Slashdot Mirror


The Ultimate Star Trek Collection

roelbj writes "For those Star Trek fans wondering what to ask for this Christmas, you may wish to consider The Ultimate Star Trek Collection to be released on November 15. For just (cough) $2499.99, you'll get 212, count them, 212 DVDs with everything ever produced under the name, including all seasons of all five telvision series as well as the ten feature films. Before loading up your disc changer and hitting play, remember to get up once in a while."

414 comments

  1. No figurines by ReformedExCon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sorry, that's the deal breaker.

    Hardly "Ultimate".

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
    1. Re:No figurines by ElectricBrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't forget about all the novels and cartoons.

    2. Re:No figurines by Golias · · Score: 5, Funny

      For an extra $500, could I get the same collection without any of the Voyager episodes?

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    3. Re:No figurines by Baricom · · Score: 4, Funny

      For an extra $500, could I get the same collection without any of the Voyager episodes?

      Absolutely. Please make the check payable to "Baricom."

    4. Re:No figurines by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      Apparently no Animated Series, either. That's more of a deal-breaker. And what, no e-books of at least the classic novels?

      Sounds like Berman and Braga's idea of the ultimate collection.

      Muahhahaha. Muahahha. *sob*

    5. Re:No figurines by Forge · · Score: 2, Funny

      THEY ARE STATUES!!

      Men should act like men.

      --
      --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    6. Re:No figurines by wbren · · Score: 1

      Nice try! I already checked with my bank, and they said they wouldn't cash a check made out to my Everyquest handle. Unless... your name is really Baricom?!

      --
      -William Brendel
    7. Re:No figurines by knigitz · · Score: 0

      "You may also be interested in these items..." Better get those too.

    8. Re:No figurines by confu2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This doesn't appear to be anything more than amazon bundling the existing box sets. And here's a kicker. If you buy the box sets from amazon separately, it's only $2755. The Voyager box set is $810 with no discounts currently. So if you really wanted everything except Voyager, it woudl only run you $1945.

    9. Re:No figurines by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Those aren't considered canon, so they wouldn't be included in something like this.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    10. Re:No figurines by tenton · · Score: 1

      Shhh...you're ruining Baricom's instant $500 arbitrage opportunity.

    11. Re:No figurines by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nice try! I already checked with my bank, and they said they wouldn't cash a check made out to my Everyquest handle.

      Losers. I dropped off a check for the soccer season at my power company (to be delivered to an employee). They had no problem cashing my check made out to Soccer Alaska. Oh, and they never gave me my money back.

    12. Re:No figurines by drxenos · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why so many people didn't like Voyager. What's not to love about 7-of-9?

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    13. Re:No figurines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anybody looking for a cool Star Trek 'screensaver' can pick one up at http://www.carlhu.com/markhu/ for free...

    14. Re:No figurines by nizo · · Score: 1

      If that is all you want to see, wouldn't it be cheaper to buy this instead?

    15. Re:No figurines by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Ya know, even under all the Borg makeup... She's still hot.
      Just like Alice Krige, and Rebecca Stamos.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  2. So fat she graphted herself into the couch by CyberBill · · Score: 0, Troll

    Now -THAT- is fat.

    I cant even come CLOSE to that... She has so much dedication. We can only strive to be more like her.

    --
    -Bill
  3. Really... by bl4nk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It was only a matter of time. :)

    1. Re:Really... by Flexagon · · Score: 1

      ... a matter of time?

      That many disks for that much? Sounds like MSDN to me. Next thing will be to update the "making of" sections every year and make it a permanent subscription!

  4. How long would it take to watch all that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming around 3 hours per dvd...thats 636 hours, now assuming you wouldnt watch them all in 1 hit, lets say an hour a day, thats enough star trek to last you nearly 2 years.

  5. The Animated Series!? by AmicoToni · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It doesn't seem to contain Star Trek: The Animated Series!...

    1. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The validity of the events in the animated series in connection to the original series timeline is disputed.

    2. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly my thoughts. What kind of a Star Trek nerd are you, if you can be sold "all seasons of all five television series"? I know there are six series, and I haven't even seen two of them!

    3. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      > The validity of the events in the animated series in connection to the original series timeline is disputed.

      Someone's been spending too much time on Wikipedia

    4. Re:The Animated Series!? by Golias · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, let's see...

      The Original Series
      The Animated Series
      The Next Generation
      Deep Space Nine

      No, actually, that's only four. There were only four Star Trek TV series ever made. I don't see where you people are getting five, let alone six.

      LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!!

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    5. Re:The Animated Series!? by nath_de · · Score: 1

      ST:TAS is non canon as it contains lots of things from other sf universes, for example Known Space (Ringworld).

    6. Re:The Animated Series!? by deetsay · · Score: 3, Funny

      Less tribbles... less troubles

      --
      "The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand", or so I have read.
    7. Re:The Animated Series!? by iota · · Score: 1, Informative

      > No, actually, that's only four. There were only four Star Trek TV series ever made.
      > I don't see where you people are getting five, let alone six.

      1. Star Trek (The Original Series) 1966-1969
      2. Star Trek (The Animated Series) 1973-1974
      3. Star Trek: The Next Generation 1987-1994
      4. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine 1993-1999
      5. Star Trek: Voyager 1995-2001
      6. Star Trek: Enterprise 2001-2005

    8. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations on not getting the joke. It must have been a hard slog.

    9. Re:The Animated Series!? by snafu109 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, it'll be in the torrent. I should be able to download the 1.5TB in about 347 days. Just hope a few people seed this.

    10. Re:The Animated Series!? by cybpunks3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Enterprise also seems to contradict a lot of canon (Robert April was supposed to be the first captain of the Enterprise, as shown on TAS, BTW). TNG+ series dispensed with TOS canon whenever they felt like it.

    11. Re:The Animated Series!? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 2
      Four? I count three. ST: TOS, TNG, DSN. The "other" three were garbage...hell one doesn't even have Star Trek in the name.

      TNG was the true triumph of the entire saga...the only one that defied Captain Syndrome (the asinine tendency of scifi captains to put themselves in ridiculously hostile environments and/or situations out of boredom...and somehow survive).

      The only detractors from DSN were:
      1) the horrible acting on the part of Dr. Julian Bashir (everyone else was superb, especially the lovely Terry Farrell aka Jadzia Dax and hilarious Jeffrey Combs aka Weyoun aka Brunt)
      2) Sisko's uber captain syndrome...but atleast he plays a demigod of sorts so death isn't as much of an issue... :)

      And TOS was a classic, no matter how you spin it.

    12. Re:The Animated Series!? by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      No, actually, that's only four. There were only four Star Trek TV series ever made. I don't see where you people are getting five, let alone six.

      Clearly the confusion comes from the fact that there were a total of five Star Wars movies. It's an easy mental slip to make, though I'd expect better from a geek-heavy crowd like this one.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    13. Re:The Animated Series!? by GraemeDonaldson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      5. Voyager.
      6. Enterprise.

      :-)

      --
      I think, therefore I am. I think?
    14. Re:The Animated Series!? by David_W · · Score: 4, Funny
      No, actually, that's only four.

      Picard: THERE... ARE... FOUR... SERIES!

    15. Re:The Animated Series!? by biglig2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      By such logic, TOS is also non-cannon as it includes a cross-over with another TV show, "Assignment: Earth".

      (Please don't post pointing out that Assignment: Earth never made it past it's pilot, or I will be forced to invoke Wold Newton, and you won't like that.)

      --
      ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    16. Re:The Animated Series!? by sandwiches · · Score: 1

      I thought DS9 was a great series, too, but I disagree about Sidig El Fadil. I personally enjoyed his character particularly because of Bashir's and O'Brian's quirky relationship.

      If anything, I'd say that the one character I think could've used some work was Sisko. Sometimes, I think he was a little over the top.

    17. Re:The Animated Series!? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      they replaced it with
      Star Trek: ???
      and
      Star Trek: Profit!

    18. Re:The Animated Series!? by jitterysquid · · Score: 1

      TNG was the true triumph of the entire saga...the only one that defied Captain Syndrome (the asinine tendency of scifi captains to put themselves in ridiculously hostile environments and/or situations out of boredom...and somehow survive).

      Indeed. One wonders what the rest of the Enterprise crew did when the captain and every senior officer decided to go visit an anomaly on an unknown planet. I think they should have just left the dumbasses to their fate. Set a course for Risa.

    19. Re:The Animated Series!? by slapout · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the last one is not called "Star Trek: Enterprise". It is just called "Enterprise". Which means that there were only 5 "Star Trek" series. (And you could agrue that since they were on a space station, DS9 wasn't really a "Trek". But I think most would agree that it was more "Trek" than Voyager).

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    20. Re:The Animated Series!? by slasher999 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I'd love to see these released on DVD, canon or not. That would make the collection complete, IMHO.

    21. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cock up de ass.

    22. Re:The Animated Series!? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      Just look at the "DVD features" to see what you get:

              * Available Subtitles: English
              * Available Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 5.1)
              * Star Trek The Original Series: The Complete Seasons 1-3
              * Star Trek The Next Generation: The Complete Seasons 1-7
              * Star Trek Deep Space Nine: The Complete Seasons 1-7
              * Star Trek Voyager: The Complete Seasons 1-7
              * Star Trek Enterprise: The Complete Seasons 1-4
              * The 10 Star Trek feature films in two-disc special editions
              * Commentary by director Robert Wise, special photographic effects director Douglas Trumbull, special photographic effects supervisor John Dykstra, music composer Jerry Goldsmith, and actor Stephen Collins on Star Trek: The Motion Picture
              * The newly restored, director's edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture
              * Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer on Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
              * Extended 116-minute director's edition of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
              * Commentary by director Leonard Nimoy, writer-producer Harve Bennett, director of photography Charles Correll, and actor Robin Curtis on Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
              * Commentary by Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner on Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
              * Commentary by director/actor William Shatner and his daughter, Liz Shatner, on Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
              * Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer and screenwriter Denny Martin Flinn on Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
              * Commentary by Brannon Braga and Ron Moore on Star Trek Generations
              * Commentary by director-actor Jonathan Frakes on Star Trek First Contact
              * Commentary by screenwriters Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore on Star Trek First Contact
              * Commentary by producer Rick Berman on Star Trek Nemesis
              * Commentary by director Stuart Baird on Star Trek Nemesis
              * Text commentary by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda (co-authors of The Star Trek Encyclopedia)
              * New and vintage interviews, documentaries, and featurettes
              * Deleted scenes
              * Storyboard archives
              * Trailers

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    23. Re:The Animated Series!? by msaulters · · Score: 1

      DEFINITELY not complete without the animated series...

      But also could use the audiobook versions of Nimoy's "I am not Spock" and "I am Spock".

      --
      These people looked deep into my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.
    24. Re:The Animated Series!? by hey! · · Score: 1

      * Available Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 5.1)

      ** sigh **

      English only.

      I'd pay two and a half Gs to hear Captain Kirk voiced by one those overheated Telemundo voice-over hombres.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    25. Re:The Animated Series!? by neurojab · · Score: 1

      What about Shatner's "Transformed Man" album? His rendition of "Mr tambourine man" is surely... SOMETHING.

    26. Re:The Animated Series!? by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1
      I don't see where you people are getting five, let alone six.

      I have heard of this occurance before. Apparently some people think there were THREE Matrix movies and a video game, when in reality there was only the original Matrix. Must have been a glitch in the Matrix or something.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
    27. Re:The Animated Series!? by Darth23 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just beaucse DS9 was based on a space station doesn't mean they didn't 'trek' through the wormhole to explore the Gamma Quadrant.

      --

      -------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.

    28. Re:The Animated Series!? by HolyCrapSCOsux · · Score: 1

      There werent any Matrix movies. They were Terminator 4, 5, & 6.

      Besides the Ultimate collection would be best if it were in one BIIIG box.

      --
      0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
    29. Re:The Animated Series!? by richdun · · Score: 1

      That is awesome...

    30. Re:The Animated Series!? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1
      According to this page at:
      Availability: This title will be released on December 31, 1969. You may order it now and we will ship it to you when it arrives

      It was made in 1973. I'll be looking... backward to it coming out on DVD... before I was born....
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    31. Re:The Animated Series!? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      If they're going to start including autobiographies, they need "Beyond Uhura" (Nichelle Nichols), "To The Stars" (George Takei), etc.

      (Speaking of which, George Takei needs to make a new edition of his book -- it omits the fact that he's gay, which IMHO is important to include in an autobiography!)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    32. Re:The Animated Series!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      canon - the accepted
      cannon - aim it at the enemy

    33. Re:The Animated Series!? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Assignment Earth" - an 18 year old Terri Garr in her first role. Mmmmmm.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    34. Re:The Animated Series!? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1

      I enjoyed his character as well, but his acting was horrible. He looked the part, but as soon as he started speaking it was borderline humorous. No talent whatsoever (this did improve slightly over the course of the series, but by the 7th season he was still tied for last with Ezri/Behr). I just thought of it as his genetically enhanced personality creeping into day-to-day life: he was talking down to all these genetically inferior beings surrounding him (rather than it being unintentional). Got me through the series. :)

    35. Re:The Animated Series!? by raoul666 · · Score: 1

      They messed around with time travel so much in Enterprise, everything could easily be fixed back to canon in about 3 seconds, if necessary.

      --
      When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
    36. Re:The Animated Series!? by Golias · · Score: 1

      Or how about a track in Esperanto?

      Shatner stared in the only full-length Esperanto movie, so he could dub himself for that track.

      That would be bonega!

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    37. Re:The Animated Series!? by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      A 46 minute episode in SDTV format looks great as a 350 meg XviD, so you can easily fit the whole thing in at about 800 gigs.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    38. Re:The Animated Series!? by sstidman · · Score: 1

      "Assignment: Earth" aired in March of 1968. Production was in 1967 (I think). By that time, Teri Garr had appeared in many roles.

      --
      Send/track messages to 100K people: www.xPressAlert.com
    39. Re:The Animated Series!? by Yusaku+Godai · · Score: 1

      I know I'm way late to this party, but seriously, you win.

  6. What a waste by ravenspear · · Score: 5, Funny

    I really don't see the point of this. Every true geek has already seen all of that anyway. It's not something they really need.

    On the other hand $2500 will pay for a lot of hookers.

    1. Re:What a waste by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I really don't see the point of this.

      Amazon was tired of sitting hundreds boxed sets of Voyager. They figured if they bundled them with other stuff people might accidently buy them.

      If this plan fails they'll hire Jeri Ryan to personally hand deliver every copy of a Voyager season bought. They figure that if she sold the series once, she can do it again.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    2. Re:What a waste by Schemat1c · · Score: 1

      On the other hand $2500 will pay for a lot of hookers.

      Or 1 really nice hooker.

      --

      "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
    3. Re:What a waste by sweetspooky · · Score: 1

      A true geek has already got them all on tape.

    4. Re:What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a lot of cheap hookers :P

    5. Re:What a waste by moro_666 · · Score: 1

      A true geek would by a brand new laptop and a bunch of dvd discs,
      attach his machine to bittorrent and start fetching & burning.

      At least i would :)

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    6. Re:What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but once you downloaded and burned all that porn, what would you do about the whole Star Trek thing?

    7. Re:What a waste by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 1

      Do you know what an incredibly hard process it would be to compile a collection of 212 Star Trek DVDs and ensure none of them contain gay porn spliced in? You're talking about downloading almost 2 terabytes of DVDs over BitTorrent. Who the hell has that kind of patience other than college kids on Christmas break?

    8. Re:What a waste by vikingpower · · Score: 1

      I KNEW it !! Always thought that my ex-fiancee was a hooker !!

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    9. Re:What a waste by magarity · · Score: 1

      I really don't see the point of this.
       
      No, no, what's *REALLY* pointless is what's shown in the link given. Amazon says that if I'm interested in buying the complete everything collection, I may also be interested in buying second and even third duplicates in smaller boxed sets.

    10. Re:What a waste by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      Actually, my SO just said she'd accept this in leiu of an engagement ring. (She's the Orion Slave Girl in the Sacramento section of Trekkies II... I'm a TOS Klingon in the background).

      I envision her, late at night, wearing the dvds on her fingers and cooing "My preciousss" and/or reading from her copy of the Ferengi Rules of Aquisition.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    11. Re:What a waste by xaque · · Score: 1

      Who the hell has that kind of patience other than college kids on Christmas break?

      Star Trek fans.

    12. Re:What a waste by irablum · · Score: 1
      If this plan fails they'll hire Jeri Ryan to personally hand deliver every copy of a Voyager season bought. They figure that if she sold the series once, she can do it again.

      I'd pay $2500 to have Jeri Ryan come deliver Voyager to me. and she doesn't even need to bring the dvd's.... or clothes....

    13. Re:What a waste by MrKibkibs · · Score: 1

      It's sad to see a sick puppy like you degrade men even with your poor taste jokes. Oh wait, it is canine hookers you use. That makes it alright then.

    14. Re:What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...hmmm PiratesPay doesn't seem to have the torrent yet...anyone know what tracker has it?

