[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Geeks are excited about Take 2. Normal people will stick with physical media just like normal people stuck with purchasing CDs.

Yup.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

You didn't say "possible", you said "great success".

Yes, it's technically possible with great success.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

If it's a "great success" then why don't people know about it? It must be the best kept secret in the world.

Do you understand what I meant when I said that the AppleTV works with HD on broadband connections with great success? Do you understand that I said nothing at all about it's popularity?

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Really, you're acting just as idiotic here as you do in the gaming threads. You make crap up, and then change your wordings.

No, you're taking my words and changing the meanings. No where did I say that it was a great success on the marketplace yet. I said that the HD downloads have been used on current broadband connections with great success. I'm not going to play these games where I say one thing and you guys try to change the argument to something else.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Oh it's just the standard connection around here for people who don't want to spend too much on internet because they only use it for email and websurfing.

And again, I have a feeling that the market of people that want to save money on internet connections, but are going to go out and buy a huge TV, a 5.1 system, and a high def player for a substantial premium over the AppleTV is not to large. Does such a market exist? Most likely. But it's going to be small.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Sadly in most rural areas, suburbs and small towns it is the max speed available. Now, looking at the US of A:

Rural areas? I find that hard to believe, considering DSL requires a transfer station, and most rural areas probably don't have transfer stations...

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Top News - Study: U.S. lags in ’net speed

Yes, I've seen that study.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Average download speed of 1.97Mbps in the US roughly six months ago. I think it is safe to assume that things have not improved significantly since then.

However, the US is on the verge of a large bandwidth increase. DOCSIS 3.0 is on the way, and FIOS is spreading at a decent rate. DOCSIS 3.0 does not even require new wiring infrastructure.

(Another good question about that survey is if it includes 56k users. I would hope that there is not much of an argument that 56k users are definitely not likely to be buying big TV's and HD players.)

Even so, you still have a very large number of people who are over the 4 Mbps mark.

Here's a good question for you. Which do you think is going to be faster? The adoption of high def players in the market, or the penetration of high speed connections over 4Mbps?

Originally Posted by voodoo 

People don't buy HDTVs and BD-Players to watch streamed content off the internet. Obviously they want to use their BD player with their new HDTV.

People didn't buy devices previously that didn't exist previously? Tell me more about this strange concept.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Even so -- about 30% of homes in the US have HDTV. Assuming they all have internet and 100% faster than the average, they still have only 3Mpbs in download speed.

You're assuming the growth in the bandwidth trend is linear. Your paper you posted says that as it stands, more people have cable connections than DSL connections. The means a majority of broadband customers should be in the 4-8 Mbps range. This also implies that the whitepaper you posted does indeed include 56k users into their numbers.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

People in rural areas can have HDTVs, but can't have fast internet. Everyone can have HDTVs and BD-players and they also know how to use them.

There is a substantial difference between "everybody needs" and "everybody wants." Most people, especially those who don't have large pocket books, may not find hi def players a compelling enough upgrade.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Renting off the internet is way too nerdy.

I suppose buying music off the internet is way too nerdy a concept too?

[Oversoul]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Nope, he was right on the money. I just hope he won't make more movies

No luck there. He's working on Transformers 2.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Yes, it's technically possible with great success.
...
No, you're taking my words and changing the meanings. No where did I say that it was a great success on the marketplace yet.

No, this is what you said:

People are having great success with the HD movie rentals on the US infrastructure today.

You didn't say "possible", you said "are having". I'd like to know how you believe that today HD movie rentals are a "great success" when there aren't any that have been labeled as such.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

People are having great success with the HD movie rentals on the US infrastructure today. Yes, it'll be great when we have more bandwidth for higher quality downloads, but as it stands internet speeds today are more than adequate.

The existence of XBox Live and AppleTV is enough to show that U.S. broadband is ready.

Quoting this just in case goMac decides to change this post which he didn't even remember he made.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

Do I have to reiterate this again?

The problem with the studios controlling when and where I can watch a movie is the crux of the problem. When I buy a film, I can watch it when and where I want

Didn't people already say they didn't want that type of thing?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

And again, I have a feeling that the market of people that want to save money on internet connections, but are going to go out and buy a huge TV, a 5.1 system, and a high def player for a substantial premium over the AppleTV is not to large. Does such a market exist? Most likely. But it's going to be small.

