[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth 

You said 1080p, not 1080i.

I said they NEED to, not that they do already. The 1080i statement about COX Cable was an observation that they already offer interlaced 1080 content. Add some bandwidth and progressive 1080 becomes a possibility.

My point remains - as 1080p displays become more widely adopted (which seems to be happening) people are going to want more 1080p content.

The adoption of Blu-ray/HD-DVD is slow because, as goMac would say, the "average consumer" is confused about which they should get and thus they get neither. Technophiles are leading the adoption of Blu-ray/HD-DVD over DVD just as technophiles led the adoption of DVD over VHS. Give it time, once there is a clear "winner" and prices go down, people will adopt high-definition video players/content.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

I expect HDDVD sales to be slightly higher for this week.

Unlikely. Why should the "shock" of Warner's annoucement lead to higher Blu-ray sales last week but not this week? Are people going to suddenly go out and start buying HD-DVD again this week?

[ort888]

Everyone seems very hostile. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

If I could get 720p transfers with a good 5.1 soundtrack for a decent price, I would be fine with that for 95% of the movies I would want to watch. I think most people would be.

The problem with AppleTV is the initial price tag and the selection. $5 a movie seems a little high as well. I spend half that to rent DVDs at the brick&morter down the street. It's not in HD, but still.

It's all about price, convenience, selection... and Apple TV just isn't there. No one is yet.

For the big home theater buffs in here, nothing but 1080p physical media will make them happy. For most people, it's not a big deal... but most people will not be buying a $229 Apple TV. Not for a long time anyway.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

Unlikely. Why should the "shock" of Warner's annoucement lead to higher Blu-ray sales last week but not this week? Are people going to suddenly go out and start buying HD-DVD again this week?

You mean the shock lead to lower HDDVD sales. People's first reaction is to stop buying HDDVD after the Warner announcement. When they come to their sense, they realize that they can continue enjoying their HDDVD players and movies that are available for the HDDVD.

It's like the stock market. Bad news sends the market tumbling because of the initial shock and stock sell off. Then people start buying again.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by starman 

This week's numbers: 85% Blu-Ray

Blu-ray Dominates Disc Sales Chart Post-Warner Announcement | High-Def Digest

$300 for a Blu-Ray player that doesn't work with every Blu-Ray disc, or $150 for an HD-DVD player that works with every HD-DVD disc. No Blu-Ray/DVD combo disc movies.

Why did Blu-Ray win?

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

I said they NEED to, not that they do already.

Sorry, I misread that. I thought you were saying they were gearing to start offering 1080p content sometime in the future.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

The 1080i statement about COX Cable was an observation that they already offer interlaced 1080 content. Add some bandwidth and progressive 1080 becomes a possibility.

I'd say that's the big issue though. I'm under impression that broadcast bandwith is at a premium already.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

My point remains - as 1080p displays become more widely adopted (which seems to be happening) people are going to want more 1080p content.

With exception of the more saavy crowd, the only reason 1080p displays are becoming more widely adopted is because 720 displays are being phased out. And I wonder how many of those that want 1080p content will actually be in a set-up that would makes the difference in quality from 720p noticeable.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

$300 for a Blu-Ray player that doesn't work with every Blu-Ray disc, or $150 for an HD-DVD player that works with every HD-DVD disc. No Blu-Ray/DVD combo disc movies.

Why did Blu-Ray win?

Because:
-People wanted to have a player that actually had movies that they wanted to watch.
-Sony won in their negotiations with Warner Bros.
-It turned out that HD-DVD combo discs weren't such a great idea, especially if they made the discs more expensive.
-Lots of people had PS3s and therefore could play BR movies without any additional expense.

And realistically, the price issue is only important for early adopters. BR players are already half the price they used to be when the PS3 came out, and they'll continue to drop. Same goes for the compatibility issue. It sucks for the few people who have unupgradeable players, but for BR as a format in the next few years, it means nothing.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Because:
-People wanted to have a player that actually had movies that they wanted to watch.
-Sony won in their negotiations with Warner Bros.
-It turned out that HD-DVD combo discs weren't such a great idea, especially if they made the discs more expensive.
-Lots of people had PS3s and therefore could play BR movies without any additional expense.