      If I start now it should finish by Christmas!

    15. Re:What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations. That is the most disturbing /. comment I have ever read.

    16. Re:What a waste by sweetspooky · · Score: 1

      Every true geek already has them all on tape.

    17. Re:What a waste by glassgnost · · Score: 1

      Can I get green greasepaint on that?

    18. Re:What a waste by GimliGloin · · Score: 1

      On the other hand $2500 will pay for a lot of hookers.

      Or maybe one orion slave girl

    19. Re:What a waste by FryGuy1013 · · Score: 1

      How will she turn the pages on the rules of acquisition with 220 dvds on her fingers?

      --
      bananas like monkeys.
  7. No way by JudgeFurious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love Star Trek, hell I grew up watching it. I even love bad Star Trek. I can't justify spending $100+ per season on it though and I never will. Paramount needs to put the crack pipe down and get those seasons in the $49-$59 range. It's not worth what they're asking. At $49 bucks a season I'd probably own most of it by now.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    1. Re:No way by grimJester · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, downloading it is not an option for those who want it now. Face it guys, the MPAA won this one.

    2. Re:No way by Fallingcow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the other hand, downloading it is not an option for those who want it now

      Yeah, just those who want it in a week or so.

      Like, the time it would take for a purchased set to be delivered.

    3. Re:No way by Fallingcow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed.

      I was so happy when they announced that DS9 was finally coming out on DVD. I hadn't even looked at any of the others, as I wasn't interested (though I've since come to enjoy the original series). It came out, and I was TOTALLY ready to fork out $40 for each season. They might even have gotten $50 or so out of me.

      They were something like $110 the first time I saw them. WTF? Those bastards can go to hell. Now I'm so pissed off at them that I'll likely never buy the seasons at all.

      It was the same thing with the X-Files. I don't know if it's changed, but it was about $100 when it came out. Totally crazy.

    4. Re:No way by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Paramount needs to put the crack pipe down and get those seasons in the $49-$59 range.

      EXACTLY!

      I am so tired of these morons trying to suck every penny from the franchise as they possibly can while ignoring simple facts. The truth is, if they cut the price in half, they would likely sell more than double what they are now. It has nothing to do with production or advertisement, it's all the greedy bastards at Paramount. X-Files was the same way until just recently when they dropped the price (at least at my local Costco) from $100/season to $40. Stargate SG-1 (owned by MGM) seasons have been $35-40 since they were first released, and they are already committed to 10 seasons. Hell, Enterprise is only 4 seasons and it's still over $100/season. Why can't others follow MGM's suit?

      The truth is that the people behind the Star Trek franchise are complete and utter fools. They embrace such asinine marketing such as this. They continue to allow the failures known as Berman and Braga to rape the franchise. They blame poor box office ratings for Nemesis on the fans and other big-name movies and not piss-poor writing and directing . They blame the failure of Enterprise on the fans and not piss-poor writing and directing.

      In reality it's probably a good thing the franchise is "resting". You can only screw something up so long before people give up on it. Hopefully when they try resurrecting it they'll have found people to produce it with something called talent.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    5. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to China: 7 yuan/DVD. 212 * 7 = 1484 yuan, or at current exchange rates about = $185. heh. You could fly here, buy it, and still save $1000.

    6. Re:No way by tooth · · Score: 1

      I'm with you, they have to match what the other box sets are going for. Anymore and they're just going for extra profits.

    7. Re:No way by bmgoau · · Score: 1

      All of the seasons are free on Bittorrent arn't they?

    8. Re:No way by sdnoob · · Score: 3, Interesting

      purchased individually, though... what parts *wouldn't* you buy, even at 50 a season?

      at ahem, NORMAL pricing...
      28 total seasons @ 49.95
      10 feature films @ 19.95
      comes to a grand total of: 1598.10
      so they've over priced it by 900 bucks. they must still be trying to recoup losses from enterprise or something. if it (upn) wasn't on a pissy little low-power uhf around here, i would probably have watched it (reception lousy even on digicable). (btw, the enterprise dvd sets must be selling well if startrek.com only had 10 copies to give away in a recent promotion http://www.startrek.com/custom/exclude/giveaways/0 51004_enterprise/detail.jsp)

      a more fan-friendly company might even discount the whole set a bit over separate prices to encourage sales of it, otherwise people would just purchase the individual items periodically as sort of a payment plan to getting the whole set. 20 percent off "my" total would be about half what amazon's charging.

      the movies by themselves at amazon (se versions) is 122. which means at 2500 you're paying 85 for each and every season. a very generous discount from tptb, don't ya think? when mainstream tv series sell for 35-50 a season and have been spotted at 20 or less on sale lately.

      considering the cost to duplicate, package and distribute, they could sell for 499 and still be in the black. the star trek empire has already paid for itself many times over (and no wonder with the prices they charge).. so why not do something crazy like deep discounts on an "ultimate collection" for a holiday season.. star trek could even end up being more popular than elmo dolls instead of being something only a google shareholder can afford.

      they could even do it on hd-dvd or bluray instead and bundle a player. all for 399. that'd be one way to really get the new players on the market real quick. if this could get rolling and out the door before new format players hit the general market, whatever format they pick could very easily wind up being the "winner". even if priced at a loss, the future revenue for the hardware makers (& studios themselves by folks buying 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th formats of other movies they already have) over the next 20 years is huge and more than enough to subsidize a promo like this.

    9. Re:No way by cliffski · · Score: 1

      I'm slowly buying them because I'm such a total DS9 addict. What annoys me big time is the fact that
      a)they come in a big molded box. I was PLEASED that DVDs are so space saving. grrrrrrrr
      b)You can't skip the pathetic menu intro. WHY? I HAVE PAID FOR THIS YOU DIPSTICKS.
      Unfortunately my geekness overrides my grouchiness and I still buy them...

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    10. Re:No way by iainl · · Score: 1

      Stuff that, how about "like, the time it would take you to watch the first lot of episodes you downloaded". My bandwidth isn't the greatest in the world, but getting more stuff to watch than I have time for isn't exactly difficult.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    11. Re:No way by PhotoBoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      You could always register your displeasure by buying some bootlegs on Ebay... ;)

      What annoys me even more about all the Trek boxsets is that they have virtually no extras. There are no commentaries to speak of, there's just one set of extras on the last disc of the season. Usually they are just a bunch of archived interviews and the occasional retrospective from the cast and crew. For the money they're asking I'd expect a lot more than that.

    12. Re:No way by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The truth is, if they cut the price in half, they would likely sell more than double what they are now.

      The thing is, that's almost certainly not true, because their marketing people almost certainly did some trials on what people would be prepared to pay and picked the sweet spot that maximises their income. As much as I'd like to believe what you wrote, and see various over-priced sci-fi DVDs brought down to the same level as everything else, I can believe that in the case of ST there are enough super-geeks willing to pay almost any price that the "normal" fans are not the deciding factor here.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    13. Re:No way by BushCheney08 · · Score: 1

      The truth is that the people behind the Star Trek franchise are complete and utter fools.

      They're not the only ones... :-p

      --
      Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
    14. Re:No way by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Paramount has priced themselves OUT of the market with these. I woudl have GLADLY forked over 40-50 PER season. 100 bucks?? 110?? GO TO HELL RICK BERMAN!

      Now what I ahve found was a GOOD deal was all of the movies for 110....that is:

      Star Trek: The Motion Picture
      Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn
      Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
      Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
      Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
      Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
      Star Trek Generations
      Star Trek First Contact
      Star Trek Insurrection
      Star Trek Nemesis

      ALL the Special Editions. I already have some of the Special Editions, but I would gladly pick this up as I do not have any of the Next Gen special editions and am missing a couple of the original crew Special Editions and the singles are getting hard to find. At 19.99 per movie, the price I saw at Best Buy (110) is a steal.

      http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000A6T262/102-07 55024-9559339?v=glance&n=130&_encoding=UTF8&v=glan ce

      --

      Gorkman

    15. Re:No way by NoMercy · · Score: 1

      Theve done the figures, and thus chosen the price which generates the maximum revinue, screw sales, it's profit profit profit, any Frengi would be proud of them :)

    16. Re:No way by TheoGB · · Score: 1

      I didn't think marketing was so complicated, though? They know full-well that Star Trek doesn't go out of fashion so they start the sets off at £80 a pop and then after a few years you'll be able to get them for £30 in the sales and things as they move it down.

      This is standard process: they sell high first to get the people who'll pay anything.

      Look at Buffy: now re-released in new packaging at half the price well after the series' maximum popularity.

      It's never hard to get these things at bargain prices if you keep looking around and use sites like DVD Price Check you'll get it cheaper.

    17. Re:No way by fdiskne1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was the same thing with the X-Files. I don't know if it's changed, but it was about $100 when it came out. Totally crazy.

      Actually, they are now selling them in mythology sets: Abduction Black Oil, Colonization, and Super Soldiers. I'm considering buying them this way. It might actually cost more per episode. I haven't figured that out but these sets are affordable and you only get the ones you want. Now if only they come out with the Lone Gunmen set. Not the Lone Gunmen series. I already have that. I want the X-Files episodes that feature them.

      --
      But why is the rum gone?
    18. Re:No way by SkyDude · · Score: 1

      This is called "testing the waters". Even though the DVD is a well established form of entertainment media, some marketers still test things like this to see what the upper end of pricing is. Believe me, they didn't run 100,000 copies of this package. More like 5,000 - and they will sell more than half of them.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    19. Re:No way by Browncoat · · Score: 1

      Over the summer there was a massive sale at Best Buy, where all FOX DVD sets were discounted to 49.99. I bought 7 seasons of X-Files.

      --
      "Curse your sudden, but inevitable betrayal!"
    20. Re:No way by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      Decent streaming. You can stream faster than you can watch, so just let it stream what you want to watch and when you're not watching it start filling in the blanks.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    21. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      The thing is, that's almost certainly not true, because their marketing people almost certainly did some trials on what people would be prepared to pay and picked the sweet spot that maximises their income.

      Yes, that is the unfortunate result of the purely capitalist mindset. Instead of being "How much can I satisfy the needs of society in which I am a member while still making a comfortable wage?" it's "How much can I squeeze out of every sucker so I can buy a third boat?".

    22. Re:No way by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      And looking at your username, you also bought seven sets of Firefly ;-)

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    23. Re:No way by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Another possibility is they know they'll eventually sell more copies as $50/per, and fully plan to do so, but first they want to gouge the suckers who just can't wait.

    24. Re:No way by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      It was the same thing with the X-Files. I don't know if it's changed, but it was about $100 when it came out. Totally crazy.

      I'm not sure either if they are $100 either still, but my mother bought me a season as a gift. I thought it was nice and thoughtful. Later, I was with her in a store and saw the boxsets with the $100 pricetag. I asked her if that was what she paid, more in the tone of "You didn't pay that much for the X-Files box set you gave me did you?" And she said yes. I told her that was too much, and to not to buy them again. She did buy me another season, and I told her again that it wasn't that I didn't appreciate the gift or whatever, but that was too much to pay for it. I was also a little pissed that it did not have a play through option on the disk, but it stops and goes to the menu after each episode, maybe an obnoxious one that repeats some music over and over again, I don't remember. Also, I don't believe that you could hit the next button to go to the next episode, but had to go back to the menu. For me, its difficult to remember which episode I saw recently by the title on the disk, and I don't notice until it starts playing. Its just a pain. Same with the South Park DVDs. Someday, I'll break the law and burn my own copy with a better interface, but its kinda stupid for me to pay that money, and then have to redo the thing. Or just download them off the net.

      In general, just like music CDs, TV show series are too expensive for something that is pretty much already done and paid for. Yes, they have to be transferred to DVD and extra features or whatever, but the shows are already done.

      It kills me that whoever puts these things together have either never watched a DVD or some PHB told them to do it that way. Just like shampoo bottle designers. For those that haven't figured it out yet, its much more convenient to have a container that you can have the dispenser or opening on the bottom. Gravity pulls stuff down, and when the bottle is narrower at the dispensing end, its very difficult to convince the bottle to stay upright. But what do I know?

    25. Re:No way by Kethinov · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, downloading it is not an option for those who want it now


      Yeah, just those who want it in a week or so.

      Like, the time it would take for a purchased set to be delivered.


      Yeah, good luck with that one. Even if someone was kind enough to make a *single* torrent out of all the DVDs, which I've yet to see, it'd be well in excess of 200gb if every episode were ~300mb. To download that in two weeks, you'd need to be pulling down well in excess of 150kb/s constantly. Hope someone's seeding on a fat pipe.

      I know people who have been trying to transverse all the torrents for every season of Star Trek for well over a year. Simple fact of the matter is, you're not going to download every season of Star Trek in a timely manner no matter how fast your connection is. Between connection problems, tracker issues, and people who don't upload, it's a slow process. But great for people who are really patient.
      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    26. Re:No way by Browncoat · · Score: 1

      I believe in stocking up...one for the DVD in my room, one set for the computer, another two sets in case those two happen to fail at the same time...one set to save on the shelf for emergencies because my air conditioning unit is leaking and i don't want anything to accidentally fall off and get wet...can't have a wrinkly case now.

      a sixth set for the public library and a seventh set to donate to a needy child. :)

      Actually, i only have one set. I did just spend $30.86 on the Serenity comic books. I wish I had gotten them when they were in their first printing but I didn't have the resources at the time. That and I procrastinated.

      --
      "Curse your sudden, but inevitable betrayal!"
    27. Re:No way by xaque · · Score: 1

      Gravity pulls stuff down, and when the bottle is narrower at the dispensing end, its very difficult to convince the bottle to stay upright.

      But what about DVDs in space? We need to future-proof our DVD boxes! Otherwise how will we watch Star Trek while orbiting Alpha Centauri in the year 2525?

    28. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks you underestimate the number of people who want Star Trek. My roommate downloaded DS9 and Voyager last week and has about half of TNG now. AVI files made from DVDs, ~350MB per episode.

    29. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I was so happy when they announced that DS9 was finally coming out on DVD.

      omg, i think that's the most pathetic sentence I've ever read.

    30. Re:No way by jp10558 · · Score: 1

      Has anyone ever thought of someone saving lots of trouble and uploading this to newsgroups?

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    31. Re:No way by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "I am so tired of these morons trying to suck every penny from the franchise as they possibly can while ignoring simple facts. The truth is, if they cut the price in half, they would likely sell more than double what they are now."

      I'm so tired of people (I won't resort to name calling) on Slashdot who don't realize that they are NOT ignoring simple facts. Hell, its probably because they're following the simple facts (that their in-depth consumer research told them) that they set it at this price point. They don't just randomly pick an astronomical price. They pick a high price that early adopters will be willing to fork over, and then as demand dies off, they gradually lower the price until years from now when it hits the bargain bin.

      So sure, you have every right to be pissed that they're being greedy, because they are and thats what businesses do, but don't pretend like you know better than them on the business angle on this. I'm sure they invested a LOT of money into figuring out how much gullible trekkies will be willing to pay when this first comes out.

      As for your rant about the people behind the Star Trek franchise being such complete and utter fools.....well, if that were the case, why are you getting so bent out of shape over the fact that you can't afford/don't way to pay for this boxed set? If you disliked it that much, you wouldn't even consider buying it let alone bitching about the price.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    32. Re:No way by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      Yup. Most likely they figured they'd get the suckers^wtrekkies to buy at the high price, then after a couple years, they'd lower to where they could get regular people to buy. If you've got 10% of the people who will pay a $100 as soon as they can and 90% of the people who will pay $40, but aren't in a particular hurry, you make the most profit by selling at $100 for a year, then dropping the price to $40. (You need to wait long enough so that the suckers^wtrekkies either don't catch on to what you're doing or can't wait.)

      --
      The cake is a pie
    33. Re:No way by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Keeping the prices on DVDs high also keeps the ability to license it out to brodcasters high. Getting rerun rights is going to be a pretty big payoff as well. If everyone owns the DVDs then noone will watch the reruns, thus less money from that point. Yet without any DVDs they don't get the buzz needed to get people to watch re reruns as well.

      That is where the sweet point is to be found.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    34. Re:No way by TheLetterPsy · · Score: 1

      The truth is, if they cut the price in half, they would likely sell more than double what they are now.

      They would probably make less money. Doesn't make sense? It does when you consider the per-unit cost. It is related to why one is better off holding stock in a company that mines/produces a commodity rather than holding contracts for the sale of said commodity during a run up in the price.

      Let's say the per-unit cost is $40 and they sell for $100. If they sold 1000 copies, that's $60000 profit. If they drop the price to $50 and sell double (i.e. 2000), they only make $20000 profit. They'd have to sell six times the original amount to recoup the same profit.

      On the other hand, as the amount produced increases, the per-unit cost goes down, but at a decreasing rate (especially so with DVDs since they are cheap to press).

      Anyhow, I agree that $100 per season is pretty outrageous, but I did want to point out that they are probably following a profit-maximization model. And the point of a business is to produce a profit. So there you go.

    35. Re:No way by AJWM · · Score: 1

      Ditto.

