you might as well spend a little more to get a new system that's going to be superior in most every way.
That depends on whether you can actually use the additional speed/features.
If all you do is browse the 'net (not youtube or similar sites) and use MS or Open Office for work, spending more money to get a PC with dual core CPU is probably not the best idea, since it won't do you any good.
I'm not. That is because I don't get many computers to fix, maybe one or two in a month. Fixing a PC isn't that hard (especially, since most fixes consist of reinstalling Windows) and it helps me maintain good standing among my friends, if I ever needed something from them.
I sometimes even get money, though I almost never ask for it.
In the end, biggest factor is the money, the way it usually works is, "you get what you pay for."
However, you also pay for the name. Though I agree, better things usually are more expensive. However, more expensive things are not always better.
And the case of my custom PC is quite good too, a 4U rackmount case and the metal is probable 1mm thick, the case alone weighs ~16kg.
Buy better PSUs and fans and they will work longer. Fans with sleeve bearings are useful only as a temporary solution until you can get the $10 or whatever for a proper fan.
Some brand name PCs have nonstandard components, which would be expensive to replace, though they may not be any better than standard ones. If a power supply in my old server failed, I would have to repair it myself or continue using the server with two PSUs, since getting a new power supply would probably cost more than a server with similar performance.
1. Spend no money and do without sound on the laptop. 2. Spend $x for an external sound card. You will need to carry it with your laptop if you want sound. 3. Spend $y (y >> x) for a new laptop.
And that depends entirely on what you value more. Personally, I'd rather carry the external sound card if I want sound (which is not always) and save $(y-x). After all, instead of buying a new (and expensive) laptop battery (current one lasts ~30minutes) I either look for an outlet or if I want to work where there is no electricity, I take a 12V 7Ah sealed lead-acid battery (or two of them, depending on how long I plan to use the laptop) and a 12V->19V converter.
Motherboards for laptops are expensive, however, not all failures are that bad. For example, if the sound chip on the laptop breaks, it's usually cheaper to buy an external sound card than a new laptop, or a new motherboard for the laptop.
Would the brand new PC from a big box store include the good motherboard and the i5 or i7 CPU?
If yes, then I sense a business opportunity (buy a new PC, sell parts). If no, then it means that you didn't need that good motherboard or the CPU anyway, so you could just buy a cheaper motherboard and CPU.
For example, my main PC uses a quite expensive dual socket motherboard (Tyan Thunder K8WE or the version from HP xw9300 workstation). When some capacitors on the motherboard failed, I knew that if I did not find anyone to replace the caps and could not do it myself (I can solder, but on simpler PCBs, like single or two layer ones) I would have to buy a new motherboard. Yes, the cost of the motherboard would be more than the cost of a lowest end PC or some used one, but those PCs would be slower than my main PC is, so there would be no point in buying them. This had a happy ending, the cost of replacing the capacitors was ~15EUR.
And how many of those 65% have geek friends that they call and say "Hi, my computer broke, can you fix it?"?
That's probably a lot, considering how many computers I fix for my friends, and yes, that includes asking them to buy a new motherboard "Go to the store and ask for 'motherboard for Socket A CPU, that's mATX'" or just asking for the money and buying it myself. When the "broken computer" problem occurs, people try to save money, and if the new part costs less than a new PC, they'll buy the part.
Reinstalling Windows is a huge hassle, at least for me. Over the years of using this installation, I have installed a lot of small programs, made some tweaks etc. Now if I reinstall Windows, on top of the fact that Win7 UI is different from XP (a thing that I would attempt to correct), I will need to install all my programs and do the tweaks all over again, with the added bonus that Win7 will probably require different tweaks.
Actually, reinstalling Windows is such a huge hassle to me that I'm considering buying a DRAM based SSD (Gigabyte iRAM Box) and putting the pagefile there, instead of installing 64bit version of Windows XP or 2003 or 7.
However, with the exception of large disasters (lightning, fire, flood etc), usually a single component fails and not the whole computer. Which means that it's cheaper to replace the failed component instead of the whole computer.
If my PSU failed, I'd rather buy a new PSU than a new PSU, motherboard, CPU and RAM (I could still use my case, videocard, hard drives etc).
So they go into the payload? Thus decreasing the amount of real, useful data that you can actually put into the packet and increasing the total number of packets flowing through the backbone, as well as the total amount of data that's being pushed through.
And in IPv6 they go to hyperspace, making the header take no more space than an IPv4 header, to that the amount of useful data in each packet is the same between IPv4 and IPv6.
