage that comparison, but the fact that music on disk was supplanted by digital music, even when a two higher quality formats appeared, should at least give you pause about the future of the movie industry.

And even if you won't see the overwhelming similarities in the SACD/DVD-A example, I think most everyone else won't be as narrow minded as you. Just like there are still SACDs, there will also be BRs, but really, what percentage of the movie market will they every be able to reach? 10%? 20%, 30%. They are now at 5%, so I'm sure you'll relish in pointing out in a year or so that the numbers have grown 100% (that's FUD for a growth to 10% of the total market, by the way). Of course you'll be downplaying the percentage of downloaded movies with all kinds of FUD about what can and cannot be included in the comparison - you're pretty good at that. In the meantime most of us will be happily enjoying our downloaded movies and remembering how much of a comical character you were. Maybe one day we can download a video of your ranting and raving, wouldn't that be the icing on the cake?

Every bluray exclusive studio as stated they are committed to growing the HD disc market, no such promise was made towards downloads. If you ran a studio, what would you pay attention to, your $42 billion market, or your $200 million dollar one? You would probably choose the latter, which is why you don't run a studio.

I don't run a studio or even own stock in them because I don't invest in Enron-type debacles. Of course they are committed to BR, it's their one last taste of the rich life before they have to settle for more humble pie. You've been touting the $42B vs. $200M figure for some time now. How far in the past did you have to reach back for that little gem? Care to share some updated figures? And what is that $42B figure for? All movie sales, including BR, HD-DVD, VHS, and DVD? Well no wonder it's so much larger than just downloads? So now who's comparing apples to a kumquats?

How does a studio exclusive to HD DVD come out the good guys pushing downloads over disc based material when the HD DVD player does not store downloads but plays disc. How stupid is this??? That studio would be tarred and feathered if that happened.

Not stupid at all: by putting a hard drive inside. For Toshiba, a company that makes computers as well as all sorts of other home entertainment gear, that could be very easy and cost-effective (more on that below). I'm not saying they are going to do this, I'm only suggesting the possibility, so don't start using this as an example of a "lie," you eager lit't beaver.

Because doing so would add cost to the players, alot more cost and complexity. With that extra cost comes a loss of a talking point. Our players are cheaper than bluray players. With the loss of studio and manufacturing support, HD DVD has nothing left. And really, the best selling HD DVD players are the A2 and A3. The XA-2 has not sold that well, and the A-35 is not doing that well either. So there is no demand for a higher priced players than we currently see now. Your suggestion is plain stupid.

For Toshiba that cost would not be hard to sustain. Even if the unit cost $100 more because of a hard drive and tuner, that would still put it on par with all the BR players out there. Even if it's marketed as just an upconverting player/PVR, that just happens to also play HD-DVD, it could be quite a fancy device. Even for $500, it would still be cheaper than any PVR out there except Tivo.

More stupidity. Why sell a HD DVD player with no movies to support it? It is apparent that studio have already chosen bluray, and you have already lost $420 million dollars and counting. It would be more than stupid of them(but on par with you) for them to lose more money on something that already failed. A digital tuner, and compete with DVR's which would be cheaper? More stupidity. HD DVD is cooked, and only you would be retarded enough to try and revive something that took its last breath two weeks ago

Huh? Are you just not able to reason at all? In addition to the HD-DVD titles out there, owners would have one heck of a nice upconverting DVD player, but more importantly, it could download all that new video content that I've been talking about, you know, that you consider insignificant? Over time, as digital video selection expands, it will have a catalog far larger than any BR player will ever have. And as HD downloadable content starts to become more prevalent, it will also play all those HD movies that were previously exclusive of BR too. Throw in a rebate from the government because it has a digital tuner built-in (would love to see that happen), and it would be the ultimate HD all-in-one box to bridge the gap from today's analog world to tomorrow's digital one.

But there's no way to know if that will happen. After all, it's in the future, as a possibility, and you're not comfortable with that, are you? I bet you don't care for modern classical, abstract art and avant-guarde films either? Figures. Well there's a place for Luddites like you: in the past. And I sure hope you stay there.

Yeah right, because if you had, you would have clearly known they have been pushing the same stuff for years, repackaged and with a new message every year. None of it took off. This year you have several companies pushing it, with no business plan, no studio support, and no hardware to be seen. Oooooo big time push.

There are several differences: this year, hard drive technology (in the TV room) will meet that demand. Another detail: just as in the past there were more and more vendors using digital music players to show off high-end audio gear, there were this year more vendors using digital video on disk to show off their wares. Also, with the BR/HD-DVD format war fizzling out, there is a refocusing of the new war between the on-disk folks (you, me and the "collectors") and the digital proponents (the general public). If I can pull another example from the SACD/DVD-A war: it wasn't until that war was over that it became obvious that downloads would drastically drive down disk sales. Funny how there actually are so many similarities between the two format wars, huh, lil't?

You are becoming the next year kid. Everything is just wait till next year, wait till next year. What do you think things just appear out of nowhere?. Things have to trend up, and with downloading of movies it is not. We are talking movies here, not music or anything else.

History is full of examples showing that it takes a little time for revolutions to settle down into a steady change. History is also full of examples of how revolutions occur after a major event or war. The trends are there, you're just not seeing them because you narrow your criteria too much. If you would just for once broaden your view just a tad, you'd see that digital downloads are on the verge of a huge increase in popularity. Just follow the stocks of those companies that are riding that wave - it's quite the contrarian sector in this down economy. Easy to get into too, because the price is still affordable. You should really take a look to carry you over that pink slip fiasco if your company doesn't change, either.

So you really are going to advance this as an arguement? I got a rather large bonus this year, and so did many of the folks that I work with in this business. That does not mean anything.

Well of course you got a bonus, because BR just had a major victory and you work for a BR-only studio - that's no surprise - but it will be short lived. Who know, you'll probably do OK as your company shifts more and more of it's business to online digital content. But if it stays on this sinking ship of disk-only movies, then I'd grab a life-vest pretty quick. In mentioning my bonus I only brought it up as an indication that my industry is doing just fine, thank you. You're doing great as well? Who cares? We're not talking about that and you're completely missing the point. You were insinuating that the computer industry is not doing well - which is a load of horse-crap from an uninformed outsider. It all depends in how well one's company shifts it's focus to new and emerging technologies. My company is migrating from Web 2.0 technologies to more video-focussed ones and I think they are on the right track (or I'd be working on my resume right now if they weren't).

You lied, and I pointed it out. You lied, and now you are in denial about the lies you told. How about the lie that my video processor/switcher was a mass market product. You didn't lie about that? I do not know ANY product that costs close to $10k that can be labeled as mass market. And how does it become mass market when it has never been released to the market?

Since you opened that door, come on in. Let me kick your ass. I apologize to everyone else as the next few paragraphs are off-topic, just skip down to the last paragraph of this post to finish. Unfortunately lil't is an insistent little imp that just can't accept that he could actually be wrong...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I said that the brand name (i.e. Sony) indicated that it was a mass-market product. I may not have known everything about it, but I never claimed to be a know-it-all, either. So I was a little overzealous about calling your precious little toy mass-market. It's still Sony and is thus dragged down in value because of all the other mediocre products the company produces - you can't deny that (sort of like that Onkyo amp you have, no?). But does my statement make me a liar? That's a stretch, and you know it.

Or how about the story about the friend at said high end audio company, which turned into the person who works for customer service(who never know shyte about future products released) to another source higher source within the company Which is it? I bet you cannot figure that one out today. That had more lies in it than brownies have nuts.

Simple: I asked my friend about the product, he didn't know. He emailed the company, they emailed back. I quoted you verbatim from the email.