      I own every season of Stargate: SG-1 that has made it to DVD, ditto for Smallville (and Firefly). They sell for less than $50/season, and include extras. (And originally filmed in widescreen.) Trek? I won't fork over for any of those until they're in the $40/season range, (or $50 with lots of extras). Ditto for B5 and Farscape (I do own the B5 movies and a Farscape "best of" set), $80-$100+ a season is just too much. (I'll throw in a gripe about Sliders pricing too -- cheap ass packaging and now double-sided discs -- but I did get them on sale.)

      Heck, at $30 I'll even buy a season of something I'd never seen but thought I might like (Lois & Clarke, Remington Steele).

      But, Paramount knows they can continue to milk Trekkies for everything they've got (which is a fair bit, think of the rent they save living in their parents' basements ;-), and so they do. (Okay, I do have the first five or six movies on VHS, also the TOS and DS9 tribble episodes.)

      --
      -- Alastair
    36. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anonymous because I don't want to be associated with my clearly illegal activities:

      To download that in two weeks, you'd need to be pulling down well in excess of 150kb/s constantly. Hope someone's seeding on a fat pipe.

      I started a download of two seasons worth of TNG last night in a direct connect hub. I was pulling over 200kb/s when I went to bed (a different user per episode times roughly 45 episodes; data comes in fast). I expect the transfers are mostly complete today.

      I know people who have been trying to transverse all the torrents for every season of Star Trek for well over a year.

      Then you don't know any real geeks. I snagged every season of Voyager, at 6-8gb per season, via BitTorrent at least a year ago. When the box set was released, the torrent took 30 seconds to find, and the download usually took 3 to 5 days.

      Simple fact of the matter is, you're not going to download every season of Star Trek in a timely manner no matter how fast your connection is. Between connection problems, tracker issues, and people who don't upload, it's a slow process. But great for people who are really patient.

      Horse shit. It took me 15 minutes to queue up seasons 3 & 4 of TNG last night. Tonight, I'll snag 5 & 6. With a little more dedication, maybe 3 to 4 hours worth of work in total, I could grab every Trek ever made in about a month's time - most of it spent waiting for downloads to complete.

    37. Re:No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I own every season of Stargate: SG-1 that has made it to DVD, ditto for Smallville (and Firefly). They sell for less than $50/season, and include extras.

      I live in New Zealand. Down here, every set of Stargate SG-1 sells for $150/set. In Australia, the very same sets sell for $75 - if you include shipping, that means I could get the whole lot for $620, as opposed to $1200 in town. Fucking distributors.

      Last I checked, TNG boxed sets were going for more than $200 a season. Fuck that for a joke.

      I have SG-1 season 8 on DVD. Two years ago, at the end of season 7, TV3 (who air SG-1) promised us that SG-1 would return in the next year. It was released on DVD about a month ago, and not on TV yet. (I'm happy I got to watch it without ads.)

      My Firefly was a gift - $80, and the second disc in the set is suffering bitrot, god dammit! Serenity is released here on thursday.

    38. Re:No way by David+Nabbit · · Score: 1

      Fox is reissuing the season sets of The X-Files at a lower price. Hopefully Paramount will follow suit sooner or later.

      --
      "Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing."
    39. Re:No way by Kethinov · · Score: 1
      direct connect hub
      Is not Bit Torrent. This kind of P2P is exclusionary, often letting in only those with fat pipes and lots shared; finding good hubs can be extraordinarily difficult. I will however concede that I know for a fact that with a good enough connection located in the right part of the world, direct connect can land you every episode of Trek in well UNDER two weeks. But this is nary an option for average joe Cable/DSL user who doesn't attend a private university with a T3.

      I snagged every season of Voyager, at 6-8gb per season, via BitTorrent at least a year ago. When the box set was released, the torrent took 30 seconds to find, and the download usually took 3 to 5 days.
      Finding torrents isn't the problem. Finding working ones is. The seeding just isn't there anymore. Yeah, I'm sure when the box set was released you could run the torrent, go screw a whore, come back, and have many an episode to watch. Bit Torrent is strong zero day. It weakens considerably over time.

      I could grab every Trek ever made in about a month's time
      Which is not two weeks. ;) I thought you were a L337 direct connect user with unlimited sources for downloads averaging in excess of 200kb/s? Why, you ought to be able to snag all 736 episodes (this includes the films, TAS, and the original TOS pilot) well within that deadline! ;)
      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    40. Re:No way by aug24 · · Score: 1
      The truth is, if they cut the price in half, they would likely sell more than double what they are now

      I read a while ago about a prof who explained to a load of music execs the profit curve you are referencing. They listened patiently while he explained that low prices meant more sales which, at the low end of the graph means more total profit. Then one put his hand up and said "yeah, but why not double the price at the low end and make twice as much money from every one of those high sales?".

      They really, really, don't understand that it's our money, not their money that someone else is holding on to.

      Justin.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  8. worth it? by fredistheking · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seeing that you will be paying more than $10 a disc is this worth it? Shouldn't you get some kind of discount for getting so many discs?

    Wait until it's at least 30% off.

    1. Re:worth it? by n0dalus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wait until it's at least 30% off.

      It already is 36% off! The original price was $3908.99.

    2. Re:worth it? by 6th+time+lucky · · Score: 5, Funny

      The sad thing is, it *is* at least 30% off...

      List Price: $3,908.99
      Price: $2,499.99
      You Save: $1,409.00 (36%)

      funnier... "You may also be interested in these items..."
      Above All Co. L74995CN Forearm Forklift Lifting Straps

      is it really that heavy???

    3. Re:worth it? by fredistheking · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So wait a little longer =)

      Seriously, who would pay this kind of money? There are the select few but I doubt their numbers are enough to keep this from getting clearanced at some point.

    4. Re:worth it? by Darkling-MHCN · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think I'll wait until the entire thing comes out on one single disc or cube or whatever it is data will be floating around on 5-10 years from now.

      Consumers are smart. They know this data isn't going anywhere, it'll be around for as long as they are (and then some). They'll hold out for as long as it takes to get a decent price before forking out any cash. Personally I don't think I'd consider paying much more than about $500 for this.

      Hollywood needs to provide better and cheapers ways of providing its content to consumers, if they don't they'll end up going the same way as the Music Industry. Whilst they don't immediately face the threat the music industry does (dvd quality video with 5.1 sound doesn't come down the wire that quick) eventually they will face it. Hopefully by that time (for their own sake) they'll think my offer is quite generous.

    5. Re:worth it? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Well, from what I can gather it's basicly a meta-box set where the surplus stock can easily be split into pieces.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely the lifting straps are to get you out of the sofa after the six years it takes to watch them all!

    7. Re:worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hollywood needs to provide better and cheapers ways of providing its content to consumers, if they don't they'll end up going the same way as the Music Industry
      Was I asleep when the music industry crumpled up and died? Must have been during President Dewey's administration.
    8. Re:worth it? by DeathByDuke · · Score: 1

      List Price: $3,908.99 Price: $2,499.99 and this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping. See details You Save: $1,409.00 (36%) You already get over 30% off.. Biggest ripoff ive ever seen for a DVD series. You can pay about £130-160 for 6-7 series of Stargate SG-1 on DVD boxset, but about over 300 for just 4 series of a star trek series..

    9. Re:worth it? by boio · · Score: 1

      It's only ~9% off the individual prices. You would think that you would get a better price for buying so much at the same time...

      The Complete Collection $2499.99

      Total Individual Price: $2754.84 (unless I can't do math, or missed an episode...)
      Star Trek - The Motion Pictures DVD Collection $121.98
      Star Trek The Original Series - The Complete Seasons $265.99
      Star Trek The Next Generation - The Complete Seasons $583.98
      Star Trek Voyager - The Complete Seasons $809.95
      Star Trek Deep Space Nine - The Complete Seasons $636.95
      Star Trek Enterprise - The Complete Seasons $335.99
    10. Re:worth it? by 6th+time+lucky · · Score: 1

      I can't be bothered going through *all* the listings, but the prices you quote are for discounted box sets, just a smaller set than the "Ultimate". I wonder what the total would come to for RRP of the individual DVD's of individual seasons... Thats how they get these "massive savings" figures...

  9. My god! by Rhinobird · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's full of Star Treks!

    I swear, I hear angels singing right now. And is it possible for divine light to shine on a webpage?

    --
    If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
  10. Was the link necessary? by ReformedExCon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Haha! Let's make fun of sick people!

    It was completely irrelevant to the topic at hand and serves no purpose but to make light of a seriously ill person (who subsequently died).

    There's something sickening here, and it's the editors' lack of respect for others and journalistic integrity.

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
    1. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you expect from somebody who STILL spams freeipods in their sig?

    2. Re:Was the link necessary? by myspys · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or maybe there's a problem with your lack of humor?

      (yes, this is a bit of a troll, but hey, it's monday morning)

    3. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...says the 480lb poster fused to his couch.

    4. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps it is this mentality that obesity is some kind of external force acting upon a person that is leading Americans to become so incredibly fat. As long as you can keep denying responsibility for your own disgusting, highly irresponsible and self-destructive lifestyles, the problem will just keep getting worse.

      She was not 'sick', she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives, consuming what the rest of the world produces until they (literally) keel over and die.

      Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ... people don't like hearing the truth.

    5. Re:Was the link necessary? by VirexEye · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apparently you missed the memo where laughing at dead people is now ok.

    6. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ..make light of a seriously ill person
      Methinks he's got more of a sense of humour than he's letting on.
    7. Re:Was the link necessary? by Golias · · Score: 2, Insightful

      She was not 'sick', she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives

      Okay, look. A 4'10" woman hits 250 pounds, it's conceivable that she just doesn't get to the gym and maybe likes her bon-bons a little too much, but this woman was way over 400 pounds. You don't just get like that from Twinkies and soap operas. Clearly there had to have been some kind of nasty metabolic problem involved. Could she have maybe fended off such a syndrome with an active lifestyle? Perhaps, but for all we know the same forces which were making her prone to obesity were also sapping her will to do much about it. Once that woman reached the point that she spent an entire day or two on that couch, somebody should have addressed the problem with both medical and psychiatric care. Six years of just sitting there? Unable to even get up for the bathroom??? That ain't right.

      By the way (only slightly off the topic)... It's easy for somebody who never struggled with their weight to accuse fat people of some moral shortcoming, never mind that they themselves don't always lead perfectly healthy lives either. I know plenty of rail-thin people who couldn't run to the end of the block and back, while I know other people who are overweight yet can easily run five miles and enjoy it. Body shape may be a very visible metric of whether somebody is in good physical condition or not, and whether they have a good sense of discipline about taking care of themselves... but it's far from the most accurate indicator.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    8. Re:Was the link necessary? by rootedgimp · · Score: 1

      Sadly that is what this world has come to, the line between humor and decency/morality has been completey demolished.

      I remember my rule of thumb a few years ago was "if something is more offensive than it is funny, don't say it.", I would take notice of just how many people would have something that was just too 'funny' to hold back, and they would throw it out in front of everyone, normally at someone elses expense (especially if it is directed at the least popular person in any given clique), the 'funny' part IMHO is that the person that throws the derogatory joke out would never have said such a thing had himself and the 'unpopular' person been the only 2 in the room. This is why I've termed this collective usage of 'humor' - "Social Points".

      Over time I've learned that my rule of thumb is sometimes not enough, you really do have to go the extra mile not to offend some people these days, it seems some people are downright determined to be offended and to be overly dramatic. I never thought I'd say this, but I believe that all of this does in fact stem from our forms of 'Entertainment' nowdays. People want to act like they are on some sitcom, they want to make fools of people, and they just love drama.

      I see the downfall already in motion, and it was started way before I was born. Look at how far it goes nowdays, though. Shows and movies like "Over There" and "Jarhead" -- If I had any family in the military right now, I'd be even more offended than normal when I see previews for movies and shows like those. Honestly, there are people getting killed, and we're sitting here watching reinactments of that fact while drinking sodas and eating popcorn. The line between entertainment and common sense regarding humanity has been thoroughly eliminated. I can guarentee you this fact in our backwards world - if I made a graphic movie about me running around slaughtering animals, like domesticated dogs and cats, although all of it would be special effects and no animals would be injured, it would be extremely controversial and I am positive that people, especially animal rights activists, would hold my movie responsible when some deranged kid goes nuts on the family pets-- and you know what? there could be a shred of truth to their claim. explain then, why movies with people killing people are totally overlooked in our days?
      Shows like 'The Sopranos glorify 'organized' crime, I had an aunt that was murdered by the mafia, case of mistaken identity/wrong place wrong time, there is nothing glorious about a defenseless woman getting stabbed 40+ times, but our kids are being brought up in an era where these types of figures are not only acceptable, but commended. Mankind is becoming more and more base by the hour, and noone is doing anything to stop it, moreover, they are profiting by accelerating it.

    9. Re:Was the link necessary? by AthenianGadfly · · Score: 2, Informative

      For those who object to the parent as lacking a sense of humor, I think there's something key to remember: it's easy to laugh at fat people partially because there's a somewhat submerged belief that it's at least partially their fault - I mean, if they would just stop being lazy and get their act together, they'd be fine, right? And, I'm sure, for some of us the issue is indeed simply one of disciplining ourselves to take better care of ourselves - excercise once in a while, watch what we eat, etc - it's true that everyone who's overweight is not a helpless "victim."

      However, in a case like this, it seems extremely likely that this person struggled with mental health issues as well - I think that there almost has to be something more going on for someone's skin to graft into a couch - can you even imagine what that would be like? A mental health disorder is most certainly not anyone's fault and is not something a person can overcome by sheer willpower (anyone who thinks otherwise has clearly not overcome mental health issues themselves nor been close to anyone who has).

      While there's nothing inherently wrong with finding humor in illness and death (hey - we all have a morbid streak in us), if it's OK to point to the linked article as humorous, then to be consistent it has to be OK to find AIDS, cancer, MS, smallpox, dementia, leprosy, and a multitude of other debilitating diseases to also be funny as well.

    10. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Fat people are fat because they eat too many burgers and don't exercise.

      Fat people are fat because they ATE too many burgers and DIDN'T exercise. Past tense. Fat people who are no longer eating burgers and are now exercising don't magically turn into thin people overnight.

    11. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There is something bizarre in US culture causing problems like this. Nobody hears of these problems in France, germany, africa, australia, russia, china, india... it's just the US.

      Unless the US is suddenly the only place where people have "metabolic disorders" or "catch obesity" or obestity is a "disease" then the culture of the fat people is to blame, not their bodies.

      Laziness and lack of personal responsibility, and little more.

    12. Re:Was the link necessary? by slashdotnickname · · Score: 1

      It's easy for somebody who never struggled with their weight to accuse fat people of some moral shortcoming, never mind that they themselves don't always lead perfectly healthy lives either.

      By your same flawed logic, I shouldn't tell my kids not to smoke if I myself smoke. Sure I should set a better example, but the lack (or presence) of moral authority does not make one's argument any less (or more) valid. Smoking is still wrong, regardless whether a smoker or a non-smoker tells you that. Plus, in this weight case, there's a difference between a non-perfect health lifestyle and being so obese that you're sitting in your own waste for years.

    13. Re:Was the link necessary? by notany · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The link was OK. I understand that some people live in the land of Political Correctness where anything remotely fundamental like sickness, death or god can not be made fun of. Sorry about that. But we others like to do so. Why?
      Because the laugh enables us to handle difficult questions of life. Laugh reveals the empty rhetoric we use to cocoon death and sickness. Laugh goes against what authorities want you to believe. Laugh is serious matter.

      --
      Dyslexics have more fnu.
    14. Re:Was the link necessary? by KylePflug · · Score: 1
      she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives


      Oh come on, give us some credit. She was at least a little atypical, don't you think?
    15. Re:Was the link necessary? by metlin · · Score: 1

      But only if they were old and Korean? ;)

    16. Re:Was the link necessary? by -brazil- · · Score: 1

      No. Obviously you don't get this kind of problem in places where people struggle against starvation, but it exists in pretty much all societies where people can eat what and how much they want to, if they want to. The US may on average have the biggest ratio of extremely obese people, but I see them here in Germany as well, and read stories of 8 year old kids that weigh more than a normal adult. Even in Japan, where people are still pretty slim on average, the police are complaining that their new recruits are increasingly overweight.

      Of course that only reinforces your other point about it being a cultural problem - but these days, culture in industrialized nations is global, with more or less minor local variations.

      --

      The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
      --Henry Kissinger

    17. Re:Was the link necessary? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      but this woman was way over 400 pounds. You don't just get like that from Twinkies and soap operas.

      Yes you do, if you don't move at all. Just walking from one room to the other is exercise that burns calories. Her only exercise was moving one arm between the bowl and her mouth. Those twinkies aren't going anywhere. Jeez, she was literally crapping in-situ, the undigested fat was probably working its way back into her body via reverse-osmosis.

      Could she have maybe fended off such a syndrome with an active lifestyle?