NAT is great, it decouples my internal addresses from external ones.
My internal network is 192.168.0.0/24. My external ip is a.b.c.d. If I change my ISP and get a different IP, let's say e.f.g.h, the only thing that needs to be updated is the configuration of the router. The internal network can be the same, no matter the ISP. Any disruption in my internet connection will only disrupt data transfer to/from the internet, my internal network stays the same.
Now, if I got 10 IP addresses from my ISP and decided to assign them to my internal network, I would have to change those addresses if I change my ISP or use a different connection (let's say a backup connection when my main one goes down). Now a disruption in my internet connection would require me to change the IPs of my local machines, which would cause disruptions in the data transfer between them.
Plus you can only forward to a single machine for a given port number.
With 65535 port numbers, you can forward a lot of ports to a lot of machines and higher level protocols should work independently of the port number.
Oh, also NAT needs to keep a translation table meaning you can't establish large amounts of connections (think torrents).
That depends on the router. Linux routers by default keep connection information for 5 days (who thought of that?), which does use up a lot of memory, reducing the timeout to a few hours can allow me to establish thousands of connections with a router that has 64MB or RAM. I know, 64MB is expensive and all, but if you need a lot of connections, you'd better have at least this much memory. A 100MHz x86 CPU cannot route 200mbps traffic either.
As a musician the amount of destruction these shitty engineers have wrought is just disgusting, and I'm proud to say the local musicians have all been listening to me and refusing to compress their records.
While the engineers are the ones doing the compression, it may be that they don't want to, but are ordered to by their boss. "Make it louder than this example CD or you're fired" can be a good motivator to compress even if the result sounds awful to you.
I once tried to record (I don't remember which) a CD to a tape (to test my new-to-me reel to reel tape deck) and saw that the level meter needles were standing almost still.
Well, anything is better than spending money on a (probably expensive) record just to find out that it sounds exactly the same as the cheaper CD. If the store accepts returns then you can buy the record, listen to it and return if it sounds exactly like the CD.
How are you supposed to know if a record is well mastered or not without buying it?
Read reviews online, participate in forums where people buy records and comment on them. Also, some record stores can play the record for you before you buy it (useful not only for finding out about compression, but also if I never saw this band and want to find out if I'll like their music).
Well, someone still has to buy the record, but then he can tell to everyone else to stay away from it.
You can record overcompressed sound to vinyl too. Vinyl, like magnetic tape or CD, has a maximum level that can be recorded (for tape it's saturation level, for CD it's 0dBFS and for vinyl it's when the playing needle jumps out of the groove), but it does not require the recorded signal to have some minimum dynamic range. I could record a pure 1kHz sine wave and it would be played back correctly. Nothing prevents record companies from recording vinyl from the butchered CD master (and a few records were made that way).
However, the people that buy records usually care about sound quality and dynamic range. If the record is badly mastered they won't buy it. Also, these people usually use high quality equipment (amplifiers, speakers, record player) that can correctly reproduce the dynamic range (ever tried listening to a recording with wide dynamic range on laptop speakers?). This is the main reason why record companies make better masters for records. The CD crowd does not care about sound quality enough to not buy the CD if it sounds bad.
The later ones had digital sound, stereo, 16bit, 44.1kHz. NTSC LDs could have both analog and digital audio tracks at the same time, while PAL LDs could have analog or digital sound, but not both at the same time. A few even later LDs had Dolby AC3 sound instead of one analog track or DTS instead of both digital tracks.
what is more frightening is that most of these institutions have an "if it's not broken don't fix it" mentality
So, in your opinion, it would be better, if they replaced their old system that everyone knows how it works and what problems it may or may not have with a new system that may or may not work as good as the old one and have bugs that nobody will know about until they surface (the same was with the old system when it was new, but now probably all bugs were fixed or people at least know what not to do).
If a bank has a 30 year old mainframe and uses it - great, as long as it works correctly, and it probably has more chance to work correctly than a new system running new software.
I sometimes say that too, because it is faster than saying Windows OS on my computer is slow, but I know, that the speed of the hardware does not change much. A 15 year old PC, if it works, works as fast as it did 15 years ago, when it was brand new. Windows can slow down over time, because various junk accumulates.
Then it seems like Android might be the perfect one for you to choose.