And realistically, the price issue is only important for early adopters. BR players are already half the price they used to be when the PS3 came out, and they'll continue to drop. Same goes for the compatibility issue. It sucks for the few people who have unupgradeable players, but for BR as a format in the next few years, it means nothing.

All your points are subjective except for the Playstation. I think that's probably the only reason.

I don't understand why someone would choose a more expensive, inherently broken format... but then I remember our past two presidential elections. Ah well. I'll wait it out even more.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by icruise 

-It turned out that HD-DVD combo discs weren't such a great idea, especially if they made the discs more expensive.

This is actually one of the things I wish would carry over to BluRay.
I would buy more of the newer movies on BR if I could watch it both on my PS3 and all the other standard DVD players throughout the house (on the macs, on the dvd player in the van, etc.)

I would pay an additional $5-10 for that feature, especially with movies both I and the kids would watch (Pixar films).

[icruise]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I don't understand why someone would choose a more expensive, inherently broken format....

My whole point was the BR being more expensive and "broken" only applies in the very short term. By the time it gets to be mainstream, the players will be very cheap, and the issues with different software profiles should be a thing of the past.

Originally Posted by cjrivera 

This is actually one of the things I wish would carry over to BluRay.
I would buy more of the newer movies on BR if I could watch it both on my PS3 and all the other standard DVD players throughout the house (on the macs, on the dvd player in the van, etc.)

I would pay an additional $5-10 for that feature, especially with movies both I and the kids would watch (Pixar films).

Considering that you can buy the DVDs separately for $5-$10 in most cases nowadays, I'm not sure why that's an attractive feature. Now if they were the same price, absolutely it would be nice to have.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

You think DVDs took off right when they came out? No. Why? Because most people had VCRs. However, DVDs slowly got adopted because PEOPLE LIKED THE PICTURE QUALITY over VHS. Same will happen with Blu-ray/HD-DVD vs. DVD once more and more people get 1080p HDTVs (see above).

People could see the difference in picture quality. Look at my chart. Most people will be unable to see the difference between 720p and 1080p, and that's not subjective.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

Not now, but they will. You seem to think 1080p content should be immediately adopted in order for my argument to be valid. The fact that the Blu-ray/HD-DVD is the only 1080p content readily available is simply because those camps are the ones pushing 1080p content. Give it time.

Why? Again, look at the chart. Most people will not be physically able to see the difference. For most setups, 1080p is just a number and won't provide better picture quality.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

You don't give people enough credit. Even my parents, who are technologically inept, WANTED a 1080p HDTV and purposefully went out to buy one.

I wouldn't honestly try and sell my parents on a 1080p. Again, look at the chart. If they bought a TV over 50" it would be kind of understandable..

TV manufacturers are pushing 1080p because they've already sold people on 720p, and now they need an excuse to get everyone to buy new TV's. It's much like people pushing 30,000:1 contrast ratio tvs. Most people won't be able to see the difference between 30,000:1 and something like 10,000:1, but that doesn't stop tv manufacturers from pushing it as the next big thing.

[exca1ibur]

The only thing "broken" were items related to the special features, not the films themselves. PiP has nothing to do with the main feature not playing.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Considering that you can buy the DVDs separately for $5-$10 in most cases nowadays, I'm not sure why that's an attractive feature. Now if they were the same price, absolutely it would be nice to have.

Not new releases, they're usually $15-20.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by cjrivera 

Not new releases, they're usually $15-20.

True, I'm generalizing a bit there, but I've been surprised at the amazing deals that I've been able to get on DVDs recently. Even new releases are sometimes pretty close to $10.

It would be nice to have DVD versions of the films for the purpose of ripping them, though. I hope they continue with the idea of including iPod-formatted versions of movies on disc.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Everyone seems very hostile. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

If I could get 720p transfers with a good 5.1 soundtrack for a decent price, I would be fine with that for 95% of the movies I would want to watch. I think most people would be.

The problem with AppleTV is the initial price tag and the selection. $5 a movie seems a little high as well. I spend half that to rent DVDs at the brick&morter down the street. It's not in HD, but still.