      Come on, she moved so little her skin grafted itself to the couch. I've had some long couch sessions myself I've got to admit, but at least every now and then I move a little to get more comforable. The idea of a piece of your skin that has remained static for so long that it's grown into its surroundings is obscene. That's the behaviour you expect from trees.

      It's easy for somebody who never struggled with their weight to accuse fat people of some moral shortcoming, never mind that they themselves don't always lead perfectly healthy lives either.

      That's a different argument. This woman "didn't always lead a perfectly healthy life"? Hell, she wasn't even close. She didn't even get up to go to the bathroom!. That's right, she was literally stewing in her own filth. They had to air the house with fans just so that the emergency workers could stand the stench.

      Your argument holds for people who could be called overweight, or even "chubby" by fashion standards. Obese is another thing altogether, and this example takes that one extreme further. You can blame her "genes" all you want, it's 90% her own concious fault, with the other 10% resting squarely on her friends and family who let it get this bad.

      She may have been ill, but if so it was a pyschological illness. I remember the story of the girl who existed entirely on potato chips and had a heart-attack. She tried to sue the maker of the snacks instead of accepting responsibility for her own actions. Why accept responsibilty when blaming others is so much easier.

    18. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a massive (no pun intended) difference between the obesity problem in the US and the obesity problem in other 1st world countries. Even here in the UK, where the problem is still greater than, say, continental Europe or Australia, and it is great--something like 25% obese--the problem is not on the scale of the US, where it is now rising above 60% unhealthily overweight.

      Having lived in the US and the UK, and travelled extensively, I can tell you there is something exceptional about American culture. The number of grotesquely fat people there is staggering. You go into a restaurant and you get an absolutely massive plate of food for little money, that is the norm not the exception. And in many parts of the country, there is totally inadequate public transport, so everyone has a car and does not walk anywhere. Ever heard the song 'Nobody walks in LA'? Well, it's not a lie. The most walking many of these people do is from their parking space into the shopping mall and back to their car.

      Yes, it is a well known problem, as the WHO has said, that obesity is becoming a worldwide epidemic. But the scale and proportions in the US are far, far beyond anywhere else. There is something seriously wrong with that place.

      And a final thing--this is not about people being able to eat what they want and how much they want to, i.e. it is not a question of affluence. Because it is the richest people, in the US and elsewhere, who are the healthiest, fittest people. Those are the people who can afford to go to gyms, buy magazines about nutrition, eat healthy, fresh food, etc. It is the poor who are worst stricken by obesity. They cannot afford these things, they have to eat cheap junk which destroys their body. They do not have time to cook fresh food because they are often working 2 jobs etc. Look at the pictures of people who were stranded in New Orleans. The poorest, and the most obese. It is a myth that this is about affluence or being able to choose what you eat. Quite the reverse actually.

    19. Re:Was the link necessary? by -brazil- · · Score: 1

      Wrong. There are differences in people's metabolisms that makes it much more difficult for some people to be slim than for others, and there are pathological cases of this that makes is nearly impossible for those so afflicted.

      --

      The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
      --Henry Kissinger

    20. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There are differences in people's metabolisms that makes it much more difficult for some people to be slim than for others, and there are pathological cases of this that makes is nearly impossible for those so afflicted.

      And these are in the tiny minority. If this was a biological problem, you would have seen it arising decades ago. And don't tell me it's about affluence--the US has been damn affluent for 50 years, and you only see this problem starting to arise in the last 15 or so. Have everyone's genes suddenly mutated so that they are all now victims of a low metabolism? With 60% obesity, are you going to tell me that 60% of people have suddenly acquired abnormally low metabolism?

      Of course, there are people with medical disorders, but give me a break--we're talking about probably 1 or 2% of the population, not 60%.

    21. Re:Was the link necessary? by -brazil- · · Score: 1

      It is a myth that this is about affluence or being able to choose what you eat. Quite the reverse actually.

      THAT in turn is not a myth, but just obviously wrong. Getting fat is impossible without the minimum affluence of being able to afford more food than you need - something that a considerable proportion of mankind can only dream of. It is only in societies where even those considered poor can afford lots of food where other factors become decisive.

      --

      The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
      --Henry Kissinger

    22. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a 'sickness' to just be a lazy shit who refuses to take care of their own body.

      Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Do you have any humane qualities at all?

      Perhaps when you become overweight/old/sick, your opinions may change and you'll regret your words. Until then, you'll just be a disgusting excuse for a human being.

    23. Re:Was the link necessary? by WraithRealm · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is only in societies where even those considered poor can afford lots of food where other factors become decisive.

      Hate to say it, and knowing attitudes on /., I'll pay for it, but this is not a completely valid statement.

      Having *less* food can often impact you in the same way as having too much. Someone who eats very little food (and in the case of poverty, not always the most healthy food) and does very little exercise in any amount (walking instead of driving/bus-ing) will invoke a much ignored fact that an inactive lifestyle with small amounts of food intake reduces the usage of energy (in any format) in the body, storing said energy as fat. Your body sees lack of use and low intake of foods the same way an animal hibernates in the winter.

      --
      I aim to misbehave.
    24. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called Prader-Willi Syndrome and it's genetic.

    25. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Being overweight is a choice. Unlike any other physical abnormality, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be overweight unless they choose to be overweight.

      A mental health disorder is most certainly not anyone's fault and is not something a person can overcome by sheer willpower

      Bull. Maybe not alone, but just like if someone with AIDS, cancer, MS, smallpox, or whatever else you can come up with refused to get help for their disorder, it's their fault. Yes, it may not be possible to overcome a mental health disorder on your own without outside help, but it's YOUR responsibility to get that outside help. If you don't, then it's YOUR fault.

      Just like, if you're moribidly obese, it's YOUR responsibility to go get help at a gym to lose the weight.

      Being overweight is, 100%, a personal choice. No one has to be overweight. If you're overweight, it's a choice. Talk to your doctor. They can get you the help needed to become healthy. NOT talking to your doctor is most certainly a personal choice.

    26. Re:Was the link necessary? by Stephen+H-B · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, dead people laugh at YOU!

      --
      Sick of WoW? Try the thinking man's MMORPG: EVE Online
    27. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm hoping that you're posting this in a confused attempt to make an opposite argument by some sort of reductio ad absurdum. If not, you have obviously never experienced severe mental illness. It can break down your will to do anything - all the way up to your desire to live. If one doesn't wish to live, it's very hard to pull together the necessary energy to actively seek out help - especially if one doesn't even want to get better - and yes, mental illness can and does cause this. Telling someone who is severely depressed, for example, that they should pull themselves together, get to the doctor, and work out a treatment plan is somewhat analogous to telling a cancer patient that they should really work on bringing down the size of that tumor; in both cases you're telling someone to do something they don't have the tools to do because of the very nature of their disease. I sincerely hope you never have to find out what this is like.

    28. Re:Was the link necessary? by RoLi · · Score: 1
      It is the poor who are worst stricken by obesity. They cannot afford these things, they have to eat cheap junk which destroys their body. They do not have time to cook fresh food because they are often working 2 jobs etc.

      Oh, come on. First of all, vegetarian food is much cheaper than meat. In every restaurant I look, the cheapest dishes usually contain no or only little meat.

      And in the supermarket it's the same thing.

      Also, I really, really have my doubts that this woman here had no time to cook because she had to work 2 jobs.

    29. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poverty is more complex than just income poverty. Of course, if we are only talking about absolute poverty, then you are right that in a country with high levels of absolute income poverty it is not really possible to have an obesity problem. The problem comes in the middle--when (fattening) food has become cheap enough for people that they can buy lots of it, but they do not have access to other basic necessities (physical activity, decent education), and they are still poor in relative terms, which contributes to low sense of self-worth etc.

      It is worth remembering that there are many communities in the US, like in the deep South, and also in black communities in New England, where many social indicators like infant mortality, life expectancy, etc, are at or below 3rd world levels. These are the same communities where people are becoming obese. So yes, they do have access to very cheap (highly subsidised in fact) unhealthy food, but they are also poor in other respects, i.e. they lack the basic ability to exist as dignified human beings in the society in which they live.

      For an introductory discussion of some of the issues involved in poverty measurement, I would recommend to you Amartya Sen's 'Development as Freedom'.

    30. Re:Was the link necessary? by notnAP · · Score: 2, Insightful
      No the link was not at all necessary in a journalistic sense. But my guess, looking at the post in its entirety, is that the link was absolutely necessary for other reasons.

      Consider that the post as a whole has an accusatory tone. To my eyes, it smacks of What kind of person, after all, would feel the need to buy this collection and at this price?

      If indeed I am not reading too much between roelbj's well thought out prose, then the Hey look at the fat person link is not at all out of place. Indeed, it becomes not only on-topic, but also necessary to further the point of We're not like them. by forwarding what is obviously in his minds another example of a subgroup he wants to publicly separate himself from.

      Furthermore, one can read into roelbj's inclusion of the link a need to connect with his reader through a mutual separation from suspect subgroups. Could the need to drive home the point We're not like them been a subconscious justification of the inclusion of the fat person post? And if so, from whence the need to emphasize commonality with others? Is that connection somehow lacking in roelbj's life? Hey look everybody... let's all do something together! Please?becomes a search for a link that nearly everyone would surely look upon in the same light as he, and the need for contact is fulfilled.


      In the interests of full disclosure... Yes, I struggle with my weight, but no am not presently nor have I ever been bonded with my sofa. I also have a nagging, hard-to-let-go-of belief in journalism, and that even Slashdot may someday climb one more rung on the ladder up towards a journalistic ideal.

    31. Re:Was the link necessary? by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ...

      I love it. You post about personal responsibility, then refuse to be held personally responsible for the comment. Classic!

    32. Re:Was the link necessary? by dfung · · Score: 1

      I guess I must be the only person on /. that watches Nip/Tuck. It's a series on FX network about two plastic surgeons in Miami. The season opener this year was exactly this story, but I didn't realize it was a real case.

      It was a good show the first year, slipped a little in the second and has went off on an extremely violent/misogynistic tear this year.

    33. Re:Was the link necessary? by acid_zebra · · Score: 1

      According to this graph: 1 in 3. So not very atypical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bmi30chart.png

      --
      -- No Sig is a Good Sig
    34. Re:Was the link necessary? by mandolin · · Score: 1

      At least part of New Orleans' problem is that their culture takes pride in deep-frying everything. It affects the more well-to-do as well.

    35. Re:Was the link necessary? by Retric · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even fat cells need energy. An extra 200lb's needs over 1000 calories each and every day to keep the cells alive. So if somone only eat's 1200 calories there is no way for them to get that fat. (And yes people can make it on 1200 calories they get extreamly thin but by doing so there are less cells to keep alive which help balance that out.)

    36. Re:Was the link necessary? by spaceorb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you are just way too sensitive in general. Don't like movies like Jarhead? Then you wouldn't like how grunts in the military act, because that is just the way we are. I have not run into one infantry Marine, present or former, that did not like what they did there.

    37. Re:Was the link necessary? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Actually, I just saw an episode of Nip Tuck recently where a lady was so fat and shat herself so much on the couch that her skin had fused to the couch and she was all infected. When they operated, she died.

      Now, is that a serious matter? Yes! Do I feel bad for people who are in that shape? HELL YES! Is it ok to laugh about it? YES!

      The reason why we joke about this is because it does several things...it helps us feel better about ourselves and all of the myriad of serious problems we all have going on in our lives...it encourages us to AVOID the kind of behavior that can potentially lead to being in this situation...and it stops us from getting depressed and angry about every single horrible problem in the world, because frankly if we did, we'd probably kill ourselves.

      If people don't like what was posted, avoid it. Don't push your morals onto the rest of us though.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    38. Re:Was the link necessary? by KylePflug · · Score: 1

      (BMI > 30) != (400lbs + skin grafted to couch)

    39. Re:Was the link necessary? by WraithRealm · · Score: 1

      Also realize that you're assuming that there will be a need for that extra 1000 calories. If the person is not doing anything in the manner of exercize (or even motion for that matter, i.e. sitting / laying in front of a computer screen / TV all day) then the necessity of consuming said 1000 calories becomes over-kill and more detrimental than helpful.

      Besides, I can't assume what background you have in sciences, but you should remember something basic from phys-ed 101: Fat cells are Chemical Storage Devices, designed to maintain / retain energy that is not in abundance in the organism's environment; i.e., thermal energy from lack of heat (as you see on whales) or lack of sustinance in food (unable to find proper nutrition).

      Yes, a person would require more energy the more fat they retained, but take into account that most people who become overweight stay that way, or get worse, because the required energy consumption to maintain the same locomotor skills as a skinnier person gets harder to achieve, so people don't attempt it! They sit down more often, allow their muscles to attrophy from lack of use (which then requires less energy to sustain), and the body responds by storing more energy. Activity beyond normal locomotor functions (walking briskly, running, riding a bike - something outside what the body considers a "normal" expenditure of energy) and a proper intake of chemical energy (a level not too far below "normal" for the person) will force the body to find the energy elsewhere - the fat cells. Fat is used, weight decreases (of course, if muscles have attrophied and are now being rebuilt, there will be a noticable increase in weight, but eventually it will return to a stable decline (which, btw, is why alot of people stop exercizing - they believe their activity isn't helping them anymore, which of course is false. Judgement solely on weight is a poor measurement.) and the cycle will continue until a stable input/output ratio comes back into play.) and those fat cells to go away.

      --
      I aim to misbehave.
    40. Re:Was the link necessary? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      How many people want to or even know how to properly eat vegetarian? The average person will not be satisfied with eating only (or mostly) vegetables and while vegetarians may be very rare among the obese most people prefer to eat what they feel like (and for most people that involves meat), not what their diet says is healthy.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    41. Re:Was the link necessary? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      She wasn't living alone so someone could have dragged her to a psychiatrist. People with worse disorders can be patched up to a degree where they can continue to live happily, I doubt there was no way to prevent her from becoming like this.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    42. Re:Was the link necessary? by OMGtehRed · · Score: 0

      fuck YOU nigger

    43. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And don't forget that before you get through the series the RIAA/MPAA will have stopped your ability to see the screen without the requisite licence....

    44. Re:Was the link necessary? by Retric · · Score: 1

      If you did not need to burn calories then you would not need to breath air. So clearly even while asleep your using energy. Now fat cells take energy in several froms. A biger gut takes more energy to move per breath, you have more capilary's which means your hart needs to pump harder. Each of those fat cells needs to spend energy to maintain "life" even when they don't seem to be donig anything.

      You hear things like " but resting hardly uses any calories at all, we may only burn 50 calories an hour." from places like www.weightlossforall.com/calories-per-pound.htm but when you think about it 50*24 = 1200. So they are saying that somone on a 2400 calorie a day diet uses 1/2 of that energy just staying alive. Now an increase in body weight also increases the amount of energy it takes to move so walking 1 mile burns 2x the energy if you are 300lb vs 150 lb. All of this adds up the fact that mainting the same diet/exercise plain will not keep droping pounds at the same rate. (This is part of the reason why you get stuck at specific wiegths with a specific diet / excersise plain and why the first few lb's are always the fastest to go.)

      PS: Yes that's how bad things are before I run spell check.

  11. More like Penultimate by ErMaC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's missing The Animated Adventures, which Paramount has said they plan on releasing on DVD at some point next year.

    And I think it's sad that of the Star Trek stories to be posted, this makes the front page where as the passing of Michael Piller doesn't.

    --
    "I want to get more into theory, because everything works in theory." -John Cash
    1. Re:More like Penultimate by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      It's missing The Animated Adventures [wikipedia.org], which Paramount has said they plan on releasing on DVD at some point next year
      Of course there's something missing. Later they will release another Ultimate Collection, which includes this animated series but will be missing other crucial material. So you'll have to buy both series to own it all.

      I thought this was common practice these days.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:More like Penultimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure they also didn't post anything about George Takei officially announcing that he's gay.

    3. Re:More like Penultimate by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      My god....have I forgotten to surf Trek Web and other sites since there's no new Trek? I remember Michael for the excellent job that he did on Deep Space 9. He will be missed.

      --

      Gorkman

  12. Where's the torrent? by Werrismys · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's like CD's in 1994... the sheer amount of data works as a copy protection...

    --
    'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
    1. Re:Where's the torrent? by cablepokerface · · Score: 1

      True. But they can make this collection magnitudes smaller by just removing the cutscenes.

      oh, wait ...

      never mind.

    2. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's no deterrent to the determined fanboy.

      Believe it or not, you can collect all (all that remains at least) of Dr. Who's 27 seasons, plus 4 movies, plus just about every interview on TV or radio in the UK about Doctor Who over the last 30 years (and most of the remaining 10 years or so), from BitTorrent sites. That's a similar scale, if not greater, and there are a hell of a lot more Star Trek fanboys than Dr Who fanboys.

      My Doctor Who folder is 216 GB, all collected inside a few months. You can bet that you can collect all of Star Trek the same way... all it takes is patience and broadband.

      And when you're looking at patience vs. $2500... that's worth a lot of patience.