Right just like that "feeling" you had that because people were buying the Wii because it was cheap wouldn't have the money or the need to hook it up to an HD-TV and then it turns out 70% of wii owners have it hooked to an HD set.

Another brilliant prediction brought to you by GoMac.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

You didn't say "possible", you said "are having". I'd like to know how you believe that today HD movie rentals are a "great success" when there aren't any that have been labeled as such.

You've literally just posted exactly what I said, and I still don't see how you think I've said that HD movie downloads are popular among people in the U.S.

I'm really sick of having you rewrite what I've said just so you can have an argument with me about something I never claimed. You just posted the exact quote from me, and no where did I imply HD movie downloads are popular in the US.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Right just like that "feeling" you had that because people were buying the Wii because it was cheap wouldn't have the money or the need to hook it up to an HD-TV and then it turns out 70% of wii owners have it hooked to an HD set.

You mean time has passed since the Wii came out, and in that time people have upgraded their TV's?

Gosh darn it SWG. You are far too smart for me. When I made that prediction I figured that people would buy their Wii's and then never upgrade their TV's ever again. But apparently I was wrong. I submit to your brilliance.

[starman]

You said that people are having a "great success". Well, I'm asking you how you quantify that. You can't. Nobody can because the market for HD rentals is even smaller than BR and HD-DVD. I'm asking you, where do you come up with a statement like that?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

Quoting this just in case goMac decides to change this post which he didn't even remember he made.

This is getting borderline retarded. You just quoted him saying that people were having great success using the AppleTV on their current connections. That does NOT mean that the AppleTV is a commercial success.

Go back to 1st grade English class if you can't understand what he wrote. Sheesh.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

You mean time has passed since the Wii came out, and in that time people have upgraded their TV's?

OMFG. I can't believe what I'm reading.

You really expect us to be so gullible to think that "oh a few months have passed and 50% of the people upgraded their TVs in under a year and I'm so ubersmart I dind't see that coming"?

[starman]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

This is getting borderline retarded. You just quoted him saying that people were having great success using the AppleTV on their current connections. That does NOT mean that the AppleTV is a commercial success.

Go back to 1st grade English class if you can't understand what he wrote. Sheesh.

I understood what he wrote. How does he back up his claim?

"Hey, one guy rented a movie. That's 'great success'".

No.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

You said that people are having a "great success". Well, I'm asking you how you quantify that. You can't. Nobody can because the market for HD rentals is even smaller than BR and HD-DVD. I'm asking you, where do you come up with a statement like that?

People are having great success downloading HD movies. Again, where am I at all talking about HD download adoption rates? I think what I said was pretty clear. People who are downloading HD movies are not having any trouble at all.

Where does adoption rates or market share mater at all in that statement? Seriously, I'm not going down this road of "Hey, let's make up something and claim goMac said it!"

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

You really expect us to be so gullible to think that "oh a few months have passed and 50% of the people upgraded their TVs in under a year and I'm so ubersmart I dind't see that coming"?

Yeah uhhhh... It's been a little more than "a few months" since the Wii came out, or I made that prediction.

Just an FYI.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

I understood what he wrote. How does he back up his claim?

"Hey, one guy rented a movie. That's 'great success'".

No.

More like "reports are that downloads are quick and no one is having issues - that means the current infrastructure is working right now." Having great success AT downloading is different from being a commercial success.

Is this getting through at all?

[starman]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

More like "reports are that downloads are quick and no one is having issues - that means the current infrastructure is working right now." Having great success AT downloading is different from being a commercial success.

Is this getting through at all?

And how different is that than downloading a goddamn FILE? It's not STREAMING, it's a DOWNLOAD.

Big
F'n
Difference

Whoopdiedoo, Akamai's fast. Yeah, we knew that already.

That's like saying "hey, look! I can download Apple updates from teh intardnets".

You don't get it, do you? Downloading a FILE isn't a "great success". It's been happening for TWENTY YEARS.