When my Nokia N93 breaks down, I'll probably buy a phone with Android or some Nokia phone (depending on what will be available at the time). I value partial functionality over no functionality, so buggy Flash is better than no Flash (of course, flashblock or similar plugins are needed). For example, my current phone does not have a lot of memory (about 22MB free when idle) and Opera Mobile 10 (which was designed for newer phones but still kinda works on mine) sometimes complains that there is not enough memory (when viewing large pages), but still somehow downloads and opens the page. So, I can still open the page if I really need it, but, since I know that this problem exists, I tend not to open large pages. This is better than Opera simply refusing to open the page at all.
I wouldn't buy an iPhone anyway, since I don't really like the fact that I would have to hack my own phone to have complete control over it. Also, AFAIK, you cannot replace the battery on the iPhone. I like devices that can be modified and customized to my liking (one of the reasons I build my own PCs), since it's unlikely that I'll come across a device that some telepath designed after reading my thoughts about how I would like it.
Yes, the best AMD CPU is slower than the best Intel CPU, and probably slower than the second best Intel CPU too. However, AMD usually has better price/performance ratio, so if I do not want the fastest CPU there is, I should probably buy an AMD product.
Same thing was when I was looking for a video card ~3 years ago. The new ATI HD2900XT was slower than the best nVidia card, but the nVidia card was much more expensive. HD2900XT was faster than the nVidia card that had a similar price.
For you, it may be like this, but I'd rather be able to visit any site using my mobile device, even if it crashes or is sluggish. The reason is that there may be a time when I need to visit that site and I only have the mobile device. In other times, since I know that the device does not like the site, I can just not go there using it.
Oh, and the guy in the video is right, but only about the choice he talks about - the kind where it is difficult (or costly) to take the choice back. I bought a car, but then decided I don't like it. I can sell it and buy another one, but realistically I won't get all the money I paid for the car back. Same thing with jam - I bought it, now I have to eat it, otherwise I'll be throwing away money.
His example with the Greek restaurant was very good - they have recommendations, but if I don't like them, I can still read the menu and find something I like. If the restaurant only had the 5 recommended options and I didn't like them, I would just go to another restaurant.
However, there are choices that do not have the negative aspects. I can change the tape deck in my car easily. So, it means that I am not stuck with the original radio that came with the car. If in the future I decide that I don't like cassettes anymore, I can replace the tape deck with a CD or MP3 player.
I have a lot of options for my desktop wallpaper. I can find a lot of wallpapers on the internet and there are some built-in ones. I think in this case the more options I have the better it is. I have a large tape and record collection, so when I want to listen to music, I can find the artist/album that I want. If I only had 10 tapes and records instead of 230 (or however many there are, I haven't counted), would it really be better?
Opera has a very customizable UI and that is one of the reasons I keep it updates, since I can always have the UI back to how it was in version 7 (though not exactly, I have modified the layout a bit, but it's mostly from versions 7 and 8). I don't see how it would be better if I didn't have that option. If Firefox 4 only has the chrome type UI and no way of changing it back then I'll stay with whatever the last 3.x version will be, though I'll try to use Resource Hacker on FF4.
One of the reasons I do not like Windows 7 is that I haven't figured out which files to edit with Resource Hacker to make Windows Explorer look more like XP Windows Explorer (address bar below menu bar and tool bar). Yet.
People like the convenience and instant gratification.
That's why downloads are getting popular. Yes, it is faster to go to the store than to download a BluRay rip over dial-up, but this is reversed with fast connections. My connection in theory an go up to 200mbps nationally and 80mbps international, so a 50GB download would take me ~30 minutes to ~83 minutes depending on where the server is. I'd rather wait 90 minutes than drive to the store, hoping that they have the movie. Also, some movies may be less than 50GB.
A 9GB DVD would take 6 to 15 minutes to download, I would not even be able to drive to the store in that time (not counting the actual purchase and standing in line and the trip back).
Oh, and 1TB hard drives are not that expensive now (yes, I know there are larger drives, but the drive that's one or two steps below the maximum has the best price/capacity ratio).
5GB download with 1mbps connection would take ~12 hours, not so much.
I remember 7 years ago when I had dial-up (could be used only 18:00 to 6:00 on work days, all day on weekends and holidays). A 5GB download would take me a month. At least FTP servers were more common then, with BitTorrent, it would probably have taken two months.
Slashdot Mirror
you might as well spend a little more to get a new system that's going to be superior in most every way.
That depends on whether you can actually use the additional speed/features.