    3. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this it: startrek_all.zip? - 169.6GB, estimated download time: OMGWTFBBQ minutes, -1 seconds.

      (I'm kidding.. :) - although from an initial survey of the P2P networks, it looks like most of those shows are already accessible. You could snag them all if you were insanely patient and had a godly internet connection).

      Although as a (perhaps not a real) Star Trek fan, I have no idea who'd actually want to buy Voyager - you'd have to pay me to watch it again. It's absolutely terrible television. It is to Enterprise as the original Battlestar Galactica is the the new BSG series (and sorry, I actually liked Enterprise from season 2 onwards).

    4. Re:Where's the torrent? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Is this it: startrek_all.zip? - 169.6GB, estimated download time: OMGWTFBBQ minutes, -1 seconds.

      Nope. Not big enough. At an estimated 5GB/disc, I imagine this set weighs in at about one terabyte. Sounds absurdly lot, but also consider the time you need to watch 212 DVDs... you'll have a few months to download as well.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Why do insist on charging way more than average for Trek stuff when the geek audience has the means to avoid playing along?

      I'm currently downloading all 7 seasons of StarTrek DS9, including the DVD extras, using BitTorrent. It'll take a few weeks to finish, but the total space required is only 65GB; 65GB only costs about $25 these days (@ $0.40/GB for IDE HDs).

      Help my download go faster by joining in on the torrent. Here are the Azureus magnet links:

      ST:DS9 Season 1 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:O2GOUZEKKNEUDQYZMWQ6PUCZBB7SVV ZF
      ST:DS9 Season 2 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:MS6AALM4P2PK45CE2APLFS7LT6NYBD GB
      ST:DS9 Season 3 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:UUBDZZJ2EOLNIKTMUOANYVRSEHGCAF XT
      ST:DS9 Season 4 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:XP6KPVEJTDS625PN6CRKZKPWXILPVF 2I
      ST:DS9 Season 5 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:WM6KRXD2BZVDDEYEATL3KLHNAGCVQV LJ
      ST:DS9 Season 6 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:OSLSLJW54QHW5JQPY5D3MCUAHIKRUV X5
      ST:DS9 Season 7 - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:ALPUUDY2CPTVVZV665XUDTUV5AGCSV RB

      "arrrrrrr! be seeing ye, landlubbers!"

    6. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      working links. awesome. anybody got some for TNG too? or where should I look?

    7. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

      Fucking thieves.

    8. Re:Where's the torrent? by un1xl0ser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PLEASE don't use XVID/DIVX!

      Without the multiple audio tracks it wouldn't be worth the download.

      Ogg/MKV please.

      --
      v4sw6PU$hw6ln6pr4F$ck 4/6$ma3+6u7LNS$w2m4l7U$i2e4+7en6a2X h
    9. Re:Where's the torrent? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Take your 169GB zip file and divide by 212 (number of disks) and you get about 800MB per disk.

      I routinely watch avi movie rips at this data size without any noticable problems...

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    10. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus it's zipped so it'd probably save a few GB.

    11. Re:Where's the torrent? by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Spoken like a true moron.
      What do you guess a ogg/Mkv container usually contains (besides h264, recently)?

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    12. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few weeks? It only took me six days a couple years ago.

    13. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any extra space savings from the zip should be small, since DivX (or any other modern codec) is already highly compressed in a way optimised for the format. The zip is just an easy way of packaging them all up into one file; they could have used tar but everyone understands zip files.

    14. Re:Where's the torrent? by ideonode · · Score: 1

      Why do insist on charging way more than average for Trek stuff when the geek audience has the means to avoid playing along?

      Why has this been modded-up? I'm not going to get drawn into the debate of whether it's stealing or whether it's copyright infringement, but either way, it's illegal.

    15. Re:Where's the torrent? by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      Uh . . . Magical Musical Bits? And purdy moving pictures?

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    16. Re:Where's the torrent? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to get drawn into the debate of whether it's stealing or whether it's copyright infringement, but either way it's illegal.

      I'm not going to get drawn into the debate of whether it's illegal or not, but either way it's ethical. Torrents are a perfectly ethical means to fight back against absurd pricing practices like these. Remember, an unjust law carries no moral force.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    17. Re:Where's the torrent? by rikkards · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't watch it on a big screen though. I just bought one and looking at what DVD shrink did artifactwise to squeeze a DVD onto a 4.7G DVDR makes it annoying. I would upgrade to a Dual Layer DVD but good luck getting affordable blanks.

    18. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

      MPEG-2 is a horrible codec by modern standards. If you're ripping from DVD, you get the best quality not by ripping to lower-bitrate MPEG-2. (So squeezing a dual-layer DVD in to a 4.7GB DVD is a HORRIBLE way to rip a DVD.) You want to use a more efficient codec, such as DivX or H.264. Then, you can have 99% of the quality in 33% the file space. (Not that I'd violate the DMCA and do this, mind you. :-) But, for example, my uh, home movies, yeah, my home movies, look better in 1500kb/s H.264 than they do in 5000kb/s MPEG-2.

      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
    19. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My personal experiences, on a 12' screen (yes, that's 12 feet, 144 inches, 16:9, projected in HD):

      I compared a downloaded episode of TNG (~350mb, xvid) with the raw DVD rip (~2GB). I could see very little difference. The xvid copy was nearly perfect, and at a fraction of the space.

    20. Re:Where's the torrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole thing takes up ~254 GiB of disk space - that costs almost as much as the DVDs...

  13. Ironic! by SolitaryMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I was reading the article "480-Pound Woman Dies After Six Years On Couch" (second link) I had a "Breakfast Bistro Sandwich" ad on the top of the page. What an irony!

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
    1. Re:Ironic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the fuck is that irony?

    2. Re:Ironic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think it's interesting that with as many fat fucks as read slashdot most of you are still laughing through your pudgy cheeks

    3. Re:Ironic! by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


      Heh. Somewhere I have a screen capture of a news story about a todler dying in a house fire, while his infant little brother was rescued by firemen. On the page is a banner add for an Iomega CD Burner which says "Burn, Baby! Burn".

      ~Will

      --
      sig?
    4. Re:Ironic! by MilenCent · · Score: 2

      When I was reading the article "480-Pound Woman Dies After Six Years On Couch" (second link) ...

      That's the most depressing thing I've heard in months!

      No, I've never been too interested in the Darwin Awards either. There is something about the death of an actual human being which I cannot laugh at. Call me a killjoy, maybe....

  14. What makes a movie worth watching over again? by Quirk · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Most geeks must have good memories. The amount of info that has to be assimilated and managed is, to say the least, considerable. It follows most geeks would be able to retain a storyline and much attendant material from watching a movie once or maybe twice.

    What makes owning this set of dvds and, presumably, rewatching the material worthwhile?

    The only movies I've watched repeatedly are Casablanca, Apocalypse Now and to a lesser extent Alien and Blade Runner, but I've no idea why I can watch Casablanca and Apocalpse Now over and over. I know the material very nearly by heart, but have no idea what the mechanism is that hooks me in.

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
    1. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe because Casablanca is the greatest screenplay yet written (so sayeth Brian Cox as Robert McKee in Adaptation.) It's like saying that the only book you can read again and again is Ulysses and not being sure why. Casablanca is so perfect in formula that there are actually several plot holes of which few people notice, realize or care about. I feel the same way about Lawrence of Arabia, the full cut is four hours long, but I've watched it over a dozen times. It's just that good.

      But... the point of this kind of set is not to see something again and again. Hell, as one person pointed out, if you did one episode a day it would take you two years to finish. And when you've gone through the entire set, hell, there will be a new series on TV by then. After that new series finished, begin rewatching your set, after two years, you'll probably have forgotten most of the episodes. This set is about possessing it, having he capacity to watch ANY given episode on a whim at any given moment. To no longer be the slave of the fickle schedules of TV re-runs. All that jazz. It doesn't have to be Casablanca, very little of it ever comes close. All it has to be is A LOT of Star Trek.

      --
      Yup...
    2. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by waynemcdougall · · Score: 4, Funny
      Maybe because Casablanca is the greatest screenplay yet written

      Ahh yes...Of all the space bars in all the worlds, you had to re-materialise in mine.

      The one starring Myra Binglebat and Peter Beardsley was definitive.

      --
      Recycle PCs and build a wireless community network www.hillsborough.org.nz
    3. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by darkgray · · Score: 1

      When I was about 5 years old, I loved to read comic books. Trouble was, my parents wouldn't buy me new comics every day. In order to slake my thirst, I started rereading my comics.

      However, rereading something isn't too much fun, since you already know what happens. My brain solved this by selectively wiping the storylines from my mind, so I could read it "fresh". This worked out quite nicely, and when I started reading Discworld novels at age 15, without affording to buy new parts all the time, I managed to reread every Discworld novel I owned three times (I currently have around 40 books by Pratchett).

      Unfortunately, while this saves money, it's made me fairly useless when it comes to discussing books I've read, movies I've seen, anime I've watched, etc, with friends, since I've already forgotten most of it. It also makes reading sequels published 4 years later impossible without rereading the entire series first.

      Point is, while I can easily memorize 100 decimals of pi, I can also enjoy watching reruns of DS9. And fail history exams. :)

    4. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      Most geeks must have good memories. The amount of info that has to be assimilated and managed is, to say the least, considerable. It follows most geeks would be able to retain a storyline and much attendant material from watching a movie once or maybe twice. What makes owning this set of dvds and, presumably, rewatching the material worthwhile? The only movies I've watched repeatedly are Casablanca, Apocalypse Now and to a lesser extent Alien and Blade Runner, but I've no idea why I can watch Casablanca and Apocalpse Now over and over. I know the material very nearly by heart, but have no idea what the mechanism is that hooks me in.

      What no Office Space? Oh, wait a minute, some of us live it, not watch it.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    5. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by squireofgothos · · Score: 1

      But at least you have taste... I wind up watching Hackers and Wing Commander over and over again mostly because I want mindless background noise...
      Was I not supposed to admit that I owned those?

      /Overshare

      --
      There is no sig...
    6. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by QMO · · Score: 1

      My wife wonders why I want to watch movies and read books more than once, since I already have the information from the first time.

      The thing is, I don't watch movies and read fiction to gain information, but to EXPERIENCE the story. The experience isn't the same the second time, but it is often still a fun experience.

      If all I wanted was the information, I'd read plot summaries.

      Then, of course, there are a (proportionally) few books and movies that have enough thought put into them that one CAN'T get them all in only a few times through.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    7. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've had this same discussion with other people who don't understand the desire to watch a movie over and over again. The point they always make is that I know how it ends.

      The point I always make is that it doesn't matter if I know what's going to happen, watching the movie provides enjoyment. Emmersing myself in the movie's world, even when it's become familiar to me, is enjoyable.

      I compare it to listening to a song. I don't just listen to a song once, and then never again because "I already know how it ends". If I like it, I listen to it over and over again. For me, it's no different with a good movie.

      Watching a movie and quoting the lines along with the characters is the movie equivalent of singing along with your favourite song.

    8. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Have you never read a book more than once? I don't think it's a matter of memory. If it was enjoyable, do it again. What, did you just have sex once, and never again because you remember how good it was (and all times you were drunk and don't remember, don't count!)? "No thanks, honey, I still remember when we did it 10 years ago!"

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
  15. And I thought those Spike TV marathons were long! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone please beam me up before it's too late!

  16. Does it include cool Yoda and Han Solo posters? by Neeth · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh wait... Star Trek

    That explains the 212 DVD's too.

    --
    Yes, I am the one with the legendary sig.
    1. Re:Does it include cool Yoda and Han Solo posters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHA You just wait, Lucas will be making his little TV show and probably about 10 other spin offs too, then what is going to happen in the trek vs. wars uh... war! Personally I like both and could care less about the war, but it seems the major griping point of most star wars fanatics is the fact that there are so many tv shows and movies. Now it seems that there are 6 star wars movies, soon to be a television show compared to 10 star trek movies and 5 series... that is not that far behind! I bet by 2025, it is an even playing field!

    2. Re:Does it include cool Yoda and Han Solo posters? by korbin_dallas · · Score: 1

      Wait for it......

      Bam, theres your 26 dvd star wars collection.
      Theres 4 versions of each film, plus the original Christmas Special, and the 'enhanced' Christmas Special.(Nooooooooo)

      Did anyone else notice on the SW:Ep3 extras, Rik McCullom even says, "When George is tinkering with the film again, I hope (my scene) gets put back in"? Man, even the producer knows George can't stop fiddling with it all. And its on the extras disk...hahahahahaha.

      Noooooo.. bwahahahahaahaa... Star Wars makes me laugh.

      Anybody got John Carpenters email, I want him to make a Bolo(Ogre) or Berserker film.
      "Yeah, anything but a direct hit might stun the crew, but their machine will still try to kill you." OGRE.

      --
      They Live, We Sleep
  17. Hard sell? by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll admit that even a very casual fan like me finds that set rather attractive looking (though its presence in my house would remove any possibility of a date so long as it was visible). However there are a couple problems. I'm too lazy to do the math and see if buying the whole set at once is a bargain at all (I know that some would say the conveniance of having it all at once is worth it anyway.) Another problem is that if someone is hardcore enough of a fan to want all seven seasons of Voyager, well, they probably have it already, like the first user review on Amazon indicated. It is however a nice display of the great treatment Trek has gotten on DVD these last couple years.

    --
    Yup...
    1. Re:Hard sell? by ne0nex · · Score: 1

      I did the math, and you actually save a couple of hundred bucks getting the "ultimate" set...

      and by doing the math i mean amazon did the math

    2. Re:Hard sell? by campaign_bug · · Score: 1

      To be honest, the TNG box set that came in the Borg cube a couple of years back looked a hell of a lot nicer. If I go and spend $2400 on a box set, I'd better be getting a nice looking box as part of the deal!

  18. HD-DVD or Blu Ray Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    212 DVD's? I'll passed and wait for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray version!

    1. Re:HD-DVD or Blu Ray Version. by John+Nowak · · Score: 1

      Yes!! Just imagine, 10x the resolution on 212 conveinient blu-ray discs!

    2. Re:HD-DVD or Blu Ray Version. by my+$anity++0 · · Score: 1

      So maybe we can all see the individual molecules on the set? I'd prefer 1x the resolution on 21.2 convenient blu-ray discs.

    3. Re:HD-DVD or Blu Ray Version. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Well, you'd get fewer DVDs, but you wouldn't get better quality.

      They could probably redo the films, but I would imagine that TOS, TNG, and DS9 are forever trapped at low resolution. I'm not sure about Voyager, but I'm pretty sure that Enterprise was done in HD.

      Of course, since TNG is probably the bulk of the DVDs, you'd save some space there...

  19. Soooo.... by kisielk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does anyone have a torrent?

    1. Re:Soooo.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or at least a mirror. The fat woman won't load normally.

  20. Too much for too much by Lifix · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is only worth it if: 1) You are a huge Star Trek Fan (no problem I'm sure these people are out there) 2) You are a fan of 4+ of the serries: It's cheaper to buy any 3 seasons individually + all the movies 3) You aren't already collecting the dvds. Now here is my POV: I am a huge tv on dvd collector but there is a limit to how much I am willing to spend (example: I'm going to pick up the BuffyBox when it comes out, even though I already have the first four seasons.) I am also a fan of all of Star Trek, and would love to pick this up, except for the fact that I bought TNG as it came out, DS9 as it out and voyager as it came out. I'm not saying that this is intended for everyone, infact if they sell more then say, a thousand of them, I will be impressed. Anyway just my $.02 oh and wtf is with Enterprise costing 120+ per season before discounts?

    --
    In nature, there are neither rewards or punishments, there are only consequences.
    1. Re:Too much for too much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just disappointed they don't have an uber-sexy box!

      From the picture it just looks like a collection of ordinary box-sets tossed in together, without any special effort to make it look nice, etc. For $2000+ I'd expect a new design at the very least.

    2. Re:Too much for too much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shooot for 2k i'd better et patrick steward as my personal chofer, michel dorn dressed as warf as my body guard, Jolene Balock and christine park and I do a three way for 4 days strait.

  21. No fat woman??? by Twisted64 · · Score: 1

    What's with this redirect? http://www.netauthority.org/ looks like a hilarious website, but why ban real stuff as well? I WANNA SEE THE FAT WOMAN!

    --
    Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
    1. Re:No fat woman??? by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      Are you using iiNet? I got the same redirection.

    2. Re:No fat woman??? by Twisted64 · · Score: 1

      Yes. Good lord, it's a conspiracy? I'll never upgrade to the DSLAMs now...

      --
      Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
    3. Re:No fat woman??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. I beleive we use iinet at work

    4. Re:No fat woman??? by Zilch · · Score: 1

      iiNet here too - same redirecton. I had no idea they censored the internet! Let me ask Whirpool!

      Zilch

    5. Re:No fat woman??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm on Optus and get redirected.. the conspiracy grows bigger...

    6. Re:No fat woman??? by Zilch · · Score: 1

      So it's just us Aussies that are being protected from blasphemy then? (John Howard, are you listening?)