It's all about price, convenience, selection... and Apple TV just isn't there. No one is yet.

For the big home theater buffs in here, nothing but 1080p physical media will make them happy. For most people, it's not a big deal... but most people will not be buying a $229 Apple TV. Not for a long time anyway.

I pretty much agree (with exception to the AppleTV being already where it needs to be). The AppleTV is not a perfect device, but the lack of 1080p is hardly one of the major flaws. Yes, rentals and the price tag of the AppleTV are the bigger problems, and I might take certain people here more seriously if that's what they wanted to talk about rather than 1080p.

I think the AppleTV right now is a bit like the rev b/c iPod. It's not going to be the exact modal that starts a larger adoption, but it's going to really be the start of a trend. You're going to have a few slightly above average consumers buying an AppleTV, showing it to their friends, and their friends will think it's cool and go buy one. I haven't been suggesting that in two weeks when the new software comes out that there will be lines around the block at the Apple store. But again, media devices like the iPod were expensive and that didn't stop them from becoming massively adopted within a short period of time.

My feeling on the matter is that online downloads will be adopted on a large scale by consumers before HD-DVD/Bluray will be.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Actually, that would be for last week ending on 1/13. Expected because of the initial shock after the Warner annoucement. I expect HDDVD sales to be slightly higher for this week.

Enough to make warner go back right?

Doesn't matter if they get 45% next week... it is just a matter of time till it has none.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

I said they NEED to, not that they do already. The 1080i statement about COX Cable was an observation that they already offer interlaced 1080 content. Add some bandwidth and progressive 1080 becomes a possibility.

According to some posts I've seen on AVS from station engineers there are *NO* plans for TV broadcasts to go 1080p. There is not enough of a quality difference between 720p and 1080i to justify the difference in bandwidth.

Cable is in an even worse situation, as are the satellite companies. They're having to seriously restructure their networks to delivery the HD content they have now. There's no way they could support 1080p content without completely replacing their entire infrastructure.

The bandwidth difference between 1080i and 1080p is literally double. So you can either have half the frames or half the channels. Everyone is choosing half the frames.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Enough to make warner go back right?

Doesn't matter if they get 45% next week... it is just a matter of time till it has none.

To be fair, as long as Universal and Paramount stay exclusive HD will never have none. And if HD can secure longer contracts than what they already have we're still looking at the two formats coexisting.

My guess is both will eventually go Blu, though.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

According to some posts I've seen on AVS from station engineers there are *NO* plans for TV broadcasts to go 1080p. There is not enough of a quality difference between 720p and 1080i to justify the difference in bandwidth.

Cable is in an even worse situation, as are the satellite companies. They're having to seriously restructure their networks to delivery the HD content they have now. There's no way they could support 1080p content without completely replacing their entire infrastructure.

The bandwidth difference between 1080i and 1080p is literally double. So you can either have half the frames or half the channels. Everyone is choosing half the frames.

Plus there is the itty bitty tiny problem of most tv's on the marketplace not having 1080p tuners. If you broadcast in 1080p you severely limit who can see your content. Given that we're just starting to get rid of analog broadcasts, I think it will be a long while before we have any 1080p broadcasts.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by goMac 

People could see the difference in picture quality. Look at my chart. Most people will be unable to see the difference between 720p and 1080p, and that's not subjective.

With the right set-up and viewing distance, you can see the difference between 720p and 1080p. And you can DEFINITELY see the difference between 480p (DVD) and 1080p (Blu-ray/HD-DVD).

Originally Posted by goMac 

Why? Again, look at the chart. Most people will not be physically able to see the difference. For most setups, 1080p is just a number and won't provide better picture quality.

480p < 720p < 1080p. It's not rocket science and it's not subjective. 1080p offers better PQ than 720p or 480p whether you can "see" it or not. If you can't see it: a) you don't know what you're looking for; b) your set-up is not right; or c) you are not at the optimal viewing distance for your TV size and resolution.

Originally Posted by goMac 

I wouldn't honestly try and sell my parents on a 1080p. Again, look at the chart. If they bought a TV over 50" it would be kind of understandable.