How exactly does that make me a liar? Oh, you wanted to see the letter on company letterhead? Sorry, email doesn't work that way, didn't you know that? But if you're so intent on finding out, why don't you send them an email and see what their plans are? It's a littl;e after the fact, but it might be informative. Of course, we'll have to trust you to be honest about your quoting too. I guess it cuts both ways, doesn't it? In any case, it does not make me a liar, so drop it.

Or what about the DVD player that has the option of playing either DSD native, or PCM, even though the player cannot pass DSD nor process it?

I said that it could output PCM. I did not say it could play DSD native.

It may be that I didn't quite understand what you asked and that somehow my answer was not specific enough for you to understand (we've seen that before), but I'm pretty sure I did not say that it passed DSD. In any case, I certainly wasn't trying to lie about it. After all, why would I? If you recall, I was only trying to explain what I had remembered ('cause I'm not in front of the TV when I'm online here) what I had set it for back home. What possible advantage would I have gained in "lying" about that?

What about I use room treatments to make up for channel imbalances? Either this is a lie to hide something else, or stupidity so profound that it scares the color out of your face.

If I didn't know exactly what the room treatments corrected for (and I certainly never claimed to be an expert), then this isn't a lie either.

I'll grant you that I don't know as much about this as the pros do. What I do know is that they made a dramatic improvement in the sound - everything became more clear and focussed. And even if I didn't know exactly what the panels and traps were correcting for, I can assure you my friend who installed and configured them for me, did. As a matter of fact, he challenged me about it, because I didn't believe in them - after having them for a month or so I bought them. Regardless, how exactly does that make me a liar?

Now if you want to take this issue to 10 pages, and look as stupid as you did before, we have a two page head start.

That's your obsession. I have a life and I'm only interrupting it here to point out that you are wrong on so many points that it's a miracle I bother to point them out. Instead of challenging me to another 10 pages, let's see if you can trim down your self-aggrandizing pontifications and suggest something that actually holds up.

Anyhow, back to the thread....

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, lil't, you've done a good job of extending this thread well beyond where it could have been. You've done a good job of spreading FUD. You've done a good job of waiving the BR fan-boy flag. you've done a good job of confusing the issues. You've done a good job of littering your posts with figures that upon closer analysis don't hold up. You've done a good job of intimidating people. You've done a good job of making yourself out to be the court buffoon instead of a terrible knight, LOL. You've done a good job of trying to insult me. And you've done a good job of trying to make me out to be a liar.

But you have not done a good job of explaining to us how BR will win over downloading. And that is really why we're here, no?

[O'Shag]

Sir Terrence and Nightflier, your opinions are both very interesting.

I would have to question one small point Nightflier; you mentioned that Blu-ray and HD-DVD would become marginalized like SACD and DVD-A. Several people I know, that would not be considered as enthusiasts but regular consumers, have already invested heavily in both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players and media. I was surprised at this. Given that SACD and DVD-A immediately levitated towards a more specialized market, I think there is a difference. The number of folks that watch movies as compared to those that are audio enthusiasts, I'd venture to say, is much larger. But very interesting and poignant analysis....

[blackraven]

Every one I know wants or has a Blu-ray player, but not very many people I know have a decent stereo. You hit the nail on the head O'Shag! Blu-ray will be here to stay.

[Mr Peabody]

Who knows where the average person really falls, I think most here would represent one end of the scale. I'm not even sure the other end, would it some one still with NTSC 480i and cable straight from the wall?

I didn't know where to share this story but this seems like a good place since the thread has gone to hell anyway I was moved to a different area in my office and got to talking to a guy across from me, he mentioned he had a HDTV, so I'm thinking, "oh, cool, some one who enjoys the hobby to banter with". So I get to asking him questions, "what size screen"? "A 37", he says. My enthusiasm meter goes down a little. What type of technology is it? "It's a plasma", he says. Meter goes back up. He says he has an upsampling DVD, waiting for Blu-ray to drop in price more, a $150.00. Hmmmm, is this guy serious, I ask myself. Then he asks what size screen I had, I modestly state, "a
62". Well to get to the point, some where in the conversation soon after he mentions his DVD player cost $35.00. Did anyone see the meter crash? I tried to explain though his DVD player said it would upconvert that it probably isn't doing much for $35.00. He wasn't buying that. I will have to ask him if he rents movies and how he gets them for tomorrows episode.

[blackraven]

You just proved my point. Here is a guy that I'm sure is way above the poverty level and he has a relatively cheap HDTV and a walmart $35 DVDP that he thinks is great. Thats going to be the majority of this country. People are not going go fork out the money for expensive high capacity hard drives and the equipment to use it when they can buy $35 DVD players. I think that some of the people on this forum are living in a bubble if they think the majority of the public is tech savy and willing to pay large sums of money for the latest and greatest technology. I'm exposed to a large cross section of the population working in a 40,000 patient per year emergency department and I can tell you it ain't so! Especially in todays economy with food, gas, housing and educational expenses rising almost daily it seems.

[pixelthis]

It is the future for folks who like to rent. For those who like to own, not going to happen anytime soon. The analyst who work the film industry all say its at least 10 years down the road. For me it is never until it can match the performance I get on disc. I am sure that is the bench mark for most videophiles. I don't care about convience, I care about quality. For those pro downloaders and VOD'ers like yourself, you don't care about quality, so download away.

Dont care about quality?
pshawww,
you , sir T, are a loon.
I had a 20in xrb, one of the first sony put out, a sony laser, a 500$ Sony vhs, a 700$ mitshu S-vhs, a 32in XBR, a 600$ dvdaudio player, you name it.
This is a great tactic, my hats off to ya , you're a great propagandist and I am sure a great company shill.
Truth is , the 1080i (or 720, depends on which way I set it) is better than most of the stuff I have been watching, my entire life.
Set an impossible "standard" and paint the "inferiour" brush on something you dont like because it doesnt meet that rediculous standard.
My current rig is better than most in the country, if not the world, few have 1080p, and of those most are first gen, cant take a 1080p input.
It will be years before even half in this country will have 1080p, if then.
Only 50%, if that, is HD of ANY kind whatsoever.
A LOT ARE LIKE ME. Working stiffs who cant ditch their new 1366x 766p just because its not the latest incremental increase in q.
Blu will look about as good as broadcast HD on my set, most stores display blu on 1080p,
and the pic does look great, but on the 720p sets, I insisted on watching it on the
improvement is more evolutionary than revolutionary, and about a tie with our local HD over VOD.
But I am a collector, and am planning on getting BLADERUNNER on Blu in anticipation
of the future, I like to have a collection before I buy a player, which is a way in the future,
just please dont impunge on my "Q" credentials, people have been marveling at my rigs for years.
As a matter of fact, its the fact that they marvel at it but wont buy their own is support of my statement that most arent that concerned about Q, as long as it looks decent.
You probably get corporate demos, make more than I do, have more access to gear,
my modest system cost more to me in blood relativly speaking than your (probably
imaginary) system.
My modest system is more of a commitment , really than yours is, so dont, please dont
talk about my lack of interest in "quality"
Its a fact that the reason that I wanted this silly "format" war to end because of my concern about a new disc for collectors.
I know about the VOD you seem oblivious to, and I know that if the industry doesnt
quit fiddling while rome is burning the only disc format we will have is DVD.
Tech has advanced, why has the CD beem around so long? Its entrenched.
And a combo of DVD and VOD is a combo Blu or HDDVD is going to have a hard time getting marketshare from, and its getting here faster than you think.
Hasnt your company learned anything from the Elcassette, beta, minidisc, DAT, SACD,
ETC?