STREAMING 1080p with no interruptions is where I'll consider something to be a success or not.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

You mean time has passed since the Wii came out, and in that time people have upgraded their TV's?

Gosh darn it SWG. You are far too smart for me. When I made that prediction I figured that people would buy their Wii's and then never upgrade their TV's ever again. But apparently I was wrong. I submit to your brilliance.

Actually you clearly said "In the wii's lifetime" so don't try to back peddle your way out of that one unless you consider a year end of life for the wii. If the Wii is on 70% HD sets in a year imagine how it will be 4 years after the wii is out.

And either way it is such a short amount of time for people to already have HD TV's and you to be wrong as always.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Yeah uhhhh... It's been a little more than "a few months" since the Wii came out, or I made that prediction.

Just an FYI.

Yeah, there' still no way you were even close. Even if the % of Wii-owners who had HDTVs doubled since it debuted, that'd still mean over 30% of Wiis started on HDTVs which would be higher than the percentage of regular consumers with an HDTV.

[ort888]

Apple TV 2.0 vs. Blu-Ray, DVD & HD Cable: The Comparison | iLounge

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth 

Yeah, there' still no way you were even close. Even if the % of Wii-owners who had HDTVs doubled since it debuted, that'd still mean over 30% of Wiis started on HDTVs which would be higher than the percentage of regular consumers with an HDTV.

Well first, I didn't end up being wrong on the Wii being successful.

Second, I made that prediction anywhere from 2-2.5 years ago, well before the Wii even came out. The Wii has what, about 20 million units sold? That means only 5-6 million Wii owners would have had to have upgraded over the last 2-2.5 years, and it doesn't even say anything about if a successful launch with SD tv owners helped pressure HDTV owners into buying Wii's.

[voodoo]

First of all you connect lots of quotes to me that aren't mine. What's your point with that??!

Originally Posted by goMac 

And again, I have a feeling that the market of people that want to save money on internet connections, but are going to go out and buy a huge TV, a 5.1 system, and a high def player for a substantial premium over the AppleTV is not to large. Does such a market exist? Most likely. But it's going to be small.

That's opposite to my feeling, because even though people have money they may not have fast internet available. For any money. Then there are a number of other reasons, that I won't reiterate.

Rural areas? I find that hard to believe, considering DSL requires a transfer station, and most rural areas probably don't have transfer stations...

Indeed, which excludes everyone with HDTVs in rural areas. Still, many rural areas here have cable, but slow cable. About 2Mbps. Some larger rural towns do have DSL. Slow DSL.

Yes, I've seen that study.

Mhmm and yet you waste my time asking WHERE I got the idea that people don't have high-speed internet? Your credibility is suffering if you aren't being honest in your arguments.

However, the US is on the verge of a large bandwidth increase. DOCSIS 3.0 is on the way, and FIOS is spreading at a decent rate. DOCSIS 3.0 does not even require new wiring infrastructure.

Indeed, this is happening everywhere.. however you are using 'salesman-speak' again. The term 'on the verge of' means in five years or so in reality.

(Another good question about that survey is if it includes 56k users. I would hope that there is not much of an argument that 56k users are definitely not likely to be buying big TV's and HD players.)

That is a good question and I notice that if one reads the article one may be informed of one's query

'"Most people who went to Speedmatters.org to take the speed test used either a DSL connection or cable modem," the report says. "Very few people with dial-up took the test, because it took too long."'

Even so, you still have a very large number of people who are over the 4 Mbps mark.

Number, perhaps - ratio? No.

Here's a good question for you. Which do you think is going to be faster? The adoption of high def players in the market, or the penetration of high speed connections over 4Mbps?

You'll need at least 16Mbit connections for HD content on a household line. Otherwise people can't watch TV in one room and surf in another. Even if that were the case and 8Mbit line would be absolute minimum.

To answer your question, I really don't know. Four years ago the fastest DSL line I could buy was 4Mbps. But it was expensive. Everybody had 512kbps-1Mbps. Now the fastest is 12Mbps and that's equally expensive. Most have 2Mbps lines. In four years, I think 25Mbps lines will be available and 4Mbps lines most common.

See the ISPs aren't dying to get us faster internet. They just want us to pay them about 50€ per month.