      Zilch.

    7. Re:No fat woman??? by Zilch · · Score: 1

      Can someone how isn't behind some sort of national firewall mirror the link? Not because I want to see a fat lady, but having someone decide to block it for me kinda bugs me.

      Zilch.

    8. Re:No fat woman??? by Twisted64 · · Score: 1

      The site itself is obviously meant for a laugh, but not being able to click "view banned sites" and have it disappear is beyond a joke. It works for other sites, but not this one, dammit.

      --
      Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
    9. Re:No fat woman??? by AussieJimbo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, WTF is going on here?

      Who the hell are Net Authority and how are they censoring my internet use?

      The pic probably isn't worth looking at but that's not the point. I do not appreciate some unknown entity interfering with my connection.

    10. Re:No fat woman??? by MooUK · · Score: 1

      It's hard to tell whether that site is a joke or not... The examples they throw out suggest they are. That, and the stupidity of the comments on some of the banned sites.

    11. Re:No fat woman??? by Zilch · · Score: 1

      Yeah the register has this:

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/21/reg_victim _of_blasphemy_hoax/

      Still not sure how they are doing it though... or if it's done by the fat lady website why they only choose to redirect Aussie IPs/

      Zilch.

    12. Re:No fat woman??? by imroy · · Score: 1

      Not iiNet, Dart/Hotkey here. Does iiNet go through connect.com.au as well? I don't know who this so-called net authority is. It seems to run by some fundamentalist kook. Their database listing though is a hoot. The Walmart site is listed for containing pornographic material, hateful material, blasphemy, offensive political material, and bestiality and/or interracial relationships. In lots of mainstream sites are listed, every one having those five same traits. It looks like people can submit sites and the admin is so extreme in his religious views, he'll list almost any site.

    13. Re:No fat woman??? by narkotix · · Score: 1

      optus here too....same page...hmmm...

      --
      We played dungeons and dragons for 3 hours.....then i was slain by an elf
    14. Re:No fat woman??? by narkotix · · Score: 1

      did you start a thread up yet? Im awaiting yours!!

      --
      We played dungeons and dragons for 3 hours.....then i was slain by an elf
    15. Re:No fat woman??? by imroy · · Score: 1

      Ok, so the Reg got an email. But why are some of us being redirected when trying to view this supposedly blocked web site? I tried getting jengajam.com using JAP and it came up fine. So who is redirecting us and why? Is it an upstream ISP, or something that jengajam.com has somehow setup? This is really puzzling.

    16. Re:No fat woman??? by m00j · · Score: 1

      i am using iiNet and get redirected. This pisses me off to no extent! I don't give a crap about what they think is and is not suitable. Besides I have seen goatse / tubgirl / lemonparty etc. I hardly see how this could be worse!

    17. Re:No fat woman??? by weharc · · Score: 1

      I'm connected through Telstra and I get redirected to the same Net Authority lame arse web site. Oh the intrigue / suspense! This story should end up being a case of Your Rights Online. The right to see fat women!

    18. Re:No fat woman??? by gravij · · Score: 1

      I am on iinet and I get the site just fine. I'm in Perth btw.

    19. Re:No fat woman??? by khedron+the+jester · · Score: 0

      And I quote...

      "# Thou shalt not post materials concerning bestiality, including interracial relationships.

              God did not intend for different species or races to intermingle sexually. Any content that contradicts this natural law, directly or indirectly, is strictly forbidden."

    20. Re:No fat woman??? by MooUK · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's more than stupid enough to be a joke. But it's also stupid enough to be a real view of some people.

    21. Re:No fat woman??? by Zilch · · Score: 1

      Yes

    22. Re:No fat woman??? by Barto · · Score: 1

      I'm in Japan and I got the same redirection to www.netauthority.org (which is a funny site, but not what I want to see). Slashdot got trolled, methinks?

  22. No!!! by mrselfdestrukt · · Score: 0

    Everything was all cool and peachy until I read the bit about the woman that became one with the couch. Damn!

    --
    "I used to have that really cool,funny sig ,but it got stolen."
  23. ALL of them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ooo, does it have the one where they modify the main deflector, meet a strange new lifeform, and have to make some crucial decision about ethics and/or sexy blue aliens? 'cause I think that's the only episode I missed...

    1. Re:ALL of them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...you missed Voyager? Why would you regret that?

  24. LOW PRICE by masterpenguin · · Score: 2, Funny

    i love the badge next to the price that says "Low Prices!"

    somehow $2,400 isn't that low of a price to me, given that's half of my car loan.

  25. BUT You Save $1,409.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    HOT DAMN! I can use the extra cash for my spock ears!

  26. what in the by soniXX.noob · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    what in the hell is this 'Net Authority' bullshit? I WANT TO SEE A FAT WOMAN DAMMIT

  27. It's worth 11.80 per disc, depend on qualtiy by Sleeping+Kirby · · Score: 1

    It's on the border line of being worth it for me. It all depends on how well the quality is. I know I can't get HD quality for the old stuff but if it's all direct copy from a bad VHS... then I don't think it's worth while.

    --
    please... let me sleep... a little more... yay, no longer annonmyous coward.
    1. Re:It's worth 11.80 per disc, depend on qualtiy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      K, I'll let you know when I'm done watching it?

  28. Possible urban legend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems very similar to this one:

    http://www.snopes.com/medical/emergent/couch.htm

    Ha ha aren't fat ppl funny :-/

  29. It's not complete until it contains by SecureTheNet · · Score: 5, Funny

    a set of pointy ears!

    --
    SecureThe.Net - Practical Resources for Securing Systems
  30. Animated to be released on Dec 31st by jbridges · · Score: 4, Funny

    According to Amazon, the Animated Star Trek Series will be released on Dec 31st, 1969.

    Star Trek - The Animated Series (1973)
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005JN6D/002-75 16313-1096059?v=glance&n=130

    So find yourself a gateway into the past (and try to avoid saving any sexy pacifists by accident).

    1. Re:Animated to be released on Dec 31st by rupert0 · · Score: 1
      You may order it now and we will ship it to you when it arrives
      They have the gateway....they will ship to you...
      --
      RUPERT! I TOLD YOU TO WATCH THE BAGS! You were looking at the boys again, WEREN'T YOU.
  31. referal fee by Celt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm curious how much trektoday get if somebody buys that set through their handy referal link in this slashdot story, nice that the editors left the link intact.

    --
    "WebTV: bringing the Internet into the shallow end of the gene pool since 1995" - Martin Bishop
    1. Re:referal fee by mike2R · · Score: 1
      Amazon currently offers two different payment schemes that you can choose from: Classic and Performance. Though, in reality, Classic is hardly a choice that makes sense. The Classic payment schedule pays a flat 4 percent on items purchased after a visitor clicked through from an Amazon Associates placed link.

      The Performance plan starts at 5 percent and ramps up based on the shipped volume of products. If your affiliate links generate between 1 and 20 units shipped you'll get the starting rate of 5 percent. On the other end, if your affiliate links generate shipments of over 10,000 units you'll get 7.5 percent. On top of the base rate (indexed to products shipped), Amazon's Performance program also tacks on bonuses of 2.5 percent for certain "Direct Link Items" and a 1 percent for "Easy Links."


      from here
      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    2. Re:referal fee by bfree · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Would you rather:

      • slashdot.org took the referer fees
      • amazon pocketed the extra cash
      • slashdot doesn't actually edit the submitted story for a change
      Another poster suggests each purchase through that link is worth around $125 btw.

      Perhaps slashdot should setup referer accounts for all the sites it pimps, and then publish and use the revenue to create some form of slash fund, perhaps paying lawyers to fight some of the laws slashdot readers seem to hate so much, or funding development on slash dependencies or ...

      --

      Never underestimate the dark side of the Source

  32. Oh no by Uukrul · · Score: 1
    On the other hand $2500 will pay for a lot of hookers.
    So there is another fan on Futurama make fun of Star Trek.
    --
    My city: Barcelona.
  33. Just over three weeks long by fmwap · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So...it's a very, very boring night at work...
    Here's the tally, this doesn't include any special features, commentaries, or otherwise useless filler:

    ST TOS:
    47 mins, 79 eps, 22 discs, 3,713min = 2days 13hrs 53mins
    ST TNG:
    45 mins, 178 eps, 48 discs, 8,010min = 5days 13hrs 30mins
    ST DS9:
    45 mins, 176 eps, 48 discs, 7,920min = 5days 12hrs
    ST Voyager:
    45 mins, 172 eps, 47 discs, 7,740min = 5days 9hrs
    ST Enterprise:
    42 mins, 98 eps, 27 discs, 4,116min = 2days 20hrs 36mins

    The Motion Picture (Directors Cut): 136mins 2 discs
    The Wrath of Kahn (Directors Cut): 116mins 2 discs
    III: The search for spock: 105mins 2 discs
    IV: The Voyage Home: 119mins 2 discs
    V: The Final Frontier: 107mins 2 discs
    VI: The Undiscovered Contry: 113mins 2 discs
    Generations: 118mins 2 discs
    First Contact: 106mins 2 discs
    Insurrection: 103mins 2 discs
    Nemesis: 116mins 2 discs

    Grand Total (Minus Commentaries, deleted scenes, additional features) :
    212 Discs
    32,638 minutes
    3wks 1day 15hrs 58mins

    References:
    Amazon.com product info
    IMDB Star Trek search

    1. Re:Just over three weeks long by Kjella · · Score: 1

      212 Discs
      32,638 minutes
      3wks 1day 15hrs 58mins

      Greatest SW freak in existance: Pricless

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Just over three weeks long by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure, but if you're using MPlayer's '[' and ']' keys, you can view all the episodes at 10x normal speed. Then you only need 54 hours and a lot of tea to calm the nerves.

    3. Re:Just over three weeks long by KylePflug · · Score: 2, Funny
      SW freak

      Whoops. Now's the part where you run for your life.
    4. Re:Just over three weeks long by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Three weeks?... Well, I finally watched Gokuu and Uubu fly off into the sunset last night, so I'm kind of in the market for another ridiculously long bit of geek viewing. This is alarmingly tempting, though monstrously overpriced.

      The sad thing, though, is:

      TOS: 47 min
      TNG, DS9, Voy: 45 min
      Enterprise: 42 min

      ... those ad breaks just get longer and longer, huh?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    5. Re:Just over three weeks long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's more interesting is that clearly we are watching 5 minutes more adverts per hour than in the 60s (13 minutes), and 3 minutes per hour more adverts than a mere 10 years ago (15 minutes). Yes, 18 minutes of adverts and TV trailers per hour.

      I expect that by 2010 it'll be 20 minutes of adverts and TV trailers per hour, but broadcast TV will be starting its downward spiral to be overtaken by online content distribution.

      As an aside does this Ultimate Star Trek collection come with a Star Trek duvet cover and the seven of nine pillow cases?

    6. Re:Just over three weeks long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the commentary and bonus features ?

    7. Re:Just over three weeks long by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      The commentary will take another three weeks, one day, and 15h58m...

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    8. Re:Just over three weeks long by aaronrp · · Score: 1

      With other related material like the Animated Series and the Trekkies movies, and any extras on the DVDs, I'm sure you could get it up to a month. Clearly Paramount is missing out by not having a Star Trek channel on cable. All Star Trek, All The Time.

      shudder

    9. Re:Just over three weeks long by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Ha ha, Wow! You know you're a geek when...

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    10. Re:Just over three weeks long by CSIP · · Score: 1

      3wks 1day 15hrs 58mins

      Thank-you, Data.

      --
      "Nyquil - The stuffy, sneezy, why-the-hell-is-the-room-spinning medicine."
    11. Re:Just over three weeks long by dogwelder99 · · Score: 1

      Three weeks? Still not enough entertainment for $2500. For that kind of money I can get Marina Sirtis to prance around my apartment naked for 3 weeks.

  34. OSCon WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe somone should have submitted news that there was an OSCon in my vincinity to begin with???!?

    BASTARDS, now i missed it!!

  35. HAHAHA fattys! by bazmail · · Score: 1, Funny

    HAHAHA fatpeople crack me up!
    They are natures clowns.

    Anyway it works out at about 12 bucks per DVD which ain't so bad. Not much of
    a bulk discount though.

  36. REFERRAL LINK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone on slashdot seems to SCREAM when people post referral links in book reviews and the what not. Now there's a blatantly OBVIOUS REFERRAL LINK in an article submission, and no one gives a damn. WTF???

  37. Im calling your BS out. by rootedgimp · · Score: 3, Insightful
    She was not 'sick', she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives, consuming what the rest of the world produces until they (literally) keel over and die.
    Uh, if that isn't 'sick', what is? Something you can see wiggling around under a microscope? The variation you described does indeed constitute sickness, and I'd say we can at least agree millions of Americans fall into its catagory. As you said, she was a 'typical member of...' -- just because it's commonplace, doesn't mean it isn't 'sick'.

    Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ... people don't like hearing the truth.


    No, actually you posted AC because you know your opinion is wrong, although you are entitled to it. If you look at all the replys to this "Was the link necessary" post, you will notice a strange phenomenon, all 5 of your type posted AC, only 1 posted such under his account. I don't call that watching your mod point karma, I call that being ashamed of your view, which you should be, the sad part is you don't know why you are ashamed of your view, so you try to justify it by your ability to proclaim yourself above it.
  38. i love subjects by Anthrox · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll wait a few years then i'll just buy it on one disc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile _Disc/

    1. Re:i love subjects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here's a link for those who are too lazy to remove the / at the end of the parent's link:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile _Disc

    2. Re:i love subjects by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bah. By the 24th century, if you want a holographic version you just tell the computer to generate you one, and it'll produce ST:TNG or whatever.

      Rumours that the technology to generate a complete ST episode using only a computer program exists today are, of course, wholly unfounded.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  39. Aha! Finally, the perfect plan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Find geekish product on Amazon.com
    2. ???^H^H^HUse affiliate link in Slashdot news submission
    3. Profit!

    ... okay, okay. It doesn't really look like there's an affiliate code in there, but I couldn't resist :)
  40. Archive.org for Australians by a.different.perspect · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Archive.org for Australians by Twisted64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, at last we can see... oh my God! Well, thank you, we did ask for it :)

      --
      Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
    2. Re:Archive.org for Australians by AussieJimbo · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link a.d.p.

      I didn't drill down any links but I fail to see anything offensive about the page itself. Whether it's truthful or not there is no excuse for it's censorship.

      Can't believe there are some self appointed thought police out there interfering with Australian net use. This example might be trivial but realistically this is no different to the great Chinese firewall and could prevent Australian access to legitimate content that some faceless authority deems inappropriate.

      Not happy, Jan!

    3. Re:Archive.org for Australians by Zilch · · Score: 1

      Looks like the owner of the site is redirecting a random range of IPs to cause a stir and generate more traffic to his site. That's my theory anyway. Here is a comment from the author of the redirect site:

      http://www.rudism.com/projects.shtml

      Zilch.

  41. Offtopic but related: Christians (was Re:what in t by troff · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... wtf?

    "You too can be a part of the Net Authority and help us eliminate offensive material from the Internet. By reading and understanding the Internet Acceptable Use Policy, and our guide on how to spot offending material, you can arm yourself with all you need to do God's work on the Internet." ... "let them know that the Internet, while being an extremely important and useful tool in today's society, also contains many dark places that may lead their souls astray from the path of God. Do not be afraid to scare them! The Internet is a scary place!"

    That fucking Wedge Strategy. AGAIN.

    And check their "Acceptable Use Policy". They've got FIVE COMMANDMENTS!

    Jengajam's supposed to be registered to a guy in Israel. This NetAuthority's registered to someone in FLORIDA.

    Fine, call me a troll, I don't give a rat's ass. But explain to me again HTF letting the U.S., an increasingly Christian-oriented nation have control of the roots supposed to be a GOOD thing again?

    I just wanted to follow a hyperlink which was probably gonna be a funny after reading a Slashdot article about the Trek DVD release.

    NOW I'm being told, and I quote:
    <blockquote>
    "Since this policy applies to the entire Internet, we felt that it should be spelled out as simply and as universally understandable as possible.

    As a result of this, we decided that the best way to write this document would be to model it after something that everyone knows and follows (or at least should!) in their daily lives already. We chose God's own law--The Ten Commandments."
    </blockquote>

    That is so fucking it. I have had enough.

    And I REALLY fucking wish the "confirm I'm not a script" keyword wasn't "almighty" for me to even post this.

  42. You may also be interested in these items...?!? by drphil · · Score: 1

    Wow. The "You may also be interested in these items..." portion is completely off the mark for this Amazon item.
    Got It.
    Nope, Got that
    Hmm. Got that, too.
    Nope, got it.
    got that one covered. ...
    Shouldn't it be redirecting you to other SF?

  43. Q about Voyager eps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Halfway through one of the seasons of Voyager, they cut the running time from 44 to 42 minutes and recut some of the episode when they were repeated. Does this set have the episodes in their longest shown format?