[GMichael]

You just proved my point. Here is a guy that I'm sure is way above the poverty level and he has a relatively cheap HDTV and a walmart $35 DVDP that he thinks is great. Thats going to be the majority of this country. People are not going go fork out the money for expensive high capacity hard drives and the equipment to use it when they can buy $35 DVD players. I think that some of the people on this forum are living in a bubble if they think the majority of the public is tech savy and willing to pay large sums of money for the latest and greatest technology. I'm exposed to a large cross section of the population working in a 40,000 patient per year emergency department and I can tell you it ain't so! Especially in todays economy with food, gas, housing and educational expenses rising almost daily it seems.

You may want to take a walk through your local Sear, Best Buy, Wal*mart or Circuit City. Rows and rows of 40, 50, 60 & 70 inch LCD's, DLP's and plazmas. Then go back home and turn on any sports program. Wait for a commercial. 10/1 says that you'll see one about HD before the game comes back on. HD is catching on. It won't be long before 90% of the average Joe's in this country have it. There are 8 people who work in my department. 6 of them have HD with screens that are 42"+. 4 of them over 50". (granted, one of the women says she can't see a difference, but I'm thinking it's not set up right)

[L.J.]

You may want to take a walk through your local Sear, Best Buy, Wal*mart or Circuit City. Rows and rows of 40, 50, 60 & 70 inch LCD's, DLP's and plazmas. Then go back home and turn on any sports program. Wait for a commercial. 10/1 says that you'll see one about HD before the game comes back on. HD is catching on. It won't be long before 90% of the average Joe's in this country have it. There are 8 people who work in my department. 6 of them have HD with screens that are 42"+. 4 of them over 50". (granted, one of the women says she can't see a difference, but I'm thinking it's not set up right)

Is it the HD they care about or the flat TV they can hang above the fire place?

The few I know with an HDTV have no HD sources. Most thought that as long as your TV was HD, everything would be in HD.

[blackraven]

I agree that HD is catching on and that people want HD TV and flat screens. I'm not disputing that. My point is that there are so many low income people that buy cheap DVDP and cheap HDTV's. Have you taken a walk through Walmart, Kmart, Target, and even BB and CC and looked at the cheaper HTTV's. These people are not the ones buying 52" Sony XBR's! I'll bet you that there are more smaller HDTV's sold than 50". Hell, I'm a Dr. and there are 27 Dr's in our emergency medicine group. We are one of the higher paid specialties now and I know of only 4 in our group that have HDTV's so far. And 1 of them is a 27" LCD!

[GMichael]

Wich direction do you think that market is moving in? Are there more and more larger HD screens being bought, or fewer? Are smaller TV's selling in higher numbers this year or last? Are the cable companies switching from HD to std, or the other way?

[nightflier]

Sir Terrence and Nightflier, your opinions are both very interesting.

I would have to question one small point Nightflier; you mentioned that Blu-ray and HD-DVD would become marginalized like SACD and DVD-A. Several people I know, that would not be considered as enthusiasts but regular consumers, have already invested heavily in both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players and media. I was surprised at this. Given that SACD and DVD-A immediately levitated towards a more specialized market, I think there is a difference. The number of folks that watch movies as compared to those that are audio enthusiasts, I'd venture to say, is much larger. But very interesting and poignant analysis....

Yes, there are exceptions to every rule. And in this case there will be lots of people who are somewhere between collectors and renters, so I guess it's a bit of a generalization to want to force everyone into two camps as if it was all B&W. But I still think the division applies in a general sense for a majority of consumers.

I also agree that HD is a pretty misunderstood topic, despite all the marketing and advertisements to try and explain it to the general public. I work in a large tech-focussed department (200 employees) and I can tell you that I have yet to find an audio/video enthusiast - kind of ironic considering how management is pushing video so much. Yes, if I take a poll, about 2/3 will say they watch their sports in HD, but they couldn't tell you what it means. Even my own employees, who have to put up with my explanations about it, are more concerned about how many songs they can cram on their LG Chocolates or what TV show they can download to their iPhones, than how it actually looks or sounds. And they sneer at my 4-year old Motorolla phone (I guess Motorolla isn't cool anymore?).

Ironically, lil't and I are probably equally frustrated with this reality. The difference is that I think there is a place for both the low-quality digital format and the high quality disk format to coexist. That said, I also believe that the market trend is pointing to one (the low-quality digital one) being far more popular than the other. Even on this post, most of us can see this when we ask our co-workers. BR will always have a place, just not a dominant one, after all, SACD didn't die and will probably live on for quite some time for us collectors. I guess I'm of the opinion that it's not an absolute, by the numbers, winners & loosers only, right & wrong world. It turns out that there is far more gray than there is B&W in the real world, as O'Shag was correct in pointing out.

[blackraven]

HDTV is here to stay. It will take a long time for it to be in every household. Just look at the Government offering two $40 vouchers per household to pay for digital to analog converters for people that dont have or cant afford an HDTV set.
Eventually, BR players will become mainstream as prices drop and the players approach the $100 barrier. And it will happen. Just look at how DVD started out. Now you can buy progressive scan players and upconverting players for under $100. They may not be the best, but most of the public doesnt know squat about quality electronics, sound or video. Just look at todays generation who think MP3 is the bomb! There are people at work who don't understand how I could spend $1400 on a CDP and they belive that their $100 CDP or DVDP sounds just as good. And some one at work was telling a few people how his bose surround sound was the best he had ever heard and was recommending it to them. I just shook my head and stayed out of that conversation.

Its interesting to note how the original topic has morphed into something else

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Dont care about quality?
pshawww,
you , sir T, are a loon.
I had a 20in xrb, one of the first sony put out, a sony laser, a 500$ Sony vhs, a 700$ mitshu S-vhs, a 32in XBR, a 600$ dvdaudio player, you name it.

Do you have any idea that there is a whole segment of people that think everything you named here is just average? Do you have the communication skills to discuss anything without name calling? Or should we just dismiss you as another immature 12 y/o?

This is a great tactic, my hats off to ya , you're a great propagandist and I am sure a great company shill.
Truth is , the 1080i (or 720, depends on which way I set it) is better than most of the stuff I have been watching, my entire life.
Set an impossible "standard" and paint the "inferiour" brush on something you dont like because it doesnt meet that rediculous standard.

That rediculous impossible standard is the standard for both Bluray and HD DVD. Any product that is going to capture the attention of the folks that drive the video market have to meet that standard or exceed it. There is no going backwards. The good enough folks have a much different mindset than the want the best folks.

My current rig is better than most in the country, if not the world, few have 1080p, and of those most are first gen, cant take a 1080p input.
It will be years before even half in this country will have 1080p, if then.

You current rig would be considered average at best to quite a few videophiles. To joesixpack your system may be off the chain, but there is quite a few folks in this hobby who are not impressed with 720p as their highest resolution. Not when they have already been exposed to 1080p. There were a few panels and DLP's that could not take a 1080p input, but the lions share now can. 1080p projectors can except a 1080p signal, and that is what videophiles use, not 50" plasma or LCD panels.

A LOT ARE LIKE ME. Working stiffs who cant ditch their new 1366x 766p just because its not the latest incremental increase in q.

Anyone who has looked at 1080p images on a properly calibrated display device knows that 1080p is not an incremental increase over 720p. It is twice the resolution, and that is quite noticeable. Working stiffs do not drive technology, they are laggerds behind the trend setters. That's a fact.

Blu will look about as good as broadcast HD on my set, most stores display blu on 1080p,
and the pic does look great, but on the 720p sets, I insisted on watching it on the
improvement is more evolutionary than revolutionary, and about a tie with our local HD over VOD.

Anyone who uses a store as a critical viewing space is not very bright. Stores do not calibrate their sets, and 99% of the display devices in stores are in the torch mode, too bright, has the wrong color temperature, and the gray scale is off. You have harsh lights reflecting off the screen, and more often than not you are too far to see the detail in a 1080p image. If you think that bluray at 1920x1080p with bitrates up to 54mbps looks the same as the typical broadcast resolution of 1440x1080p with a average bitrate of 14.4mbps you are blind as a bat. I am willing to believe based on what you have posted that your set is not properly calibrated. That is the only way you can make the statements you do.