People didn't buy devices previously that didn't exist previously? Tell me more about this strange concept.

Apple TV isn't the first VoD service, as well you know.

You're assuming the growth in the bandwidth trend is linear. Your paper you posted says that as it stands, more people have cable connections than DSL connections. The means a majority of broadband customers should be in the 4-8 Mbps range. This also implies that the whitepaper you posted does indeed include 56k users into their numbers.

Yes, as they say there are some 56k users on that survey, but not many because the test took so long for 56k modems that people just didn't bother.

There is a substantial difference between "everybody needs" and "everybody wants." Most people, especially those who don't have large pocket books, may not find hi def players a compelling enough upgrade.

If they have large enough pocket books for HDTVs they have large enough pocketbooks for BD players. Besides, the BD player plays all their DVDs and also the new BDs. If they need a 'DVD' player then they'll buy a BD player. If they don't, they don't -- but they won't get a service that isn't available to them.

I suppose buying music off the internet is way too nerdy a concept too?

Without the iPod driving it, it would have been too nerdy. Very few would be buying music off the internet except for the ubernerds if it wasn't for the iPod.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Apple TV 2.0 vs. Blu-Ray, DVD & HD Cable: The Comparison | iLounge

Not too shabby...

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Well first, I didn't end up being wrong on the Wii being successful.

But you were dead wrong about the PS3, which is predicted to move ahead of the 360 this year.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Not too shabby...

No, but shows that Blu-Ray kicks AppleTV's ass.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Well first, I didn't end up being wrong on the Wii being successful.

Hey that's great, that's not what we're talking about here.

Originally Posted by goMac 

Second, I made that prediction anywhere from 2-2.5 years ago, well before the Wii even came out. The Wii has what, about 20 million units sold? That means only 5-6 million Wii owners would have had to have upgraded over the last 2-2.5 years,

Which would still be a staggering rate of upgrade, particularly for a bunch of people who don't care about HD.

Originally Posted by goMac 

and it doesn't even say anything about if a successful launch with SD tv owners helped pressure HDTV owners into buying Wii's.

Ahaha, well if you can cough up some proof for that theory, be my guest.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Well first, I didn't end up being wrong on the Wii being successful.

Actually you were still wrong about that as you did say the Wii would be sucessful (meaning do better than the gamecube) but you clearly said SEVERAL times:
"I even predict the 360 to win this generation".

In reality you can bet they are going to be at the BOTTOM again as the PS3 is creeping up on it even with a year behind.

So again.... wrong.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by starman 

But you were dead wrong about the PS3, which is predicted to move ahead of the 360 this year.

I'll believe that when I see it. That'd require the PS3 to more than double the amount of existing consoles while the 360s sales came to a virtual standstill.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Well first, I didn't end up being wrong on the Wii being successful.

Second, I made that prediction anywhere from 2-2.5 years ago, well before the Wii even came out.

Actually no. I clearly remember you saying that next to no Wii owners would hook it up to an HDTV as nobody in the US has them and you barfed out stats to prove your point. This was all AFTER the Wii had already shipped also so don't think we are stupid.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

First of all you connect lots of quotes to me that aren't mine. What's your point with that??!

Really? Sorry, I didn't mean to, honestly.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Indeed, which excludes everyone with HDTVs in rural areas. Still, many rural areas here have cable, but slow cable. About 2Mbps. Some larger rural towns do have DSL. Slow DSL.

And again, while this market does exist, it's not a very large market...

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Mhmm and yet you waste my time asking WHERE I got the idea that people don't have high-speed internet? Your credibility is suffering if you aren't being honest in your arguments.

Um, a majority of US consumers have broadband internet. Like 70%. Those are numbers you can also look up.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Indeed, this is happening everywhere.. however you are using 'salesman-speak' again. The term 'on the verge of' means in five years or so in reality.

I'm a Computer Science major with a business concentration, so using those sort of terms and talking about trends is sort of what I do...

Originally Posted by voodoo 

That is a good question and I notice that if one reads the article one may be informed of one's query

The portion of the article you posted that is relevant also implies that this is in no way a scientific survey.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

You'll need at least 16Mbit connections for HD content on a household line. Otherwise people can't watch TV in one room and surf in another. Even if that were the case and 8Mbit line would be absolute minimum.