I didn't try to sell them - they did it all on their own.

Originally Posted by goMac 

TV manufacturers are pushing 1080p because they've already sold people on 720p, and now they need an excuse to get everyone to buy new TV's. It's much like people pushing 30,000:1 contrast ratio tvs. Most people won't be able to see the difference between 30,000:1 and something like 10,000:1, but that doesn't stop tv manufacturers from pushing it as the next big thing.

TV manufacturers are pushing 1080p because it's the new standard and they are selling well. Your argument is like saying studios pushed DVDs because they sold people on VHS and needed an excuse for people to buy all their movies again. Fact is, DVDs offered better PQ and consumers wanted them. Same thing with 1080p TVs.

[Brien]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Because:
-People wanted to have a player that actually had movies that they wanted to watch.
-Sony won in their negotiations with Warner Bros.
-It turned out that HD-DVD combo discs weren't such a great idea, especially if they made the discs more expensive.
-Lots of people had PS3s and therefore could play BR movies without any additional expense.

And realistically, the price issue is only important for early adopters. BR players are already half the price they used to be when the PS3 came out, and they'll continue to drop. Same goes for the compatibility issue. It sucks for the few people who have unupgradeable players, but for BR as a format in the next few years, it means nothing.

Wouldn't you mean it wasn't an issue for early adopters? The whole point is they're WILLING to pay the $1,000 price tag they players launched at (and would still be at if there'd been no format war).

[ort888]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

To be fair, as long as Universal and Paramount stay exclusive HD will never have none. And if HD can secure longer contracts than what they already have we're still looking at the two formats coexisting.

My guess is both will eventually go Blu, though.

They will both ride out their contracts with Toshiba and then go either Blu -ray exclusive or neutral.

I think we'll see several big retailers get rid of HD DVD next. That's going to be the big blow.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

With the right set-up and viewing distance, you can see the difference between 720p and 1080p. And you can DEFINITELY see the difference between 480p (DVD) and 1080p (Blu-ray/HD-DVD).

What sort of viewing distance? Like, 4 feet? Look at the chart...

Again, seeing the difference between 480p and 1080p depends on the size of the tv and the viewing distance. I'd agree that in most cases 1080p looks way better than 480p, but things are more complicated than that. Upconverting DVD players provide a great way for consumers to make their DVD content look better, and it will impede the adoption of HD-DVD/Bluray.

If there was a cassette desk that could make a VHS tape look and work very similar to a DVD, do you think DVD would have been adopted nearly as quickly?

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

480p < 720p < 1080p. It's not rocket science and it's not subjective. 1080p offers better PQ than 720p or 480p whether you can "see" it or not. If you can't see it: a) you don't know what you're looking for; b) your set-up is not right; or c) you are not at the optimal viewing distance for your TV size and resolution.

Again, your eye only has a certain resolution, just like your ear can only hear a certain range of sounds. There most certainly is a maximum discernible resolution.

You keep saying that your optimum viewing distance depends on your tv's resolution. You do of course realize this means that your optimum tv resolution depends on your viewing distance?

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

TV manufacturers are pushing 1080p because it's the new standard and they are selling well. Your argument is like saying studios pushed DVDs because they sold people on VHS and needed an excuse for people to buy all their movies again. Fact is, DVDs offered better PQ and consumers wanted them. Same thing with 1080p TVs.

I've already addressed why DVD vs. VHS is not applicable here.

TV manufacturers are pushing 1080p because they always need something new to push. And yes, for some people there is a benefit to 1080p. I am not disputing that. Again, I myself own a 1080p tv. But for your average consumer? 1080p is just a word for a Best Buy salesman to throw at someone to get them to spend more money. Honestly, that same person is probably going to take their 1080p tv home, hook it into a Wii, and believe that they are playing their Wii at 1080p for the next 5 years.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Brien 

Wouldn't you mean it wasn't an issue for early adopters? The whole point is they're WILLING to pay the $1,000 price tag they players launched at (and would still be at if there'd been no format war).