But I am a collector, and am planning on getting BLADERUNNER on Blu in anticipation
of the future, I like to have a collection before I buy a player, which is a way in the future,
just please dont impunge on my "Q" credentials, people have been marveling at my rigs for years.

Woooopie!!! Like I have said, your ceiling is my floor.

As a matter of fact, its the fact that they marvel at it but wont buy their own is support of my statement that most arent that concerned about Q, as long as it looks decent.

As I have said, there is good enough(you and your friends) and those who want the best of the best(that would be most videophiles). The folks that actually drive the video business are not the good enough folks. Sorry.

You probably get corporate demos, make more than I do, have more access to gear,
my modest system cost more to me in blood relativly speaking than your (probably
imaginary) system.
My modest system is more of a commitment , really than yours is, so dont, please dont
talk about my lack of interest in "quality"

If you claim that ones system is "imaginary", can't that same claim be thrown back in your shortsighted face? How you can make this statement and keep a straight face is beyond me. You know peoples committment to their hobby by how much they are willing to spend to get the best performance there is. I am not disputing or contesting your committment to what you have done, I am stating that what you call quality is not what I call quality. You are at good enough, I am at getting the best. 720p is good enough for you, its not for me. Its just that simple. You cannot say your system is more of a committment than mine. You have no clue how much blood and sweat I have put into my system do you?

Its a fact that the reason that I wanted this silly "format" war to end because of my concern about a new disc for collectors.
I know about the VOD you seem oblivious to, and I know that if the industry doesnt
quit fiddling while rome is burning the only disc format we will have is DVD.

I am not oblivious to VOD, I am realistic about it. VOD is not where the studio I work for is putting their resources. It is not where the hollywood studios as a whole are putting their resources. The studio put their resources where the greatest return will come. Based on their actions, its bluray. Warner has basically settled this, so we can effectively move out of the war mode, and into the replacement mode. You are apparently still stuck in the war mode, move on, its over.

Tech has advanced, why has the CD beem around so long? Its entrenched.
And a combo of DVD and VOD is a combo Blu or HDDVD is going to have a hard time getting marketshare from, and its getting here faster than you think.
Hasnt your company learned anything from the Elcassette, beta, minidisc, DAT, SACD,
ETC?

VOD is no competition to disc SALES. Since you do not work in my field or industry, you do not understand that this has been researched over and over again. People who use VOD are not quality oriented, the are convience oriented. They are not buyers, they are renters. Two different types of consumer. Most studios have a plan to replace DVD. They have transition from VHS to DVD. What they did then is simply release the DVD first with a large advertising campaign promoting the extra features and better PQ and SQ, and release the VHS later that was basically featureless. They know how to run their business, you don't.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I read nightliars post over and over again and came to this realization. He is trying to evaluate one Industry based on experience in a completely unrelated industry. The film and video business is not like the computer business. They don't operate the same way, do not have the same goals, do not speak the same language, and have different priorities about where their dollar will go. You cannot look at the star through a microscope, you use a telescope. You do not as a human go to the vet to get a check up, you take your pets there. You do not use a frying pan to boil water, and you do not bring analysis based on computer experience to analyze the film and video industry. Most computer geeks think the whole world dances around their computer(much like nightliar thinks) like they do. The world does not.

Computer geeks do not think like videophiles or collectors. Videophiles think of good equipment, an acoustically corrected room, projector resolutions, audio codecs, higher picture resolutions, great SQ and PQ, and usually strive to get the best performance out of their investment. Most people I know that fit this bill do not look to downloading as a primary source of their entertainment, they want a disc with the highest picture resolution and uncompressed audio to show off their system. Alot of folks here fit that bill.
Computer geeks thing about gear and gadgetry. Their vocabulary is completely different than the videophile or collector. They look to the internet for just about all of their entertainment. PQ and SQ are secondary to the comfort of being online, and using their slingbox to stream video everywhere. Gamers follow closely in this same realm, and they are very comfortable with lower quality PQ and SQ coming from the internet. They believe that the tools they are comfortable with should be the tools every is comfortable with. I does not work that way.

I am going to side step the name calling, and address some valid(but mostly invalid) points.

What works for music (and photography, apparently) is also going to work for movies. Revenue has been flat, but that is not what it will be this year. You want trends, well I'll start by what was said at CES, and I'm not just talking about the sales pitches, I'm also talking about what people said. I saw more interest in digital downloads then ever before and it's going to piggy-back on what people are already doing with their music. They will (and have been) storing their movies on the same hard drives that they have their music collections on.

Your first sentence is simply not correct. Downloading music requires far less bandwidth and takes far less time. I can put 256 songs on a one GB stick. You cannot do that with HD movies. Peoples expectation of quality from music has lowered considerably, there is no indication that is the case with video or 1080p panels would not be selling like hotcakes like they are.

This is the first year in the last 15 that I have missed CES. Computer geeks go to CES to find out the latest in computer related gear(that includes internet related things). Videophiles go to see the latest in video gear. What buzz you hear largely depends on where your interested is. If you check the computer focused rags, downloads, internet gear, covergence gear, streaming gear was the buzz. Computer related stuff. To the videophile the buzz was Warners decision, new bluray players, audio codecs from Dts and Dolby, flat panel, DLP and LCD televisions, new movie releases, new video screen technology, and 1080p projectors. Whatever side you sit on, you will get a different perspective of the buzz. Anyone who stats that only their interests were the buzz is ignorant as hell about CES. That show is too huge for just one technology buzz.

Just as most people have ripped, copied from friends, and downloaded a large portion of their digital music collections, this is also the case with movies. You are completely dismissing the widespread practice of piracy and semi-piracy between people.

Most people have not done this, some people have. Don't overstate your point. You have to buy a product before you can rip it. Music downloads are growing, and yes CD sales are decline. But when you look at the overall revenue generated, downloading still is dwarfed by CD disc sales, by a loooooong shot. I have already posted link after link in the other thread that shows piracy actually spurs sales, not take away from them

http://torrentfreak.com/piracy-boosts-cd-sales-071103/

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ct-of-p2p.html

Just as music is being re-engineered and re-recorded to suit a different palate that eliminates things like dynamic range to reduce file size, the same is happening with movie content. Extras, unwanted sound format, languages, and other junk is all stripped out of pirated movies, but now there are programs that change the video and sound within the film to be more applicable to small portable devices and flat screens

This is strictly a computer geeks perspective, not your collector, not your videophile or your average consumer. Computer geeks do not mind doing this because they do not love film, they just want product in any form including altered from its original intent. According to survey after survey conducted by the Studios, the general buying public WANTS the extra value content, even if the videophile doesn't. This is why you see both HD DVD and Bluray pushing interactivity and extra value content. The videophile wants the original aspect ratio, not some altered pan and scan type alterations, not altered low quality audio and video formatted and processed for computer monitors and computer speakers. This is strictly what a computer geek likes and will accept.

BR will be valuable for collectors who want to own, but is that population growing or shrinking? You're been raving about how BR movies have so many more new releases, but that means very little to collectors. How many B&W classics are available on BR? And why would anyone bother? How many 70's, 80's, & 90's blockbusters on BR? Not too many I gather. The problem with BR is that it tries to cater to collectors, but it is releasing mostly content that appeals to the renters. Isn't that a kick in the pants

This is another computer geek perspective. No collector or videophile(I am both) expect B&W classics, 70, or 80's blockbuster this earlier in a new formats roll out. It didn't happen with VHS, Laserdisc, or DVD and it is not going to happen with Bluray. 90's blockbuster are well represented on Bluray for this early. As the format matures, then you will start to see more and more broad based content on the format. It was that way for VHS, Laserdisc, and DVD. If your assertion are true, then SALES of bluray disc would be alot smaller, and RENTALS of bluray disc would be alot larger. Its the reverse, which means your assertions are just plain wrong.

