Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Blu-ray/HD DVD... Who is winning?

View Poll Results: Which do you have? (Choose only ONE. Includes stand-alones and game consoles.)
Poll Options:
HD DVD 34 votes (17.09%)
Blu-ray 87 votes (43.72%)
Both 14 votes (7.04%)
Neither 70 votes (35.18%)
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 199. You may not vote on this poll
Blu-ray/HD DVD... Who is winning? (Page 167)
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2010, 11:00 PM
 
Starman, where did you even buy 35mm prints?

As for Star Wars, from what history has shown I'm sure we'll actually get the opposite: more "improvements". Especially if he has to fix/change things in anticipation of another 3-6 films.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2010, 08:03 AM
 
There was a trade mag called "The Big Reel" which had all film and tv ads, mostly 16mm and 35mm film ads, but some movie poster and lobby card ads.

Big Reel Magazine Subscription

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2010, 08:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Same here. The original theatrical release with Han "being a pirate," and with "Close the blast doors, close the blast doors" followed by "OPEN THE BLAST DOORS!!!!" I wouldn't mind a "two version" release of that one-the original, un-enhanced, "as I saw it in the theater in May, 1977" version and George's "enhanced" version-but without that lame-o "Greedo shot first" hack.

But again, only if Han shoots first.
The "close the blast doors" line wasn't on all prints. I think it was on just the mono reels, so you can't really nitpick that. Josh Ling and I tried archiving all the audio differences from all the versions of SW ('77 70mm, stereo, mono, '79, '81) and just gave up, it was WAY too much.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
-Q-
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2010, 02:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I'd agree completely if I didn't have a huge investment in DVDs. Starting out getting BRs for films I wanted to see would be absolutely optimum. But now that I would have to take a considerable amount of time to count my DVDs, replacing them with BRs isn't really economically feasible, at least not en masse.
This might help the transition:

DVD2Blu trade-up scheme lets you swap any old DVD (plus $4.95) for a Blu-ray -- Engadget
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2010, 09:45 PM
 
Why yes. That might help a lot...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 1, 2010, 11:21 AM
 
Yeah, yeah, this probably doesn't go here but again, I don't want to clutter the Lounge with what would be a short-lived thread.

How Comcast became a toll-collecting, nuke-wielding hydra
The facts as we know them

Comcast found itself in the middle of a renewed argument over its "evilness" yesterday afternoon as an interconnection dispute blew up into public view. Level 3 Communications, which runs a major Internet backbone along with a newer content delivery network (CDN), fired off a scathing press release accusing Comcast of (once again) threatening the "open Internet."

On November 11, Level 3 inked a deal with Netflix to serve as the streaming media company's new CDN starting January 1, 2011. In that capacity, Level 3 will cache and serve Netflix streaming video from sites across the country to avoid possible backbone congestion and to deploy streams from servers that are closer to end users.

Due to the size of the deal, Level 3 announced that it was doubling its own storage capacity and adding 2.9 terabits per second (Tbps) of CDN capacity, alongside the 1.65Tbps that it rolled out late this year. The entire Netflix streaming library, which consists of more than 20,000 titles, will be moved directly to Level 3 servers during November and December in preparation for the January rollout.


Coming to you via the Level 3 CDN
The deal also means, of course, that a huge new amount of traffic will soon be sent from Level 3 to various ISPs, and not all of them are happy at the prospect. A week after Level 3 announced the Netflix deal, Comcast told the company that it would “demand a recurring fee from Level 3 to transmit Internet online movies and other content to Comcast customers who request such content,” in the words of yesterday's Level 3 press release.

Comcast says that this is standard practice (and that it's not singling out any particular kind of content). While it previously had a settlement-free (read: no charge) traffic peering agreement with Level 3, such agreements are typically made only between network operators who are roughly comparable in size and therefore exchange similar volumes of traffic with one another. According to Comcast, the Netflix deal means that Level 3 will soon more than double the amount of traffic it sends onto Comcast's network and that this will result in a 5:1 traffic ratio—at which point the relationship will be unbalanced, and fees will be required.