If all you do is browse the 'net (not youtube or similar sites) and use MS or Open Office for work, spending more money to get a PC with dual core CPU is probably not the best idea, since it won't do you any good.
I'm not. That is because I don't get many computers to fix, maybe one or two in a month. Fixing a PC isn't that hard (especially, since most fixes consist of reinstalling Windows) and it helps me maintain good standing among my friends, if I ever needed something from them.
I sometimes even get money, though I almost never ask for it.
In the end, biggest factor is the money, the way it usually works is, "you get what you pay for."
However, you also pay for the name. Though I agree, better things usually are more expensive. However, more expensive things are not always better.
And the case of my custom PC is quite good too, a 4U rackmount case and the metal is probable 1mm thick, the case alone weighs ~16kg.
Buy better PSUs and fans and they will work longer. Fans with sleeve bearings are useful only as a temporary solution until you can get the $10 or whatever for a proper fan.
Some brand name PCs have nonstandard components, which would be expensive to replace, though they may not be any better than standard ones. If a power supply in my old server failed, I would have to repair it myself or continue using the server with two PSUs, since getting a new power supply would probably cost more than a server with similar performance.
And then you have to decide:
1. Spend no money and do without sound on the laptop.
2. Spend $x for an external sound card. You will need to carry it with your laptop if you want sound.
3. Spend $y (y >> x) for a new laptop.
And that depends entirely on what you value more. Personally, I'd rather carry the external sound card if I want sound (which is not always) and save $(y-x). After all, instead of buying a new (and expensive) laptop battery (current one lasts ~30minutes) I either look for an outlet or if I want to work where there is no electricity, I take a 12V 7Ah sealed lead-acid battery (or two of them, depending on how long I plan to use the laptop) and a 12V->19V converter.
Motherboards for laptops are expensive, however, not all failures are that bad. For example, if the sound chip on the laptop breaks, it's usually cheaper to buy an external sound card than a new laptop, or a new motherboard for the laptop.
Would the brand new PC from a big box store include the good motherboard and the i5 or i7 CPU?
If yes, then I sense a business opportunity (buy a new PC, sell parts).
If no, then it means that you didn't need that good motherboard or the CPU anyway, so you could just buy a cheaper motherboard and CPU.
For example, my main PC uses a quite expensive dual socket motherboard (Tyan Thunder K8WE or the version from HP xw9300 workstation). When some capacitors on the motherboard failed, I knew that if I did not find anyone to replace the caps and could not do it myself (I can solder, but on simpler PCBs, like single or two layer ones) I would have to buy a new motherboard. Yes, the cost of the motherboard would be more than the cost of a lowest end PC or some used one, but those PCs would be slower than my main PC is, so there would be no point in buying them. This had a happy ending, the cost of replacing the capacitors was ~15EUR.
And how many of those 65% have geek friends that they call and say "Hi, my computer broke, can you fix it?"?
That's probably a lot, considering how many computers I fix for my friends, and yes, that includes asking them to buy a new motherboard "Go to the store and ask for 'motherboard for Socket A CPU, that's mATX'" or just asking for the money and buying it myself. When the "broken computer" problem occurs, people try to save money, and if the new part costs less than a new PC, they'll buy the part.
Reinstalling Windows is a huge hassle, at least for me. Over the years of using this installation, I have installed a lot of small programs, made some tweaks etc. Now if I reinstall Windows, on top of the fact that Win7 UI is different from XP (a thing that I would attempt to correct), I will need to install all my programs and do the tweaks all over again, with the added bonus that Win7 will probably require different tweaks.
Actually, reinstalling Windows is such a huge hassle to me that I'm considering buying a DRAM based SSD (Gigabyte iRAM Box) and putting the pagefile there, instead of installing 64bit version of Windows XP or 2003 or 7.
However, with the exception of large disasters (lightning, fire, flood etc), usually a single component fails and not the whole computer. Which means that it's cheaper to replace the failed component instead of the whole computer.
If my PSU failed, I'd rather buy a new PSU than a new PSU, motherboard, CPU and RAM (I could still use my case, videocard, hard drives etc).
Anybody knows where I can get this game? Seems fun :)
People get pissed about the smallest things - which is funny.
Of course, after all, a good system on paper is worth much more than a system that works and is actually used in practice.
The internet now is too big for reboots.
So they go into the payload? Thus decreasing the amount of real, useful data that you can actually put into the packet and increasing the total number of packets flowing through the backbone, as well as the total amount of data that's being pushed through.