Renting, by the way, is the crux of the argument and (big surprise) you want to downplay that. You mentioned Netflix as a better alternative to downloads, but those are exactly the people that will be drawn to downloading. The truth is that it's just a simple switch for them from receiving disks to downloading the content right to their TVs. Hence the reason the company is now offering downloads - they have wisely read the writing on the wall.

Rental income is not on the radar for studios. They down play it not me. However the studios are always looking for another income stream, so they are slowly releasing catalog titles for rentals to places like apple, XBOX live and Amazon. However these deals are extremely costly to them because they need the content to stay in business. I see downloading as impacting the rental market, that is logical. But sale through via downloading is not happening now, and it will not happen for quite a while. There is no money in it. Its not like music downloads at all.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6523707.html

Not as rosey as you think is it?

I truly believe that the downturn in DVD sales has far less to do with BR or the quality of the movies now coming out of Hollywood, then the simple fact that there is so much more free content available everywhere that people are watching instead.

The computer geeks perspective, not one the reflects what the industry analysis says.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6517192.html

What drives the DVD business is collectors. Folks who purchase and keep hundreds and thousands of titles in their collections(that would be myself, and alot folks on AVS and HTF) drive DVD business. The average joesixpack is the second kind of consumer that drives sales, but to a far lesser extinct than the collectors. Collectors go out and purchase 4-5 titles weekly, the general consumer has probably 10-20 titles in their collection, and Netflick the rest of their disc. The collectors are not purchasing DVD anymore, and have moved on to HD DVD or Bluray. They however are not buying as much collectively as they did DVD's because of this format war, and the uncertainty it brings to the market. I personally use to buy about 5-10 DVD's a week depending on what is released. I have purchased exactly three DVD since the beginning of 2007. I have split my purchases between the two formats with the emphasis on bluray. I however am not buying 5 disc a week like I was with DVD. That is what is causing the slide in DVD sales, not downloading, and not free content found over the net. You are attempting to brush two unrelated things together, and that is why you are having a hard time bringing me to your side of the argument. I do not think like a computer geek, I think like a collector, and I do analysis like a STUDIO executive would, not like a computer geek trying to do video analysis with computer based filters.

Sure Amazons does, because they have a wide catalog that caters to collectors. Tell me lil't, isn't it true that NetFlix's download business is growing? Are you even willing to admit how much, with your insider info? Funny, you bring Apple's stake in this since they don't actually sell movies on disk. Let's see, we'll compare apples to nothing. Guess what? They are different! You don't say!

Netflix download service is growing, but apples is growing faster. However according to this analysis, downloading is NOT effecting rental by disc. According to NDP downloading is less than a 2% market compared to rentals of disc. While the sales of DVD's is slowing, the rental of DVD's is still quite strong.

http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.cnn.c...netflix-stock/

As I pointed out above, just because it's not where analysts are telling the studios they will make the most money (duh), that says nothing about its growth. The fact is downloaded digital video content on the internet is the fastest growing medium / file-format by far. Just because the studios can't figure out how to make money off of it, doesn't mean it's not growing. So the studios are going to doggedly push disk sales over downloads, is that what you're proposing? Well guess what? It didn't work for the music studios, now did it?

Spoken like a true computer geek. Downloading free content spreading accross the web is not the same thing as a movie purchase. Only a computer geek would try and mix the two together(and you say my perspective is narrow). Television programs that are aired on free broadcast television is not the same thing as a movie sold on a disc. You can find all kinds of free content on the web, but there is next to nothing that can compete apples to apples with a BR disc in terms of HD content. Free content on the web is not of any concern to a movie studio. They care about making movies and selling them. They follow the money trail, and that money trail does not lead them to downloads. It leads them to disc. As a computer geek you cannot understand that, because you do not understand the Hollywood studio culture. You follow Bill Gates.

I was not talking about player sales, I was talking about PVR, Tivo, xBox, and AppleMovie hardware sales. If I wanted to be a real stickler, I could have added media server sales, computers, and routers, but that is getting too computer-ish and I understand you've got a phobia there, so we'll stick to what you can get your little head around.

If you add up all of PVR, TIVO(which is sold at a loss) and Applemovie hardware sales together, it would even touch DVD player sales. I do not have a phobia about computer related hardware, I have no interest. Big difference don't cha think? None of what you mention(with the exception of Tivo) has the interest of the movie collector or the videophile. The general public appears not to have much interested either, just computer geeks, and them only. That is why it is so high on your radar, and not on mine. Do you see any of these devices discussed in detail on this website? I don't.

Again, so it's clear: "downloading in terms of revenue" is only a small part of the picture. Don't you get that? You don't want to get that because it flies in the face of your argument. Well just for once, can you please look at the whole picture and not just your little corner? If people were not looking elsewhere for their entertainment, where were they looking? DVD sales were down, were they not? Where did people turn? They turned to renting, free content,

The only part of the picture the studios are interested in is the revenue picture. Computer geeks emphasize the amount of downloading of free content. Your assertion that the general public turning to renting and free content is based on what? Where are you facts instead of your opinion? How do you measure activity on free content? Where do you get the information that supports your assertions? I would like to see you post it here. Anyone can make the claims you do, where is the support for those claims? If you do not support those claims, why should I believe you. You do have a history of telling lies. Show me proof, or shut the hell up!

Well my little fruity cavalier, I am comparing it to DVD (and BR) anyway. So sue me. If people are watching it instead of movies, then it's a useful comparison. And you're forgetting one of my main points, movies from cable movie channels, while not legally "free," are a large part of this unmeasurable content you seem to have such a hard time with.

More of that 4 y/o name calling. You are the first example of a person that has kids more mature than yourself. Your comparison is not useful and not valid. Movies from cable channels cost the cable companies themselves, which pass the cost on to you. It is just spread over millions of people instead of directly charge to individual customers. If you cannot measure it, how can you compare it? More unsubstantiated claims, no proof of accuracy.

If people are making a digital copy and enjoying a 2-year old movie that aired on cable, then it's sorta "free" and it's keeping them busy from buying that shiny new disk, isn't it?

Sorta free is not completely free. You are attempting to hedge your arguement, and I am not buying it. If people are not watching DVD's, then why is the rental market on DVD's still strong? Why is DVD sales(even in decline) so much larger than downloads?

Sidereel.com is a good place to start. And if you doubt that people are actually downloading these to watch them on their computers of TVs, just look at the download numbers. Now imagine being able to do that from your TV screen? So the quality is not HD, who cares? Well you (and me) and most collectors care, but what kind of economic impact does our little minority have?

First, you cannot put yourself and myself in the same camp. I care about quality images and quality sound. Apparently you do not if you go for altered video, and altered low quality sound coming through computer speakers and viewed on a computer monitor. We do not speak the same language because our interests are as divergent as San Francisco is from New York. Our little minority(of which you are not apart of) helped build the DVD market into the huge $42 billion dollar worldwide business it is. Our little minority(of which you are not apart of) has helped propel the bluray format past the downloading and VOD market less than a year after its launch. That is what impact our little minority has.

With regard to renting, see my points 3 & 4 above. Waiting 2-3 hours? What does that matter if it's in the middle of the night when they are sleeping? Or in the middle of the day when they're at work? Ever heard of Slingbox? I bet you wish you would have bout stock in that little upstart, huh?