"We are happy to maintain a balance, no-cost traffic exchange with Level 3,” said Comcast senior vice president Joe Waz last night. “However, when one provider exploits this type of relationship by pushing the burden of massive traffic growth onto the other provider and its customers, we believe this is not fair.”

Level 3 thought it was entirely fair—in part because this is not traffic that is transiting through Comcast's network, but traffic that is headed for Comcast subscribers and was requested by them. Under this view, Comcast is trying to charge a content provider for the very access to content that it is selling to its own customers. And, of course, there's the issue that such fees could raise costs for Netflix and other Internet video providers, but won't affect Comcast's own video services such as cable TV.

"By taking this action,” said Level 3 Chief Legal Officer Thomas Stortz, "Comcast is effectively putting up a toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet access network, enabling it to unilaterally decide how much to charge for content which competes with its own cable TV and Xfinity delivered content. This action by Comcast threatens the open Internet and is a clear abuse of the dominant control Comcast exerts in broadband access markets as the nation's largest cable provider.”


And if that wasn't enough of an attack, Level 3 said that it was “approaching regulators and policymakers and asking them to take quick action to ensure that a fair, open and innovative Internet does not become a closed network controlled by few institutions with dominant market power.”

While such sentiments tap into a fertile seedbed of hate that many people have for cable companies in general (routinely one of the most reviled industries in the US by consumers) and for Comcast in particular (thanks to its BitTorrent blocking/throttling and subsequent litigation), Level 3 is hardly a disinterested paladin working for Great Justice; the company wants to maintain its free peering arrangements with Comcast even as it grows into a large CDN operator.

This appears to be Comcast's view of the situation—it's a private peering dispute taken public in a bid for leverage. And Level 3, seeing no choice if it hoped to avoid a service interruption, has already agreed "under protest" to the new fees.
A future roadblock to an all streaming lifestyle?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 1, 2010, 02:16 PM
 
The Comcast/Level3 peering issue is being widely misconstrued into some net neutrality thing. It's not, it's a normal peering/transit relationship change.

Comcast and Level3 used to be peers, where they exchanged approximately even levels of traffic and didn't bill each other. Now Level3 picked up a significant customer (who happens to be Netflix, but could be anyone), unbalancing that exchange of traffic. So Comcast begins charging Level3 for transit, just as they would any other network with unbalanced traffic.
( Last edited by mduell; Dec 1, 2010 at 03:12 PM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 1, 2010, 02:27 PM
 
How anyone can deal with Comcast is beyond me. I cut those idiots loose years ago and haven't regretted it for a moment.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2010
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 2, 2010, 02:26 PM
 
Its all most 2011 and the DVD is phasing out like the VHS before it. As Blu-ray players and discs are becoming more and more cheaper it will eventually take over the industry, HD -DVD is currently struggling to hold on as people are switching over and companies are growing favor with Blu-ray.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 2, 2010, 03:38 PM
 
I agree^

I still have faith in HD DVD though; it may have been swimming upstream for the past 2 years and 10 months, but I'm quite sure that Toshiba had a contingency plan for just this type of difficulty. I've no doubt that we'll see a renewed marketing push going into 2011.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 2, 2010, 06:47 PM
 
What studios do they have (HD-DVD) to remain viable beyond just being a storage format?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 01:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
Sold Out: Analyst Predicts 4M Apple TVs per Year

It was on Macrumors as well. Why on earth would I want to make up something like that??!

Early Apple TV Sales Estimated at 1 Million Per Quarter - Mac Rumors

So yes, that was the pent up demand for the thing, 250 000 units. Now it's downhill from here.

EDIT: yeah the Apple TV sold 250 000 units since it was announced, when it started shipping is irrelevant. When you're spinning numbers, you've entered Apologistville big boy.
Apologistville calling back...

Average sales estimates weren't too far off for the lifespan of the Apple TV 2.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...er_report.html

http://www.maximejohnson.com/techno/...rd-pour-apple/
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:06 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2