Huh? One AppleTV HD download is 4.5 Mbps. An existing 8 Mb connection is more than adequate. I'm quite curious as to where you are getting this 16 Mb number from.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

To answer your question, I really don't know. Four years ago the fastest DSL line I could buy was 4Mbps. But it was expensive. Everybody had 512kbps-1Mbps. Now the fastest is 12Mbps and that's equally expensive. Most have 2Mbps lines. In four years, I think 25Mbps lines will be available and 4Mbps lines most common.

I think we'll likely be on 100 Mbps in four years. The aforementioned upgrades in my other posts take at least the cable networks up to 200 Mbps range, and assuming they only give us half that...

Originally Posted by voodoo 

See the ISPs aren't dying to get us faster internet. They just want us to pay them about 50€ per month.

I agree, but increased competition in the market is starting to break this. FIOS, the WiMax folk, and others will all put pressure on the cable and DSL companies. Already Clearwire is at 2 Mbps, which is quite impressive for a wireless service. I don't think it will be long until they get into the 4 and 6 Mbps range.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Apple TV isn't the first VoD service, as well you know.

No, but it's the first publicly recognizable VOD service (aside from stuff like OnDemand). Apple has a retail storefront to push AppleTV rentals, companies like Vudu don't.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Without the iPod driving it, it would have been too nerdy. Very few would be buying music off the internet except for the ubernerds if it wasn't for the iPod.

So what makes the AppleTV all that more different from an iPod? The AppleTV takes a "nerdy" concept, and makes it digestible for the general public. Just as the iPod/iTunes made downloadable music usable for the general public.

[Oversoul]

Originally Posted by goMac 

No, but it's the first publicly recognizable VOD service (aside from stuff like OnDemand). Apple has a retail storefront to push AppleTV rentals, companies like Vudu don't.

I saw a Vudu kiosk at the Westfield mall here in San Francisco. There were maybe 3 sales guys standing around occasionally trying to push the product on disinterested passersby.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Actually no. I clearly remember you saying that next to no Wii owners would hook it up to an HDTV as nobody in the US has them and you barfed out stats to prove your point.

Um, the stats at the time said that HDTV owners where in a decent minority in the US. It didn't take a mental giant to figure out that if Wii's sold over an even distribution in the market, a majority of people would not be hooking them to HDTV's.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

This was all AFTER the Wii had already shipped also so don't think we are stupid.

No, it wasn't. Why would I be talking about potential Wii sales numbers after the Wii had already launched and was selling? Plus, at that time after the Wii launched I owned an HDTV and had my Wii hooked up to it.

[starman]

Face it, goMac. You're wrong. For some freakin' reason you seem to feel that you need to (as always) twist your words to say "see? I'm right!".

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Oversoul 

How many freaking hard drives do I have to keep buying to store all my new fangled hi def downloads? 100GB? 250GB? Plenty, right? Oops, I just downloaded ten to twenty hi def movies. New hard drive? How big this time? 500GB? 1TB? Dammit, I burned through those too. Now I have my library on several hard drives. Which hard drive was movie A on again? How much did I spend on all these hard drives in addition to the money I spent on the movie download? Shoot, my hard drive just crashed! I lost half my movie library! I'll call Apple for help. "Sorry sir, you should have backed up your movies." SH*T, so I'm supposed to buy another hard drive as a backup drive? ZOMGWTFBBQ!??!!

Oh, screw buying. I'll just rent. Damn those $3.99 charges to my credit card really add up...

I'm totally happy with 5GB 720p hidef movies. So a 750GB stores about 150 movies. There are less than 150 movies that I want to own. Most movies I would just watch once or twice at most. I don't care to keep. I would get a RAID drive in case one drive fails.

I never have a problem locating a file across hard drives, once it has been catalog with DVD pedia. Why should I have any problems just because you don't know how to organize and search for data across multiple hard drives. If I don't have problems locating a single file out of millions of files on hundreds of CDs/DVDs, why would I have problems locating a movie out of hundreds of movies across 2 to 3 hard drives?