Umm, no I do not want stock in that startup. Since the slim box's introduction a couple of years ago, it has only managed to sell 35,000 units. The prime customers appear to be Television stations, not consumers. I have heard no videophiles, or anyone else even mention this product. I do know that two Disney owned stations KABC and KGO both use them everywhere in their studios. I have yet to see one in anyones home. Another geek gadget that appears irrelevant to the consumer. The rest of you comments contain information that only a geek would appreciate.

Far fetched? Not at all. I purchase my movies from a queue: as soon as they are available on disk, they ship to me, it's all automated. Someday in the near future, I'll be forced to join that bandwagon and do my movies digitally, too - it's called progress, bub. Actually, I've been downloading the presidential debates and watching them on my computer at lunchtime.

I know nobody who does this. This must be another one of those geeky things that computer nerds do. Everyone else just watches the debates on television. What you do personally, and what every else does appear to be completely different. But then, I do not have a whole lot of computer geek friends either.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but for those who absolutely need to see the movie before it's out, they can get a pirated version. Movies and shows almost always appear well before release. I wouldn't be surprised if the first episode of Lost isn't already floating around out there. But for non-crackers, they won't mind waiting. Why do I say that? Because the decline in theater ticket sales tells me so. If it's too expensive or inconvenient and it will appear on video soon, people will forgo the theater. What is really going to bake your noodle is that digitally, video can easily made available much sooner than it can be distributed on disk - so actually digital downloads into households will appear much faster then disks on shelves. Maybe that fact alone will be a nail in that coffin for movies on disk.

The general public is not going to download pirated movies. That is a computer geek, or a poor college student kind of thing. Besides, with the price of DVD's dropping so fast, there really isn't a whole lot of reason to download low quality pirated versions of movies.

Regarding movie ticket sales, another attempt to analyze the movie industry with computer geek glasses. Hometheaters are the movie theaters downfall. The better the images we get at home, the better sound we get at home, the less the public wants to go to the movies. You cannot tie that directly to piracy, because the general public does not download pirated movies. However the sales of HTIB, cheap DVD players, and low DVD prices have done more harm to movie theaters than piracy ever can. Secondly, the studios are not going to cannibalize their cash cow to downloads. Apple has a deal with all 6 major hollywood studios. But that deal does not give them access to content ahead of the DVD release, or any other disc based release as far as I know. It also give them selected access to certain titles, not access to all titles like we get on DVD. It is only when the Studios decide that disc based media is not going to make them any more money will they turn to digital downloads. Right now the Studios are dragging their feet in two areas of digital downloading. Movie downloading, and digital distribution to movie theaters. They do not appear to trust their content on either without accessive DRM.

Utter nonsense. This is where your lack of knowledge of technology is most apparent, lil't. Take the Tivo Series 3, for example. It has a SATA external drive hookup. I can plug in a 1Tb drive into that sucker and keep myself watching for some time. And as far as this change not happening with movies on disk, the exact opposite is true. I know quite a few people that have ripped all their CDs into a digital format, made several copies and are perfectly happy getting rid of the disks (I'm always on hand to help out with that part).

The average joesixpack is not going to hook up a SATA external drive to their tivo, and you know that. You are so full of shyt. One point you are forgetting, in order to rip a CD you have to buy it. Anyone just discarding their disc after ripping them is an idiot. If your drive crashes, how do you replace them? Pull them out of your azz? You are speaking only of the computer geek culture, not the ordinary average citizen, not the videophiles, and not the movie collector.

The fact is that most people don't want to hold on to the vast majority of their DVDs because they take up so much room - far more than a couple of hard drives, by the way. Of course, there are some disks we all want to keep (Godfather, Citizen Kane, Great Escape, and of course my whole Clint collection), and for those I'll probably eventually get the BR version, but that's not enough for the studios to build a business model on.

Okay, where is the evidence that the vast majority of people do not want their DVD because they take up so much room? You made this up, because everyone I know that has a collection of movies has a place they put them. Jeeze nightliar, when will you stop the bull****? You are trying to tranfer your thoughts and concerns on everyone. You think for you, I think for me, and let everyone else think for themselves. They do not need your lying mouthpiece to convey their thoughts.

As I said, the movie studios can do what they want. Just because they don't see profit margins as big in downloading, that does not mean it's dead. Personally I think they are missing the boat. It's not unheard of for whole companies to do that, you know. Didn't Microsoft miss the Internet boat? Didn't Yahoo miss the simplicity boat? Didn't the music studios miss the downloading boat? What ultimately happens is that they eventually have to jump on board of risk being left behind. If they don't do it, their shareholders will do it for them.

Since you don't run a movie studio, who cares what you think? How does somebody get left behind when they control the content? They are not getting left behind, you are just too far ahead. When the public at large desires digital downloads, then the studio will respond. They follow the money, and since the public at large has not made a sound in relation to downloading, they are not moving many resources in that direction. There is no money to be made right now.

Wow, I can't believe you went through the trouble to list all that FUD. If you think for one second that Microsoft is wrong about the upcoming downloading boom, then I don't think you understand the company at all. It will happen, even if they have to make it happen. Whether they will be riding that wave with their own HDi and VC1, or buy out someone else's technology, I can pretty much guarantee that they've already got their surf boards polished. If these past three years all Microsoft wanted to do was postpone BR & Sony's success with their support for HD-DVD, then they have succeeded. I can almost guarantee you that they will be pushing downloads even harder now. I also expect xBox Live to be a major part of that push. If you think Microsoft is dead in the water, then you're not the first that thought that - take a number behind IBM, Borland, Novell and Apple.

Microsoft cannot MAKE anything happen in the video business. They do not produce or own content do they? They have to pay for it, and if giving Microsoft content effects the studios bottom line, they ain't getting a damn thing. If you think what I said is FUD, then read.

http://www.parislemon.com/2008/01/bi...d-vote-of.html

The company supported HD DVD because it used its codecs and HDi exclusively. When HD DVD suddenly looks dead, he minimizes his company's involvement with HD DVD. Did you know that in spite of Microsoft being a major HD DVD supporter, they would not participate with Toshiba in negotiations with Warner? The let Toshiba go it alone and that is very telling about how much Microsoft truely supported HD DVD. Amoung people who know the movie industry well, this is common knowledge. To a simple computer geek with no information or knowledge of the movie industry, its FUD. What are you, Bill Gates biach? Microsoft is a big player in the computer business, they are next to nil in the film making business.

First of all, I never claimed to be an expert, unlike yourself. I listed some scenarios, that from my experience in the computer industry actually did make an impact there. If I was wrong, is that such a horrible crime? Everyone tries to understand the world around them by using references to things they are familiar with.

You do not have to openly claim you are an expert, you try and post like you are some authority on the movie business and you are not. Your scenarios were wrong because you are trying to use experience that does not apply to the movie industry. The computer and movie industry are not the same, and to attempt to analyze, and create scenarios in the video business using computer experience is quite frankly stupid. That is like me using my sound experience to analyze the medical field, or dentistry. It is a round peg going in a square hole.

Groundbeef did a great job of pointing out how so many of your examples, links, and numbers were outdated and no longer applied. See that's the problem with your fancy stats and sales figures, they are all in the past. You can't seem to move on. Your whole world view is based on the past (kind of like your avatar). Well it's over, lil't, it's time to drag you kicking and screaming like the little child that you are, into the future, and that future is digital downloads.

Groundbeef addressed issues regarding the XBOX360, not my figures or stats. Do not attempt to lie again liar. You state my figures are from the past? How do you know if you do not have access to them? Every figure that I have quoted, every stat I used as an example came from CURRENT issues of NDP. My company pays millions of dollars for this information, and I think your kotex is in a knot because you cannot dispute them.
My future is with Bluray disc, not downloads. You manage your life, I will manage mine.