And in IPv6 they go to hyperspace, making the header take no more space than an IPv4 header, to that the amount of useful data in each packet is the same between IPv4 and IPv6.
I use L2TP over IPSec VPN that is provided by Windows and so far I could connect from any connection (NAT or not) to my VPN server that is behind NAT.
NAT is great, it decouples my internal addresses from external ones.
My internal network is 192.168.0.0/24. My external ip is a.b.c.d. If I change my ISP and get a different IP, let's say e.f.g.h, the only thing that needs to be updated is the configuration of the router. The internal network can be the same, no matter the ISP. Any disruption in my internet connection will only disrupt data transfer to/from the internet, my internal network stays the same.
Now, if I got 10 IP addresses from my ISP and decided to assign them to my internal network, I would have to change those addresses if I change my ISP or use a different connection (let's say a backup connection when my main one goes down). Now a disruption in my internet connection would require me to change the IPs of my local machines, which would cause disruptions in the data transfer between them.
Plus you can only forward to a single machine for a given port number.
With 65535 port numbers, you can forward a lot of ports to a lot of machines and higher level protocols should work independently of the port number.
Oh, also NAT needs to keep a translation table meaning you can't establish large amounts of connections (think torrents).
That depends on the router. Linux routers by default keep connection information for 5 days (who thought of that?), which does use up a lot of memory, reducing the timeout to a few hours can allow me to establish thousands of connections with a router that has 64MB or RAM. I know, 64MB is expensive and all, but if you need a lot of connections, you'd better have at least this much memory. A 100MHz x86 CPU cannot route 200mbps traffic either.
As a musician the amount of destruction these shitty engineers have wrought is just disgusting, and I'm proud to say the local musicians have all been listening to me and refusing to compress their records.
While the engineers are the ones doing the compression, it may be that they don't want to, but are ordered to by their boss. "Make it louder than this example CD or you're fired" can be a good motivator to compress even if the result sounds awful to you.
I once tried to record (I don't remember which) a CD to a tape (to test my new-to-me reel to reel tape deck) and saw that the level meter needles were standing almost still.
Well, anything is better than spending money on a (probably expensive) record just to find out that it sounds exactly the same as the cheaper CD. If the store accepts returns then you can buy the record, listen to it and return if it sounds exactly like the CD.
How are you supposed to know if a record is well mastered or not without buying it?
Read reviews online, participate in forums where people buy records and comment on them. Also, some record stores can play the record for you before you buy it (useful not only for finding out about compression, but also if I never saw this band and want to find out if I'll like their music).
Well, someone still has to buy the record, but then he can tell to everyone else to stay away from it.
You can record overcompressed sound to vinyl too. Vinyl, like magnetic tape or CD, has a maximum level that can be recorded (for tape it's saturation level, for CD it's 0dBFS and for vinyl it's when the playing needle jumps out of the groove), but it does not require the recorded signal to have some minimum dynamic range. I could record a pure 1kHz sine wave and it would be played back correctly. Nothing prevents record companies from recording vinyl from the butchered CD master (and a few records were made that way).
However, the people that buy records usually care about sound quality and dynamic range. If the record is badly mastered they won't buy it. Also, these people usually use high quality equipment (amplifiers, speakers, record player) that can correctly reproduce the dynamic range (ever tried listening to a recording with wide dynamic range on laptop speakers?). This is the main reason why record companies make better masters for records. The CD crowd does not care about sound quality enough to not buy the CD if it sounds bad.
The later ones had digital sound, stereo, 16bit, 44.1kHz. NTSC LDs could have both analog and digital audio tracks at the same time, while PAL LDs could have analog or digital sound, but not both at the same time. A few even later LDs had Dolby AC3 sound instead of one analog track or DTS instead of both digital tracks.
what is more frightening is that most of these institutions have an "if it's not broken don't fix it" mentality
So, in your opinion, it would be better, if they replaced their old system that everyone knows how it works and what problems it may or may not have with a new system that may or may not work as good as the old one and have bugs that nobody will know about until they surface (the same was with the old system when it was new, but now probably all bugs were fixed or people at least know what not to do).
If a bank has a 30 year old mainframe and uses it - great, as long as it works correctly, and it probably has more chance to work correctly than a new system running new software.
'this computer is slow'
I sometimes say that too, because it is faster than saying Windows OS on my computer is slow, but I know, that the speed of the hardware does not change much. A 15 year old PC, if it works, works as fast as it did 15 years ago, when it was brand new. Windows can slow down over time, because various junk accumulates.