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

According to some posts I've seen on AVS from station engineers there are *NO* plans for TV broadcasts to go 1080p. There is not enough of a quality difference between 720p and 1080i to justify the difference in bandwidth.

Cable and satellite providers have said several times that they will not broadcast 1080p only 1080i as P brings waaaay to much extra bandwidth for little improvement.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Cable and satellite providers have said several times that they will not broadcast 1080p only 1080i as P brings waaaay to much extra bandwidth for little improvement.

Exactly. For the time being the only way to get 1080p content will be HD DVD and Blu-Ray. Video games wont go 1080p until at the earliest the next generation (2010 for Xbox and 2012 for PS?).

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

My feeling on the matter is that online downloads will be adopted on a large scale by consumers before HD-DVD/Bluray will be.

I'd really like to know who. My mom? No. My dad? No. My neighbors? No. Not one person I know, even the techies at work gives a rat's ass about downloadable movies. They're always talking about BR, though.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

I'd really like to know who. My mom? No. My dad? No. My neighbors? No. Not one person I know, even the techies at work gives a rat's ass about downloadable movies. They're always talking about BR, though.

Ooh! Anecdotal evidence!!! I have some of that!

A friend of mine (with a PS3) is very interested in how I like my AppleTV. He has no plans on buying Blu-Ray or HD DVD but he would try the HD rentals. And my father owns an HD DVD player (although the only HD movies he owns are the ones I gave him), and he's also considering an AppleTV.

[starman]

There's one factor that goMac, in his INFINITE wisdom, failed to mention:

paradigm shift

If people are going to use an internet appliance to watch movies, are they going to think they can get infected with a virus? Their ID stolen, etc? Forget about what the machine can and cannot store, I'm talking about public perception about the internet.

There's also ownership; having a physical item. Bringing it on the road or to a friend's house. How will that work?

Answer: it won't

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

If people are going to use an internet appliance to watch movies, are they going to think they can get infected with a virus? Their ID stolen, etc? Forget about what the machine can and cannot store, I'm talking about public perception about the internet.

Yes, because so far these issues have kept people off the internet.

Originally Posted by starman 

There's also ownership; having a physical item. Bringing it on the road or to a friend's house. How will that work?

A lot of people already made that shift with the iTunes Store. People buy things that aren't physical all the time. Why would this scare them?

As for bringing it to a friends house... That's easy. Load it on an iPod and plug the iPod into a TV.

Originally Posted by starman 

Answer: it won't

Same reasoning was given for the iPod and the iTunes Music Store. Lower quality, lack of physical copies, broadband internet usage...

[goMac]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

A friend of mine (with a PS3) is very interested in how I like my AppleTV. He has no plans on buying Blu-Ray or HD DVD but he would try the HD rentals. And my father owns an HD DVD player (although the only HD movies he owns are the ones I gave him), and he's also considering an AppleTV.

I mentioned the AppleTV to my parents as an aside. In response they asked why Apple is always the one that thinks of the obvious ideas...

(They are looking at moving to HD but have no plans to buy Bluray or HD-DVD. They actually thought Bluray and HD-DVD were the same thing for a bit...)

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by goMac 

.....They actually thought Bluray and HD-DVD were the same thing for a bit...

Uh, everybody thinks that Blu-ray is HD dvd until someone with the patience of a saint trys to explain the difference for an hour or so and when they eventually fail, they continue thinking that. The way I remember the difference is that Blu-ray discs feel nice and heavy and smooth and shiny and slippery, instead of cheap and sharp and nasty.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by starman 

There's one factor that goMac, in his INFINITE wisdom, failed to mention:

paradigm shift

If people are going to use an internet appliance to watch movies, are they going to think they can get infected with a virus? Their ID stolen, etc? Forget about what the machine can and cannot store, I'm talking about public perception about the internet.

Right. The public is abandoning the internet in droves. People stop buying music from iTunes. Amazon is close to dead because everyone is afraid to shop online. Myspace, facebook, and flickr will all be dead by next year because people are afraid to post pictures and share their personal info.

[starman]

Hey, goMac, I can take my 720p movie on my iPod? AWESOME!

[ort888]

800,000 PS3s sold in December.