  44. 200+ dvds = a lot of space... screw that, use HD by cheekyboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now personally, If I had than many eps, id put em all on HD-converted to mpeg4 or something.
    One 600giger will take care of it, though a lof of CPU time to convert though, but more portable
    than 3 folders of 80 DVDs each.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  45. If I weren't by imperator_mundi · · Score: 0, Redundant

    If I weren't an honest citizen I could even think that buying an external 500gb hd and downloading it from the internet would be far cheaper way, more confortable to browse (be serious you don't really want 200+ dvd) and I could look on the net for sanskrit subtitles when I feel I want it exoteric.

    If just I weren't...

    1. Re:If I weren't by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1

      Why don't they release it like that? I'd buy it. Not for $2500, probably, but they would be able to make a nice profit.

  46. Australians have been redirected to Net Authority by the site itself. Sorry to disappoint, but this is not the work of some shadowy government agency.

  47. Beam It Up Yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    torrentsport it scotty! :)

  48. Also by blincoln · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's missing the theatrical cut of The Wrath of Khan, which I vastly prefer to the extended/alternate footage television version on the two-disc set - and I'm not even a big enough dork to own ANY of the television episodes.

    Over two thousand dollars and they can't throw in a second copy of the best Trek film evar? What a swindle.

    Man, I think the first Slashdot post I ever made was a complaint that the two-disc set didn't include the original release. What were they thinking? Extended is great. Replacing certain scenes - that I thought were great - with alternate takes, and then not including both versions a la the Terminator 2 DVD, that's lame.

    --
    "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  49. No, but it was funny by TallMatthew · · Score: 1

    At least to some people. Decency and humor are subjective. What offends you doesn't offend me and vice versa. There's a new trend in America that we have to conform to the standards of people who are easily offended. That's because in America we're under the influence of a population who insists that what offends them offends God and so must be eliminated. And being that most of these people are less than comfortable with physicality, they complain about meaningless things like this under the guise of being kind and serving The Lord (TM).

    1. Re:No, but it was funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A troll by any other name... Please, how could someone be so ignorant? Back here in reality, it is almost always the liberal, pc run amok crowd that are offended by anything and everything even slightly disparaging of anything other than the predominately christian and white population. Please go outside of your parent's basement and get a reality check.

  50. Unless you live in a country with PAL or SECAM by Phil+John · · Score: 1

    where, because of the differing frame rates, american series and all films are played ~4% faster. Over here you'll only have to site through 31,202 minutes, or roughly a day less ;o)

    --
    I am NaN
  51. Re:Offtopic but related: Christians (was Re:what i by KylePflug · · Score: 1

    Dude, misdirected anger. If it seems too kooky to be true, it usually is. NetAuthority.com is a total hoax.

    Here's the author's website with his statement on NetAuthority: http://www.rudism.com/projects.shtml

  52. Can't wait to pirate it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, eagarly await the avalability of this via my favorite piracy channels.

    Yeah, there is no fucking way I'm dropping that kind of money on something like this, it's a non-starter. So, the Mafia won't be out any money anyway...

  53. pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get it... How can Star Trek TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT seasons boxes still be selling at twice the price of (e.g.) Lost season 1 DVD box?

  54. Re:Offtopic but related: Christians (was Re:what i by troff · · Score: 1

    I take your point. Especially the bit about the anger. Indeed, I'm taking that reality check to the teller at the bank. Consider me chilling.

    But then why's the redirection happening?

    Jengajam and NetAuthority are registered in two different places and two different IP addresses, running on (thank you, nmap) two different operating systems.

    Why is it that, to see the content of the linked article, you have to hit a historical cache? Why, and for that matter, how is the redirection happening? ... and what kinda kicks do you (no, not you Kyle, I know) get out of pulling crap like this? ESPECIALLY WHEN we've something GENUINELY like this in the Discovery Institute's Wedge Strategy? The sort of crap that actually got an airing in court?

    Last few days, Slashdot's been putting out the articles on the diminishment of Science and the rise of Fundamentalism in America. And by the way America, the fallout of this crap hits other countries too, y'know.

    It's enough our idiot politicians suck up to yours and saddle us with the FTA that's causing NO end of troubles... but now the Christian Right's trying to slime its way across the world until all the atlas is blood-red.

    So Rudis's NetAuthority page is really, let's be honest, NOT a good idea. That's at least heading in the direction of making airplane crash jokes. On 9/11. In earshot of grieving victims.

    Ew.

  55. eBay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I already own all the movies and series except Enterprise. I put the sets together a hell of a lot cheaper than list price by buying new, sealed collections on eBay. They look quite nice in my living room.

    Most people on eBay aren't willing to fork out enough cash for a whole series, so I was able to get TNG, for example, for about $350 - a bargain compared to the $700+ retail price.

    Just be careful that you buy the authentic, non-Asian "collector's edition" sets.

  56. Not even a good deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A quick search on dvdpricesearch.net shows you can get the contents of this collection for $2347 delivered, ordering from deepdiscountdvd.com and playcentric.com. This amazon collection is pointless. Is 'one-click' purchase worth $150?

    (BTW, it's fitting that the captcha word for this post was 'spanked')

  57. 240 Gb HD for the episodes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as it seems, individual episodes are offered as 350M downloads in p2p. so a 300G HD is enough for the whole collection. it would seem wise to sell this stuff on an external HD for about $500.

  58. You may also be interested in these items... by vrmlguy · · Score: 1
    Above All Co. L74995CN Forearm Forklift Lifting Straps

    Yep, you'll need those to lift the damn thing.

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
  59. For $2500.00 - buy a new DVD Theater & Netflix by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    For that money you can buy a Netflix account and a DVD (DVD, surround sound, HDTV) home theater which will give you many more viewing options.
    the other story sounds like something from www.fark.com

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  60. remember to get up once in a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It must have been something she ate...

  61. The case of the amazing SHE-SOFA by notany · · Score: 1

    Without knowing we can't know if his problem was mental or neurological. One thing is sure tough, it was not completely metabolic. No one gets that fat with metabolic problems only if they try to control their weight. If you eat only water, veggies and some rice you just don't grow that big. Digesting your food consumes lots of energy. Producing all that salt-acid etc. consumes energy even if you don't move. So if people with some extreme metabolic problem eat low calorie food and don't move there is limit how big they can grow. And that limit is much less than with this lady.

    It is most likely her problem was mostly mental. But there is chance that she suffered from rare neurological condition where you are always extremely hungry. For these people life is constant suffering. This kind of rare conditior many times results people to eat themselves to dead. But we can't be sure.

    If that man who was feeding her would have given her only rice, vater, veggies and vitamines she would be living today.

    --
    Dyslexics have more fnu.
    1. Re:The case of the amazing SHE-SOFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Preach on, I knew a lady about the same heft has a hippo. I sugested all sorts of things that she might like as excersize- go to the beach, swim, etcetc. All I got was; OOOOh I'm so tired from rooting for tiger 'im a one hit wonder' woods. Or mabie tomorrow. etc etc. etc. Well I let it go cause it was my aquaintences mom and none of my business. Old cow croaked almost a year to the day after she had a tempertantram and refused to get out of bead and be responsible for her life.

  62. West Wing? by thevoice99 · · Score: 1

    You can get the entire west wing series for less than $200 bucks yet Paramount wants to screw everyone with this crap. Paramount should just sell the TV rights to NBC, let Aaron Sorkin write it, get some West Wingesque actors, and call it Deep Space 10.

  63. Only protects from the lazy... by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

    Hey, I remember my friends back in the day bragging about pirating a certain groundbreaking FPS game, Arj'ed onto 50 floppy disks... Of course, no CD burners back then.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
    1. Re:Only protects from the lazy... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Floppies? Ick.

      I remember when I tried to re-install Windows 95 (a legal copy, mind you) from a floppy disk set back in the late 90s. Get halfway done, then run into a bad floppy. I tried everything I could, but I didn't have the tools at the time to format a floppy in an unusual format, and the data I'd managed to recover from the floppy didn't fit in 1.38MB.

      I didn't run Linux at the time, so I'd never heard of superformat.

      In short, one bad floppy can ruin a whole install sequence. And floppies don't age well. CDs can scratch, but they at least have error correction built into the filesystem.

    2. Re:Only protects from the lazy... by Mostly+Monkey · · Score: 1

      It's too bad MS didn't include a couple .PAR disks. ;)

      --
      Chika Chik-ah... do-e ow ow.
    3. Re:Only protects from the lazy... by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      All you have to do is use Win'95 to diskcopy a: a: from a good windows install disk to a blank. It's now 1.7mb formatted. Then erase all the files (deltree /y *.*), and copy the recovered files from your bad disk to the new good one. Hopefully the files that were affected are not critical to the install.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    4. Re:Only protects from the lazy... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      WONDERFULL, where were you TEN FREAKING YEARS AGO!!!!!!!

      Darn you to heck.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    5. Re:Only protects from the lazy... by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      > WONDERFULL, where were you TEN FREAKING YEARS AGO!!!!!!!

      Working in a shitty little computer store and wishing more people would buy CD-ROM drives. :)

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  64. What now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They must have mistaken the stardate of the release for the price??

  65. Borg Cube by E8086 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    $2500!? Where's the cheap gimmick that makes it worth that much? How about TNG in the Borg Cube box? If I were to get all those individually at deepdvddicsount(dot com) I could get it for about $150 less, or $750 less if I leave out Voyager. Greedy Paramount wants to sell Star Trek at $100 a season, I guess they're going for PROFIT over total sales. SG-1 can be had for $30-40 a season, for those who don't like math, that's 60%-70% less, yes they're only 22eps/season while Star Trek is mostly 26eps, but even that doesn't make it worth the more than doubled price. If you want TNG and DS9 I suggest a cheap, or not so cheap, TV card or even a TiVo and SpikeTV, 2 eps of DS9 and 3 of TNG, you'll have the entire series in a couple weeks.

    --
    F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    1. Re:Borg Cube by faedle · · Score: 1

      ... with SpikeTV's annoying watermarks and live-action "commercials for other shows in the corner."

      No, thanks. I'll just rent Star Trek from Netflix.

    2. Re:Borg Cube by Larryk12308 · · Score: 1

      Who set the price? Was it Quark? What do they think we're made of? Latinim?

  66. Re: a lot of hookers by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 1

    Now THAT is my kind of Deep Space Nine.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
  67. Just in time for high-def by michaelmalak · · Score: 1
    With HDTVs firmly established and High Def DVDs coming out in less than a year, this could perhaps be the last big fleecing of the DVD collector. It puts George Lucas to shame.

    Of course, all the movies could benefit from high-def, but I believe half the TNG shots were filmed rather than videotaped. It could be weird switching back and forth between resolutions within a single episode, but should be available as an option. Any collector would want that option.

    1. Re:Just in time for high-def by GSV+Ethics+Gradient · · Score: 1

      Although TNG was shot on film, it was only ever edited on videotape so even if the original film existed (which it doesn't) they would have to re-edit the episodes from scratch - which wouldn't be economically viable.

  68. Validity? by aurelian · · Score: 1

    Huh? It's a science fiction show. Given that the live-action shows themselves are frequently contradictory (when did they first meet the Romulans again? What do Klingons look like? What are stardates?), what grounds are there for saying the cartoons are any different?

    1. Re:Validity? by JabberWokky · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Here are the answers to your questions. Note that they may be spoilers to some people:

      Romulans were officially known to Starfleet during TOS "Balance of Terror", although the Vulcans and Romulans had been engaged in minor disputes and actions for a long time before that, some of which were known to other races and Starfleet... the Vulcans hid the existance of Romans by shrugging them off as radical Vulcan splinter factions, although at least some non-Vulcan individuals knew of them.

      Klingons look like they do in TNG. During TOS they were Klingon-Human hybrids (well, technically Klingon-Engineered-human hybrids) due to an accident involving theft of military genetic enginering technology left over from the Terran Eugenics Wars. See Enterprise season 4.

      Stardates are a way of creating a system of time that accounts for differences in relativity. As a result they vary (and they vary in speed) depending on where you are in the galactic plane. The system was revised between TOS and TNG, at the same time pulsed warp made it necessary to revise the warp factor (to a logarithmic scale with 10 being infinite speed).

      There are some much nicer places of contradiction. Those are pretty well established.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    2. Re:Validity? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      Doesn't make sense. The Romulan War was hardly a minor action. It was three years of hard fighting in space vessels barely more advanced than tin cans. The Romulans were first officially known to Starfleet during that war which took place more than 50 years before TOS, not during the events of "Balance of Terror".

      Starfleet didn't know what a Romulan looked like because they didn't allow prisoners to be taken, and they negotiated by audio subspace radio. They apparently only fought naval actions too. No hand to hand combat. By the time of TOS, technology had advanced to the point that Spock was able to hack a webcam on the bridge of the Romulan bird of prey, to get Starfleet's first look at a Romulan.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    3. Re:Validity? by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      Sorry, I was taking "known" to mean "knowing who they are"... i.e., known by Starfleet to be an entire society originating many thousands of years ago from Vulcan. You are, of course entirely correct as well. It's a bit like saying that North America was discovered by Vikings when a bunch of people had wandered across the Bering land bridge quite a bit earlier. Both are correct in different contexts.

      BTW - as far as minor actions, I was referring to the skirmishes that were going on for thousands of years up to the 23rd century. They aren't canon (most occur in the books), but they fit very nicely into the Trek history and are generally accepted. Mostly confined to raids and intrigue on Vulcan itself.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    4. Re:Validity? by FourStarGeneral · · Score: 1

      And just where did you get your information? (Evil Starfleet Security glare...)

      --
      Resistance... is futile.
    5. Re:Validity? by aurelian · · Score: 1

      That's great, but those are all post-hoc explanations, attempts to rationalise inconsistencies which were either not appreciated or were considered unimportant by the various scriptwriters involved. As you say yourself, there are plenty more throughout the Star Trek shows and movies. If you can rationalise them, why can't you do the same for the cartoons?

    6. Re:Validity? by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      They are a witches brew of pro, semi-pro, and fans-who-became-pros stories published by the various companies that have had the rights to Trek over the years (from Paramount to Pocket, from FASA to Bantam) in a dozen different media. People like writing stories to account for gaps, whether it be about two minor characters in a play by Shakespeare (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern), or why Klingons looked different. Of *course* the real reason is the reality of a 60s tv show makeup budget, but it's a living plotline and eventually somebody will come along and say "this is why".

      Every individual author working on a single novel does the same thing, coming up with various points and rationalizing them using the characters and events, nudging facts around until they form a working whole, and then writing and publishing the result. In the case of Trek, it's a huge universe written by hundreds of authors at this point. Everybody grabs a niche and fits a story in. Of course several of them are intended to "fill the jarring gaps" left by preexisting stories -- that's often where the interesting stories are located.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  69. Sulu's story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This makes the front page but Sulu being gay doesnt?! At least CNN had the wiseness to make that story a front page affair!

  70. I wonder if there is an Easter Egg by hrieke · · Score: 4, Funny

    After watching all the DVDs, does William Shatner appear and tell you to "Get A Life"?

    --
    III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIIIV IIVIIIIIIVIII...
    1. Re:I wonder if there is an Easter Egg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They bundled it with the SNL sketch:
      "I'd just like to say to everyone at this convention, get a life! I mean you're insane. You took an enjoyable job I did as a lark, and turned it into a nightmare! *points at random Trekker* You? You're what? 45? I mean, have you even kissed a girl?"

      Then again, that last comment could be directed at slashdotters too...

    2. Re:I wonder if there is an Easter Egg by zakezuke · · Score: 1
      After watching all the DVDs, does William Shatner appear and tell you to "Get A Life"?

      Or this from "Just for laughs"


      "I'm not a Starfleet commander, or T.J. Hooker. I don't live on Starship NCC-170... (some audience members say "1"), or own a phaser. I don't know anybody named Bones, Sulu, or Spock (picture of Dr. Benjamin Spock is shown on screen behind him). And no, I've never had green alien sex, but I'm sure it'd be quite an evening. (Pomp and Circumstance begins playing.) I speak English and French, not Klingon! I drink Labatt's, not Romulan ale! And when someone says to me 'live long and prosper', I seriously mean it when I say, 'get a life'. My doctor's name is not McCoy, it's Ginsberg (nude picture of Dr. Ginsberg shown on screen). And tribbles were puppets, not real animals. PUPPETS! And when I speak, I never, ever talk like Every. Word. Is. Its. Own. Sentence. I live in California, but I was raised in Montreal. And I believe in priceline.com, where you never have to pay full price for airline tickets, hotels, and car rentals! I've appeared onstage at Stratford, at Carnegie Hall, Albert Hall, and the Monkland Theatre in NDG. And, yes, I've gone where no man has gone before, but... I was in Mexico and her father gave me permission! My name is William Shatner, and I am Canadian!"
      --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shatner
      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    3. Re:I wonder if there is an Easter Egg by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Was that from the SNL skit? I thought is was at first, but then the whole "priceline" part threw me.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    4. Re:I wonder if there is an Easter Egg by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Was that from the SNL skit? I thought is was at first, but then the whole "priceline" part threw me.