Damn those $25 charges to my credit card really add up from buying. Who knew buying is more expensive than renting.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Apple TV 2.0 vs. Blu-Ray, DVD & HD Cable: The Comparison | iLounge

Wow, in that sample the color saturation and clarity on the AppleTV is horrible, not to mention the moiré pattern. Yuck.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Apple TV 2.0 vs. Blu-Ray, DVD & HD Cable: The Comparison | iLounge

Damn, the Blu-ray version looks awful. The trees look like black blobs.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Damn, the Blu-ray version looks awful. The trees look like black blobs.

Eyeglasses.com: Prescription Glasses, Eyewear, and Eyeglass Frames

[analogue SPRINKLES]

How old are you now anyway GoMac? 21? I'm surprised you have such vivid memories from events from 10 years ago and Apple keeps giving you so much insider info.

[Dakar the Fourth]

This is degrading nicely.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

And how different is that than downloading a goddamn FILE? It's not STREAMING, it's a DOWNLOAD.

Big
F'n
Difference

Whoopdiedoo, Akamai's fast. Yeah, we knew that already.

That's like saying "hey, look! I can download Apple updates from teh intardnets".

You don't get it, do you? Downloading a FILE isn't a "great success". It's been happening for TWENTY YEARS.

STREAMING 1080p with no interruptions is where I'll consider something to be a success or not.

Well considering we were discussing the success of downloading HD rentals to the AppleTV, I don't see where what you're saying you're talking about now comes into play at all.

Fact is that AppleTV HD rentals are working successfully now. That was all that was said. You went off on a tangent.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Eyeglasses.com: Prescription Glasses, Eyewear, and Eyeglass Frames

Is that where you buy yours?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Is that where you buy yours?

Never worn any; 20/16 right, 20/18 left.

[starman]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Well considering we were discussing the success of downloading HD rentals to the AppleTV, I don't see where what you're saying you're talking about now comes into play at all.

Fact is that AppleTV HD rentals are working successfully now. That was all that was said. You went off on a tangent.

How so?

You people seem to think that HD rentals are some Elven Magic.

It's a F-I-L-E. You download a F-I-L-E. That's it. No magic. Saying there's "great success" with this is like saying there "great success" with light switches.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Never worn any; 20/16 right, 20/18 left.

And you don't see any problems with the first blu-ray image of the White House with all the trees?

[Dakar the Fourth]

Not one that isn't replicated in the other three.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

And you don't see any problems with the first blu-ray image of the White House with all the trees?

I see what you are talking about but it might just be because the DVD image is overbright.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

And you don't see any problems with the first blu-ray image of the White House with all the trees?

No, but since I'm looking at an image on my monitor, which is 3' in front of me, it really isn't a factor. I was simply explaining that I don't need glasses.

To me, the trees don't look like "black blobs", they look dark green.

You can't see the moiré pattern in the AppleTV image (the slightly RT to LT vertical lines)?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I see what you are talking about but it might just be because the DVD image is overbright.

I see that the AppleTV image is a bit washed out, and that's causing the color to appear brighter.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, but since I'm looking at an image on my monitor, which is 3' in front of me, it really isn't a factor. I was simply explaining that I don't need glasses.

To me, the trees don't look like "black blobs", they look dark green.

You can't see the moiré pattern in the AppleTV image (the slightly RT to LT vertical lines)?

It's quite obvious in the first blu-ray picture, the blacks are way too dark and you can't even make out the details of the trees. Just black blobs.

Which AppleTV image is having the moiré pattern problem you are talking about? Moiré pattern can be create by your monitor or by the camera use to take the shot.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

How so?

You people seem to think that HD rentals are some Elven Magic.

It's a F-I-L-E. You download a F-I-L-E. That's it. No magic. Saying there's "great success" with this is like saying there "great success" with light switches.

WTH is your problem? There were some questions (in this thread even) on whether or not HD rentals on the AppleTV would be feasible with current broadband speeds. The answer seems to be that it is. That's all that was brought up.

No one was talking about magic. No one was talking about streaming vs. downloading. No one was talking about commercial success. Well I take that back - no one else was. You were.