That's a lot of Blu-ray players.

[mrtew]

[obnoxiously sarcastic post]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Right. The public is abandoning the internet in droves. People stop buying music from iTunes. Amazon is close to dead because everyone is afraid to shop online. Myspace, facebook, and flickr will all be dead by next year because people are afraid to post pictures and share their personal info.

[/obnoxiously sarcastic post]

[hyteckit]

Thank you.

[hyteckit]

Demand for hidef standalone players outside the US. Look at these pathetic numbers in Europe.

Cin�motion : HD-DVD - Blu-Ray - Plasma - Lcd - Projecteur

From 2006 to July 2007, number of players sold

UK
Bluray: 1662
HDDVD: 4306
Dual: 17

France
Bluray: 1412
HDDVD: 3569
Dual: 36

Germany
Bluray: 941
HDDVD: 3908
Dual: 14

Italy
Bluray: 854
HDDVD: 790
Dual: 38

Spain
Bluray: 386
HDDVD: 231
Dual: 15

Switzerland
Bluray: 214
HDDVD: 790

Total
Bluray: 5,469
HDDVD: 13,186
Dual: 120

[hyteckit]

In Australia, number of standalone units sold through Nov. 2007.

Bluray: 2241
HDDVD: 609

[hyteckit]

If you don't want your personal information stolen, don't open any credit card accounts or buy anything with a credit card, offline or online.

My citibank account was replaced because someone stole personal information from hundreds of thousands of citibank customers. Personal information from hundreds of thousands of people who are customers of Ameritrade and Monster.com were also stolen, and I have accounts with them. Lots of personal information of millions of US citizens were stolen which had nothing to do with online shopping.

Today's news

Data lost on 650,000 credit card holders - Yahoo! News

Incidents like this add to consumer concern about fraud. The Identity Theft Resource Center says there was a six-fold increase last year in the number of records reported compromised in the United States — to 125 million.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

Hey, goMac, I can take my 720p movie on my iPod? AWESOME!

No, but you're welcome to tell me how I'm supposed to fit a 720p Bluray player in my pocket...

Everyone has a DVD player. Does everyone have Bluray players? Not so much.

[starman]

People are known to bring PS2's and 360's to friend's houses. Why not a BR player?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

People are known to bring PS2's and 360's to friend's houses. Why not a BR player?

Why not carry the AppleTV?

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Why not carry the AppleTV?

Simple. Not every living room has an ethernet jack or wireless access. With an optical disc, you don't have to worry about managed copies.

Besides, you can't do anything with HD on AppleTV except rent anyway, and it's only 720p even if you do.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

Simple. Not every living room has an ethernet jack or wireless access. With an optical disc, you don't have to worry about managed copies.

I don't think you need internet to play a movie you've already rented. Rentals on the Mac don't need internet to play...

Originally Posted by starman 

Besides, you can't do anything with HD on AppleTV except rent anyway, and it's only 720p even if you do.

Yes, I think this has been noted.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I don't think you need internet to play a movie you've already rented. Rentals on the Mac don't need internet to play...

I didn't say the Mac, I said AppleTV.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

I didn't say the Mac, I said AppleTV.

Yes, and I'm telling you I don't think you need an active internet connection to playback a movie stored on the AppleTV. The rental period is actually determined by the local date on the device. This was covered on Digg today.

(And yes, by setting back the clock you can give yourself more time on the rental.)

[starman]

OK, fine, but it's still 720p and might not have 5.1

Blu-Ray movies are 1080p and unless it's a mono movie, it's probably going to be in 5.1 guaranteed.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

OK, fine, but it's still 720p and might not have 5.1

Blu-Ray movies are 1080p and unless it's a mono movie, it's probably going to be in 5.1 guaranteed.

Sure, but with Bluray, I can't carry 4 seasons of The Office in my pocket. I mean, I could carry around a Bluray player and a bunch of discs all the time...

Honestly, I think people care more about... you know... actually being entertained by a movie rather than the two back speakers not working.

[starman]

They might as well use VHS then. Oh, wait. That died. Why? Because DVD looked and sounded better.