Now I never said that HD-DVD was going to win anything. I said, starting about 6 months ago, that there were too many possibilities for the fortunes to change in the format war. And more importantly, I also said that both formats will be marginalized in the same way that SACD and DVD-A would be. Sure you had lots of reasons for trying to sabotage that comparison, but the fact that music on disk was supplanted by digital music, even when a two higher quality formats appeared, should at least give you pause about the future of the movie industry.

Well none of the possibilities you mention came close to happening did they? It does not appear like bluray will be marginalized at all does it? Last week it outsold HD DVD 85-15% in disc sales. It wasn't just the numbers, it was the overall volume of discs moved post Warner annoucement. In one week after Warners announcement, Bluray sold more discs than it did the three weeks leading up to Christmas. Bluray had 9 out of the top 10 best selling HD titles. It appears that whatever was holding folks back, ain't holding them back anymore. SACD and DVD-A never sold the amount of disc that even lowly HD DVD has. Music files, and movies files are not created equal. One can quickly be downloaded, the other is a bandwidth hog. Besides on thing you have not taken into consideration, there is a little war going on between cable and downloading services like Apple, and XBOX live. If the cable puts limits on the amount of downloading that can be done, that will pretty much cap how much people can move through broadband. Both Time Warner and Comcast are flirting with this idea

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...ref=technology

This ought to bode well for your downloading future.

And even if you won't see the overwhelming similarities in the SACD/DVD-A example, I think most everyone else won't be as narrow minded as you

This statement is for pee brained people like you who don't critically think.

SACD and DVD-A never had any major record label support. Bluray has 6 of 8 major studio now, and will have all eight well before christmas. Bluray has the support of over 100 independent studios world wide, neither SACD or DVD-A had that kind of support.

SACD and DVD-A never sold a million disc. Bluray did in 5 months after it was launched.

SACD and DVD-A require an investment of 6 cables to connect to your reciever. Bluray just requires one HDMI cable when connected to newer receivers.

DVD-A and SACD did not have exclusive support from anyone. Bluray has exclusive support that equals 70% of all movies released if you tally all the movies the 6 studio have released to DVD.

DVD-A and SACD lost out because you could not make it portable. There is already talk of a bluray portable player in the making.

Only Sony committed to releasing SACD players that the masses could afford. Only Pioneer and Panasonic supported DVD-A for the masses. Every new BR player announced at CES was under $500 dollars(with the exception of one), and there were 12 different manufacturers showing players.

SACD and DVD-A ended in a draw, and that killed them both. Bluray has clearly one this one.

The only simularity between DVD-A and SACD war, and HD DVD and bluray war, is that you had two competing formats on the market at the same time. After that, there are few if any simularities.

I don't run a studio or even own stock in them because I don't invest in Enron-type debacles.

Then I guess you never heard of the Dot.com implosion have you. That was a debacle.

Of course they are committed to BR, it's their one last taste of the rich life before they have to settle for more humble pie. You've been touting the $42B vs. $200M figure for some time now. How far in the past did you have to reach back for that little gem? Care to share some updated figures? And what is that $42B figure for? All movie sales, including BR, HD-DVD, VHS, and DVD? Well no wonder it's so much larger than just downloads? So now who's comparing apples to a kumquats?

Humble pie? They own the content that the download services need. It seems to me the downloading services are at the behest of the Studios, not the other way around.

$42 billion and $200 million for a while. Wrong, I just started saying these figures recently. $42 billion worldwide is a 2007 figure for DVD sales. $200 million is a 2005, 2006, and 2007 figure. Downloads and VOD did $212 million dollars in business to the studios in 2007. That is a flat figures that is within $2 million dollars of the total of 2005. In other words, not going anywhere. If you want to take it local only, then its $18 billion dollars for America only for DVD sales. That still leaves downloading in the dust. Now how do you compare that to an unmeasured free content floating around the web? You can't, which is why it is rediculous to make the claims you do.

Not stupid at all: by putting a hard drive inside. For Toshiba, a company that makes computers as well as all sorts of other home entertainment gear, that could be very easy and cost-effective (more on that below). I'm not saying they are going to do this, I'm only suggesting the possibility, so don't start using this as an example of a "lie," you eager lit't beaver.

A lie, nope. Stupid as hell? yep. You are a very poor business person. You don't sink money into something that has already failed in the market. What you are proposing would pit this HD DVD , DVR thing right up against the PS3 and the XBOX360 to a lesser extent. Both are too far ahead for Toshiba to get a footing in that market. You have already lost $450 million dollars, and most folks say that after this firesale that Toshiba is currently on, it could ballon to close to $700-800 million. Now what kind of idiot would sink more money into a losing venture, oops you!

For Toshiba that cost would not be hard to sustain. Even if the unit cost $100 more because of a hard drive and tuner, that would still put it on par with all the BR players out there. Even if it's marketed as just an upconverting player/PVR, that just happens to also play HD-DVD, it could be quite a fancy device. Even for $500, it would still be cheaper than any PVR out there except Tivo.

It wouldn't cost $100 dollars more. Toshiba has been selling all of its players at a loss since inception. In order for them to have to make a profit on the A2 or A3 the price would have to be closer to $399 dollars. You add a drive and a tuner, and yes that product would be $500. Then you lose the talking point you have over bluray because there are players out there cheaper than $500. The S300 is currently going for $268 bucks. The sumsung 1400 is going for about $20 dollars more. Almost all of the new players coming to market are under $500. The HD DVD platform is dead. You can find a upconverting player for less than $100 dollars. You stick to being a computer geek, because business is not your bag.

Huh? Are you just not able to reason at all? In addition to the HD-DVD titles out there, owners would have one heck of a nice upconverting DVD player, but more importantly, it could download all that new video content that I've been talking about, you know, that you consider insignificant? Over time, as digital video selection expands, it will have a catalog far larger than any BR player will ever have

This is a pipe dream. With no new titles coming to the format, how do you sell the format. Content sells the product, not the other way around. You cannot build a player based on second hand content. And the folks that would buy the player are not downloaders. Most folks that purchased the HD DVD player never took advantage of the online interactivity anyway. You are trying to make video folks computer folks, and they are not the same dude.

There are several differences: this year, hard drive technology (in the TV room) will meet that demand. Another detail: just as in the past there were more and more vendors using digital music players to show off high-end audio gear, there were this year more vendors using digital video on disk to show off their wares. Also, with the BR/HD-DVD format war fizzling out, there is a refocusing of the new war between the on-disk folks (you, me and the "collectors") and the digital proponents (the general public).

You are calling the general public digital proponents? False. If that were the case, revenue from downloads would be WAY higher than from disc sales. Secondly, high end wares were not being highlighted with digital music players. That is a bald face lie. When you use high end equipment, you have to be very careful that your sources are as pure as you can get them. High end music equipment is very unforgiving, and the compression artifacts found in highly compressed music would be very audible. Also, the hometheater folks where not using storage disk to show there wares either. They were using either a Bluray player, or a HD DVD player. You obviously were not at CES this year, so there is no use in lying to make your point.

History is full of examples showing that it takes a little time for revolutions to settle down into a steady change. History is also full of examples of how revolutions occur after a major event or war. The trends are there, you're just not seeing them because you narrow your criteria too much. If you would just for once broaden your view just a tad, you'd see that digital downloads are on the verge of a huge increase in popularity.

History is also full of examples of good products that the consumer just didn't want. The Slimbox may be good for computer geeks, but the consumer obviously doesn't want it because it has not sold even 40k units in three years on the market. WebTV was a great idea to computer geeks, but the public didn't buy it. Interactive TV was the rave of computer geeks, and the public thumbed its nose at it. You are not asking me to broaden my view, you are asking me to blur my view. Not going to happen. You are the computer geek that thinks like one, I am a videophile collector who thinks like one. Never the two shall meet in thought, our priorities are too different. Digital downloads for rental are just getting started. Digital downloads for owning, are not feasible in the near future. The next war will be between VOD and movie downloading services. Even amoung the downloading services there is non compatibility. If the digital downloads are the future, you are going to have to get behind one download software, and one download business model, not three different one from three large players.