Then it seems like Android might be the perfect one for you to choose.
When my Nokia N93 breaks down, I'll probably buy a phone with Android or some Nokia phone (depending on what will be available at the time). I value partial functionality over no functionality, so buggy Flash is better than no Flash (of course, flashblock or similar plugins are needed).
For example, my current phone does not have a lot of memory (about 22MB free when idle) and Opera Mobile 10 (which was designed for newer phones but still kinda works on mine) sometimes complains that there is not enough memory (when viewing large pages), but still somehow downloads and opens the page. So, I can still open the page if I really need it, but, since I know that this problem exists, I tend not to open large pages. This is better than Opera simply refusing to open the page at all.
I wouldn't buy an iPhone anyway, since I don't really like the fact that I would have to hack my own phone to have complete control over it. Also, AFAIK, you cannot replace the battery on the iPhone. I like devices that can be modified and customized to my liking (one of the reasons I build my own PCs), since it's unlikely that I'll come across a device that some telepath designed after reading my thoughts about how I would like it.
Yes, the best AMD CPU is slower than the best Intel CPU, and probably slower than the second best Intel CPU too. However, AMD usually has better price/performance ratio, so if I do not want the fastest CPU there is, I should probably buy an AMD product.
Same thing was when I was looking for a video card ~3 years ago. The new ATI HD2900XT was slower than the best nVidia card, but the nVidia card was much more expensive. HD2900XT was faster than the nVidia card that had a similar price.
For you, it may be like this, but I'd rather be able to visit any site using my mobile device, even if it crashes or is sluggish. The reason is that there may be a time when I need to visit that site and I only have the mobile device. In other times, since I know that the device does not like the site, I can just not go there using it.
Oh, and the guy in the video is right, but only about the choice he talks about - the kind where it is difficult (or costly) to take the choice back. I bought a car, but then decided I don't like it. I can sell it and buy another one, but realistically I won't get all the money I paid for the car back. Same thing with jam - I bought it, now I have to eat it, otherwise I'll be throwing away money.
His example with the Greek restaurant was very good - they have recommendations, but if I don't like them, I can still read the menu and find something I like. If the restaurant only had the 5 recommended options and I didn't like them, I would just go to another restaurant.
However, there are choices that do not have the negative aspects. I can change the tape deck in my car easily. So, it means that I am not stuck with the original radio that came with the car. If in the future I decide that I don't like cassettes anymore, I can replace the tape deck with a CD or MP3 player.
I have a lot of options for my desktop wallpaper. I can find a lot of wallpapers on the internet and there are some built-in ones. I think in this case the more options I have the better it is. I have a large tape and record collection, so when I want to listen to music, I can find the artist/album that I want. If I only had 10 tapes and records instead of 230 (or however many there are, I haven't counted), would it really be better?
Opera has a very customizable UI and that is one of the reasons I keep it updates, since I can always have the UI back to how it was in version 7 (though not exactly, I have modified the layout a bit, but it's mostly from versions 7 and 8). I don't see how it would be better if I didn't have that option. If Firefox 4 only has the chrome type UI and no way of changing it back then I'll stay with whatever the last 3.x version will be, though I'll try to use Resource Hacker on FF4.
One of the reasons I do not like Windows 7 is that I haven't figured out which files to edit with Resource Hacker to make Windows Explorer look more like XP Windows Explorer (address bar below menu bar and tool bar). Yet.
People like the convenience and instant gratification.
That's why downloads are getting popular. Yes, it is faster to go to the store than to download a BluRay rip over dial-up, but this is reversed with fast connections. My connection in theory an go up to 200mbps nationally and 80mbps international, so a 50GB download would take me ~30 minutes to ~83 minutes depending on where the server is. I'd rather wait 90 minutes than drive to the store, hoping that they have the movie. Also, some movies may be less than 50GB.
A 9GB DVD would take 6 to 15 minutes to download, I would not even be able to drive to the store in that time (not counting the actual purchase and standing in line and the trip back).
Oh, and 1TB hard drives are not that expensive now (yes, I know there are larger drives, but the drive that's one or two steps below the maximum has the best price/capacity ratio).
5GB download with 1mbps connection would take ~12 hours, not so much.
I remember 7 years ago when I had dial-up (could be used only 18:00 to 6:00 on work days, all day on weekends and holidays). A 5GB download would take me a month. At least FTP servers were more common then, with BitTorrent, it would probably have taken two months.