      The "I am Canadian" speech was first a molson commercial... but a parity of it was on something called "Just for laughs" which I quoted verbatium from wikipedia... hince the quotes and the link.

      The SNL sketch I don't remember all that well and isn't quite as funny.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  71. No no, funny is funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny is funny. There's no such thing as a topic that is off limits. Religion, sickness, mass murder, cancer, suffering are all valid topics for humor.

    Humor should make you uncomfortable.

    And besides, funny is funny. Anything else is secondary.

  72. Netflix by toupsie · · Score: 1

    Just sign up for Netflix and you can watch these anytime you want without wasting the storage space of 212 DVDs.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  73. Not mankind; Americans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americans are becoming more and more base by the hour.

  74. For me, its "Rick's" by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

    Rick's Bar (Rick's Cafe Americain) is so perfect in terms of decor, lighting, the people that even though its obviously a set you wish you were there and owned the place, its that's perfect.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
  75. Re:200+ dvds = a lot of space... screw that, use H by Bananatree3 · · Score: 1

    Or...Just wait until they come out with the 600GB Video iPod! Then you can watch ANY Star Trek season on the go, when you want to!

  76. Trekkies by Understudy · · Score: 1

    How can this be complete without a copy of Trekkies ?

  77. I think I just creamed my pants... by Markus_UW · · Score: 1

    I think I just creamed my pants... i'd better go look for some new ones...

  78. Perfect Solution by solomonrex · · Score: 1

    I'm selling a Genuine Unofficial Free-Standing All-Space-Age Temperature-controlled Star Trek DVD Display Case that is cleverly disguised as a fridge. Now you can enjoy a ridiculously immature niche obsession without scaring off desirable potential mates.

    A couple notes:
    1. It includes a automatic light that turns on when you open the door, neatly illuminating the collected genius of Gene Roddenberry.
    2. It can keep the DVDs at a cool 40f, the optimum temp for beloved DVDs and meatloaf.
    3. Your official date-night story will be that the second fridge is for meat from hunting. I suggest packages of ground meat on the first shelves and condiments in the door on date-nights. To complete the ruse, you may want to buy a gun - but don't refer to it as a 'Phase Pistol,' 'Phaser Rifle' or "'Lil Wheaton".
    4. Feel free to keep Voyager in our super-cold 'torture chamber' conveniently located at the top. Now you can really mean it when you say, "Braga, revenge is a dish best served cold."
    5. Pull all Star Trek refrigerator magnets and fan art off and store in box prior to dates. This applies to your current fridge, as well.

  79. ultimate? pfah! by option8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    from the editorial review:

    The only omissions from the set are the animated series (1973-75), which as of 2005 was not available on DVD, and the two officially sanctioned fan-focused documentaries, Trekkies and Trekkies 2. So perhaps The Ultimate Star Trek Collection isn't quite as ultimate as it could be...

    'nuff said.

  80. Another thing missing, apparently by smrubin · · Score: 1

    Is all the material from the bonus DVDs included with the season sets. These were exclusives from Best Buy and its associated companies. So it's even a little less ultimate.

  81. THE PRICE IS NOT THAT HIGH!!!! by joerdie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I dont think that 32 cents an episode for a good t.v. show is too much to ask. Is it expensive? Yes! Is this better than watching the garbage on today? Yes!! !!Golly Geepers!!

    1. Re:THE PRICE IS NOT THAT HIGH!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where the hell are you getting 32 cents an episode?

    2. Re:THE PRICE IS NOT THAT HIGH!!!! by pedroloco · · Score: 1

      I think he either flipped the numerator and denominator or he misplaced a decimal point.

      Not counting the movies:

      703 episodes / $2500 = 0.28 episodes per dollar

      $2500 / 703 episodes = $3.56 per episode

  82. yeah, but it still will have "spanish internation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And still all that live in Spain will continue viewing it in English.
    This "translation" literally sux.

  83. Where's the Bittorrent? by DavidBrown · · Score: 1

    I mean, c'mon, I'm waiting here.

    --
    144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
  84. Its a joke, read the author's comments here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  85. A bit off topic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't think of a better place to say it.... Is it me, or are Amazon's "x out of y customers found the following review helpful" like a simplified version of slashdot moderating?

  86. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  87. Try $70 for SG1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They only recently dropped to the $40 range. Up until about when season 7 or 8 was released, it was $70 a set. Most stores won't even carry them, save your movie-centric ones (Suncoast, Media Play, Best Buy, etc). I finally started buying them (damn good show but the price was just too steep) once they dropped below the $50 mark.

    Although, I do agree, the high price and resulting low availability kept me from purchasing most of TNG and any of TOS. Every time I'd force myself to pick up a Trek box, I'd look over and see The A-Team, MacGuyver, Batman Animated (1992), etc for less...combined. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to guss what's gotten pruchased over and over.

  88. That's because. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    "West Wing" is 100% mind-control propaganda designed to lull people into a false sense of love for America and a false perspective on reality abroad. Of course you can get that for less than a series which is only full of shit about 50% of the time.


    -FL

    1. Re:That's because. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, west wing is about the hope that we could elect someone that's not an idiot.

  89. THEY LEFT OUT THE CARTOON!! by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
    They left out the short lived two year cartoon from 1973-1975.

    That is the ONLY set of shows that I have not already watched to completion, and they left it out.

    What's the point if it is not complete?

    Besides, don't you want to see Kzinti threaten to eat vulcans? (One of the few episodes of the cartoons was written by Larry Niven - it was basicall a re-write of one one his better short stories about Slaver weapons and Kzinti and he even kept the Kzinti)

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:THEY LEFT OUT THE CARTOON!! by Kelson · · Score: 1

      I was wondering about that one. I suspect Paramount wants to pretend the cartoon never existed, but there were a couple of -- well, yeah, maybe only two -- good episodes in there. The Larry Niven one was good (even if it mashes the Trek and Known Space universes together), and so was the one in which Spock travels back to his childhood on Vulcan.

  90. Animated Series -- Boxed Set! by Zobeid · · Score: 2, Informative

    For whatever its worth (not much to most people, I guess), the animated series was released some years back as a boxed set of Laserdiscs. You remember Laserdiscs, right? They were just as good as DVDs in most respects, only bigger. And yes, I have the discs, I just don't have a working LD player at the moment.

  91. Re: Oh wait...Star Trek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they didn't change the facts...the Borg shoots first.

  92. 212 dvds = $54 worth of physical materials. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    Quite a markup.

    $54 bucks worth of dvd's.
    $10 worth of packaging.

    Sell for $2500 - wow- nice markup!

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  93. Self-fulfilling by drwiii · · Score: 1

    A box set comprised of box sets. Now we know how the Borg started.

  94. Re:No figurines AND no tabletop gaming by korbin_dallas · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and wheres every item ever published for Star Fleet Battles????

    That'd add another 500lbs to the shipping...

    Aw heck, btw, anyone got the original Star Fleet Battles pocket game?
    What was that 1977???

    --
    They Live, We Sleep
  95. Only Americans, huh? by cbreaker · · Score: 1

    So, there's no morbidly obese people in other parts of the world? Bullshit. While there may be some indication that the average weight of the average american may be rising - that statistic has absolutely *nothing* to do with an extremely overweight person with an obvious mental condition.

    How can you even call someone like this *typical*?

    Your post smells of so much bullshit I can smell it over the web. If you really believe what you said, instead of just repeating what someone else has said, you wouldn't have posted anonymously. Personal responsibility? Yea, good showing.

    Fucktard.

    Ohh, and PS. Buying nice things doesn't make us fat. It just means we're not impoverished.

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  96. Re:No figurines AND no tabletop gaming by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

    I have it, buried somewhere in my apartment... Along with the early supplements.

  97. but on the plus side.. by Savatte · · Score: 1

    it does come with a lifetime supply of condoms (that would be necessary for someone buying this set).

  98. Just a money grab! by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

    This is one last desperate money grab before they release all the same material on either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Why grab $2500 from a nerd once when you can do it twice?

    1. Re:Just a money grab! by ichthus · · Score: 1

      No, that's the Star Wars universe you're thinking of.

      Yeah, I got burned by the "One last time... until Special Edition" SW caper.

      --
      sig: sauer
    2. Re:Just a money grab! by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how this is different. Are you saying that they aren't going to release any of the included Star Trek material on the new formats?

    3. Re:Just a money grab! by ichthus · · Score: 1

      Uh, yeah. I have an inside source that this is it. CleverNickName, can you confirm?

      Actually, I don't know what format the TV shows (TNG and forward) were originally shot in, but I doubt HD releases would be any better than DVD. (Surely, consumers are smart enough to realize this. No?) As for the films, I'm sure Paramount will want to milk any HD revenue they can from the ST franchise. (And, good for them, IMO)

      My comment was simply meant as a jab at Lucas for being the great capitalist that he is and going to market "One last time" with the original* Star Wars trilogy -- not mentioning that a new, Special Edition version was shortly to come.

      *original, of course, is a fluid term. Apparently, these had been edited/touched-up/enhanced since the Original-original release.

      --
      sig: sauer
    4. Re:Just a money grab! by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that a HD format wouldn't benefit the TV shows. Remember a few years ago when they first released a few feature films to IMAX? The films hadn't been shot in IMAX but were later scaled up and with decent results. I would guess that some processing could be done on standard def footage of TV shows that would make them look much better on HD screens than DVDs do. Simply having a progressive scan source rather than an interlaced one would make a large difference. As for the SW stuff, I have laser disk rips of the originals. I don't have anything else. The rips are ok on my TV but on a computer monitor you can see flaws.

    5. Re:Just a money grab! by MegaHyster · · Score: 0
      I didn't search to confirm...

      Reviewer: Mojo (Los Angeles) - See all my reviews The ONLY Star Trek series that can be released in Hi Def is the ORIGINAL SERIES. That show was shot and finished on film. It won't be widescreen, but the masters are on film so hi def resolution is supported. However, Next Gen, DS9, Voyager and most of Enterprise was SHOT on film, but edited and finished on NTSC VIDEO (in fact TNG was the first show ever to do this). That means the master tapes for these shows are all 525 line video and they will never look better than they do on DVD. It is physically impossible to release them in hi-def. Enterprise switched over to 16:9, but it was not actually finished in hi def until late in the game. The movies can all be hi def, except for (sadly) the new edition of ST: The Motion Picture. The special edition director's cut was only finished on NTSC and can never be upscaled to HDTV. Only the original theatrical version can be re-scanned to a higher resolution. Use this info to plan your purchases accordingly! Was this review helpful to you? YesNo (Report this)

      --
      All good things...
  99. No what it really has to include is... by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

    Leonard Nimoy himself. So the one ultra-fan that ever buys this can say he owns Leonard Nimoy.

  100. You may also be interested in these items... by kindbud · · Score: 1

    Amazon thinks that we might also like one of these:

    Above All Co. L74995CN Forearm Forklift Lifting Straps

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
  101. Paramount is stupid by SmokeSerpent · · Score: 1

    I and at least 4 other people I know would have at least bought TOS by now on DVD if it were more reasonably priced. ($40-$50)

    As for this collection, its insane! $11 per disk!? Who would buy this?

    --
    All kings is mostly rapscallions. -Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
  102. Good Luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For one they wouldn't all fit on a 500gb HD.

    212 DVDs, 9.4GB each (double sided), 1992.8GB total.

    So, four 500GB Hard Drives.

    Assuming you could get it streaming, you have 32,638 minutes to view it, so your pipe better be over 1.04 MB/sec. If it isn't, multiply your download time accordingly.

    1. Re:Good Luck by imperator_mundi · · Score: 1

      I think xvid would give a better than needed quality (especially for the first series) and compression algorithms seem to work nicely on pyjamas. My estimate is around 500Mb per hour, hence 32,638 minutes = 544 hours would fit in about 277Mb.

  103. Re:No figurines: (B5 fan's response..) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Who in their right mind would pay $2.5k for this?

    Hell, B5 in totality costs $500 (depending on where you get your discs), and for another $450 you can get actual scripts for almost every episode, released by JMS. (By "actual", I mean "with all the original parts intact", "with plots etc. that were excised before filming", and "with practical jokes played on the actors.") Check it out: www.babylon5scripts.com (There's a page with sample script pages, with stuff tossed out of the pilot..)

    And.... you can actually sit through the entire series without scratching your head and going, "Didn't these dumb [expletive] just FIX THIS [expletive] PROBLEM?" and "WHY THE [expletive] CAN'T THEY FIX THE [expletive] HOLODECK?" and "You're telling me that, despite robotic hearts and bionic livers, they can't grow hair on Picard's or Sisko's heads?"

  104. Can someone please explain this troll to me by The+Hobo · · Score: 1

    n/t

    --
    There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
  105. This item ships for FREE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...with Super Saver Shipping. See details.

    yey! you spend $2,499.99 and they ship it for free! they are so nice.

  106. she broke her leg by caffeine_monkey · · Score: 1
  107. Anyone? by u16084 · · Score: 0

    Resistance is futile - Hers the torrent.

    --
    -- I Dont Deserve A Sig I Have Bad Karma
  108. Re:No figurines: (B5 fan's response..) by BootNinja · · Score: 1

    sisko shaved his head. he didn't want hair. I guess he thought looking more like picard would make him more respected :)

  109. And what about... by glassgnost · · Score: 1

    What about the David Gerrold paperbacks? Shatner sings? I AM NOT SPOCK?!!

  110. ...and the target consumer would be... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, lemme get this straight: This is for the massive Star Trek fan (ready to fork over $2,500) who hasn't already bought most of the movies and TV shows on DVD.

    Ri...iiiight.....

    1. Re:...and the target consumer would be... ? by fyrie · · Score: 1

      That's the thing - I can't fathom a true fan who would spend this kind of cake on this stuff who doesn't already have enough of the sets to make it a bad deal.

  111. Re:Offtopic but related: Christians (was Re:what i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Rudis's NetAuthority page is really, let's be honest, NOT a good idea. That's at least heading in the direction of making airplane crash jokes. On 9/11. In earshot of grieving victims.

    Wow. You wouldn't have liked being at my university on that day. (12/9 our time.) One of the Americans in my class was making jokes about plane crashes, and jokes about killing 40,000 accountants at the same time.

  112. bt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I downloaded all of these for $0. Much cheaper :)

  113. from the "I don't think so" department by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    For those Star Trek fans wondering what to ask for this Christmas, you may wish to consider The Ultimate Star Trek Collection to be released on November 15. For just (cough) $2499.99

    Well. I can ask.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  114. pathetic sentances by skiddie · · Score: 1
    omg, i think that's the most pathetic sentence I've ever read.

    there are many of those on this thread...

  115. OT: The Net Authority? by aendeuryu · · Score: 1

    I tried to follow the link of the fat woman on the couch, and got taken to this Net Authority website.

    From the site:

    The Net Authority is an organization dedicated to the removal of offensive material from the Internet. The online world is teeming with pornography, depravity, blasphemy, and all kinds of hate propaganda. It is our mission to define a set of guidelines to which all information posted on the Internet must adhere, and to hold responsible those who would knowingly break those guidelines.

    It is extremely important that children are shielded from sites in violation of the Internet Acceptable Use Policy. The children of today determine the society of tomorrow, so the kinds of things that their growing, susceptible minds are exposed to are of the utmost importance. The Net Authority willingly works in conjunction with national and international enforcement agencies to put a stop to the dissemination of offensive materials on the Internet.

    Our primary initiative towards that end is the maintenance of a continually growing database of Internet offenders--websites that knowingly violate the Internet Acceptable Use Policy. We freely provide access to this database for concerned parents, interested software developers, and law-abiding Internet citizens in general. We fully understand the scope of the Internet, and that it is unlikely for us to ever hold a majority of offending sites in our database--but it is our hope that by holding these sites up as an example, we can help deter other Internet users from following similar paths and thus reduce the accumulation of offensive material on the Internet in general.

    The Net Authority is an organization consisting of individuals and community leaders from all over the civilized world. We are all constantly on the look-out for new offenders to add to our database--but we can't do it alone! You too can be a part of the Net Authority and help us eliminate offensive material from the Internet. By reading and understanding the Internet Acceptable Use Policy, and our guide on how to spot offending material, you can arm yourself with all you need to do God's work on the Internet. Every offending site that is added to our database by visitors just like yourself takes us one step closer to a cleaner, better Internet for our children.


    Is this happening for just me? Or is this happening to others, too? Looks kind of draconian.

  116. Ultimate ? by Mr+Europe · · Score: 1

    It doesn't even include The Star Wreck !!
    http://www-uk.starwreck.com/

  117. Animated Release Date by koick · · Score: 1

    You gotta love the animated release date!

  118. Re:200+ dvds = a lot of space... screw that, use H by turkeyphant · · Score: 1

    Actually, I have it compressed down to 254 GiB at decent quality,

  119. Start Your Own TV Station... by tonymus · · Score: 1

    Buy this set, and you'll have more programming available than Spike TV...