Well of course you got a bonus, because BR just had a major victory and you work for a BR-only studio - that's no surprise - but it will be short lived. Who know, you'll probably do OK as your company shifts more and more of it's business to online digital content. But if it stays on this sinking ship of disk-only movies, then I'd grab a life-vest pretty quick.

If they go to downloads now, it will be a sinking ship. Every analyst that covers the video business has said such. The time is not here yet

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6487745.html

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6523707.html

Not your pie in the sky digital downloading rosey picture is it?

I said that the brand name (i.e. Sony) indicated that it was a mass-market product. I may not have known everything about it, but I never claimed to be a know-it-all, either. So I was a little overzealous about calling your precious little toy mass-market. It's still Sony and is thus dragged down in value because of all the other mediocre products the company produces - you can't deny that (sort of like that Onkyo amp you have, no?). But does my statement make me a liar? That's a stretch, and you know it.

You didn't call my Sony a mass market product, you called my video switcher a mass market product. It costs over $10k and has never been released to the public. Yes you were overzealous in calling my Sony mass market. Just because it is Sony does not drag it down in value any more so than the name Outlaw drags down its value.

I will repeat the once again, just because I know you are lacking much in the intelligence area. My Onkyos are a upgrade and redesign. Aside from the badge on the front, nothing inside comes from Onkyo including the layout inside. It is a John Curl design in a Onkyo shell. That is it. Since it is custom, you cannot evaluate it like you can evaluate an Outlaw, which is not high end either by the way. Some look at it as a mass market product you know. So before you throw stones, move out of the glass house. One channel of my amps cost more than your entire pre-pro just to get you in perspective.

I said that it could output PCM. I did not say it could play DSD native

You did?

My player has the option of converting to PCM or not. But I prefer not to do any any bass management in the player. That is out of post #69.

If you are saying or not, just what does the not cover? If it doesn't convert to PCM, what does it convert to? There are only two option here nighliar. Either it passes DSD stream straight to the receiver, or it is converted to PCM. You were trying to insinuate that your player can pass the DSD stream natively because those are the only two option out there. LIAR!

This further shows this

Terry says "If you use bass management, delay, or level settings, the signal must be converted to PCM. There are no post processing tools in DSD except on the ultra high end SACD only players."

Nightliars response. "Well, then my Sony player (not too expensive) must be pretty high end." That is in post #66.

Lie lie lie nightliar

It may be that I didn't quite understand what you asked and that somehow my answer was not specific enough for you to understand (we've seen that before), but I'm pretty sure I did not say that it passed DSD. In any case, I certainly wasn't trying to lie about it. After all, why would I?

Now its you didn't understand. Can anyone say backpeddle. Your answer was specific enough, it was also ignorant enough, and stupid enough. Why would you lie? Because you were trying to pass yourself off as knowledgeable on the subject,and your ignorance was making you look real bad. All someone has to do is read the thread all the way through and you could clearly see that. Ray Charles could clearly see that!

If I didn't know exactly what the room treatments corrected for (and I certainly never claimed to be an expert), then this isn't a lie either.

Then you should not have even mention them. You were faking, and trying to hide you were.

Well, lil't, you've done a good job of extending this thread well beyond where it could have been. You've done a good job of spreading FUD. You've done a good job of waiving the BR fan-boy flag. you've done a good job of confusing the issues. You've done a good job of littering your posts with figures that upon closer analysis don't hold up. You've done a good job of intimidating people. You've done a good job of making yourself out to be the court buffoon instead of a terrible knight, LOL. You've done a good job of trying to insult me. And you've done a good job of trying to make me out to be a liar.

Insult you? You don't need me to do that. Spreading FUD. I have supported my assertions with links, facts, and figures. Where are yours?

Once again, you have spread assertions and opinions with no support whatsoever. You are trying to fit round pegs in square holes by analyzing the film industry with your computer experience. Eggs and oranges at best. You are once again trying to pass youself off as an expert, but then turn around and acknowledge you are not. You have called enough names to embarrass a two year old. $hit, you don't need me to embarrass you, you do that to yourself with your worth a penny assertions and opinions.

But you have not done a good job of explaining to us how BR will win over downloading. And that is really why we're here, no?

No, the topic of this thead is toshiba fights back...sort of, not the war between downloads and disc. You hyjacked this thread with your senseless bull$hit. In the future maybe your should read the title of the the thread before responding. You didn't start this one this time.

[blackraven]

Ouch! Without getting involved in this fight, I have to agree with alot Sir T has to say about BR and downloading's future.

[nightflier]

I am going to side step the name calling, and address some valid(but mostly invalid) points.

Yeah, if only that were true. Don't even try to come off as the nice guy in this because the post is littered with insults. Here's a sampling:

You do have a history of telling lies. Show me proof, or shut the hell up!

What are you, Bill Gates biach?

...and I think your kotex is in a knot

This statement is for pee brained people like you who don't critically think.

A lie, nope. Stupid as hell? yep.

You are a very poor business person.

You stick to being a computer geek, because business is not your bag.

And I'm not even going to address the way you stereotype computer geeks (which, by the way, I am not). But What is most galling is the condescending tone you take in everyone of your posts. It's insulting and speaks volumes of your inferiority complex. I mean, not only do you call yourself "Sir Terrence The Terrible, The Cavalier" but what's with the one-upsmanship? e.g:

One channel of my amps cost more than your entire pre-pro just to get you in perspective.

Are you going to follow that up with how much bigger your {daddy, car, member, whatever} is as well? A psychologist could write volumes about your insecurities. So before you go stereotyping everyone into evil computer geeks and good video collectors, you should really take a hard look in the mirror. I mean, do you wave your authentic Isildur sword up in the air when you type this stuff, or is it your Sith lightsaber? This isn't a crusade against the downloading hordes, lil't....

At least, the one thing we now know is that I never lied about anything. Yes, you tried to come up with insinuations, suppositions, and conjectures, but really, lil't, nothing has stuck. Just drop it already. It only further convinces me how insecure you are.

OK, so now that we have that out of the way....

What you are basically saying is that there are two types of people in the world: downloaders and collectors, right? Now w/o going into all the silly adjectives you used to describe these into good & evil, your basic assertion is that the video collectors will somehow, by some miraculous coup of mind-boggling economic reversal, save the movie industry from having to distribute video digitally? You assert that the downloaders are the minority and the collectors the majority of the folks out there, right?

I mean is this starting to sound silly yet?

Now you go on by saying that because the studios haven't figured out how to make money from downloading, but because they know how to make money off of disks, they will keep doing just that and maintain the huge margins they enjoyed during the glorious DVD years?

Well, I'll stop there, because unlike you, I don't feel it serves anyone but you to keep arguing point-for-point. Let me just finish with a few details:

- Slingboxes are hugely popular

- Tivos are hugely popular

- External drives are plug & play (ahem, that's geek-talk for "simple to install")

- Your lack of understanding about hard drive technology is telling (and quite surprising really considering your line of work)

- Music on hard drives sans cd, is the norm nowadays (that right, people don't fear owning music digitally)

- The music studios fought downloads tooth & nail and lost

- Pirated content created the online music boom (yes, there are lost of differing opinions on this, but it's pretty much the white elephant in the room)

- Computer-knowledgeable people far outnumber audio/videophiles

- It is possible to be and audio-enthusiast and computer-enthusiast (just look at the other people on this forum)

And I can go on with the fallacies in your theories, but I think this is enough to keep you ruminating for a while, and you'll probably add another ten pages of text to debate it - we all hope you'll restrain yourself. To quote John Stewart on Cross-fire: "just stop it."