I know.. isn't it ridiculous? DVD's were unbreakable for quite some time, and even then they weren't able to be copied easily for even longer after that.
You can already make copies of BluRay discs - WAY ahead of schedule over DVD.
Sure, and DVD's have copy protection too. Or are you too young to know that at one time, DVD copy protection was "uncrackable" too?
Besides which, BluRay has already been cracked. It's over. All that's left now is some nice easy little GUI tools to rip, convert, etc. You can do 1:1 copies right now.
DVD's will be around for a long time because many, many people still do and will continue to own SD TV Sets.
HDTV's are still expensive. I remember when I purchased a 32" Sony Trinitron CRT TV. It was $800, and that was one of the most expensive TV's in the store (Besides the big projector units.) Now, $800 is a very cheap TV in the store for a livingroom TV.
It will take a long time for HD to sit in everyone's homes. Until then, you pay a premium for the technology.
Besides. HD-DVD is gone now, so Blu-Ray is the only choice. It ain't going nowhere. It's going to be the HD format for many years to come. There's no need to "bring more people over to the format" anymore. They will come eventually.
I don't see how this is so hard to see. But apparently you're an idiot.
I didn't know memory sticks and minidiscs have a sense of smell. IMHO disks are going the way of the dinosaurs. Streaming media is the future, IMHO.
First of all: We already have "streaming media." It's called TELEVISION.
What you're saying is different: You mean On-Demand, over the internet video.
There will be plenty of room for both for a long time. At LEAST until Internet connections average a MUCH higher speed than they do now.
I want to own things. I like my discs. I like to own what I've purchased. I'm not alone in this. But sometimes I might want to just download something and watch it once.
There's room for both, because Internet streaming video won't be yours, and you won't be able to achieve the same quality with a 5Mbit - 15Mbit connection.
Ohhh give it a fucking rest! Anyone can copy a DVD - NOW. But it took several years before it became easy enough for people to do it.
Why do you expect it to be that easy for BD right now? It hasn't been out for very long and you can already copy them. Soon, you'll be able to rip and transcode them just like a DVD, just as easy. It can be done now, but it's a little difficult - just like how DVD's used to be.
If you have a decent HDTV, HD will look so much nicer on it that you will only want to buy HD versions.
I don't know a single person that has seen movies on my TV in HD that didn't say "This looks great!"
I'm so sick and tired of all you fucking armchair market experts trying to tell everyone what "MOST PEOPLE" do, think, and care about. Go fuck your righteous self.
In case you didn't notice, almost all flat panels in the stores are LCD now. (Gee, who didn't see that coming? Ohh yea. All the Plasma TV fanboys.) Almost all of them support 1080p; if not directly, they can take a 1080i signal and de-interlace them.
I got my TV three years ago, and it's 1080. My friend has a DLP Projector from four years ago - 1080.
For a little while 720p was more common but now it's all 1080.
Don't pretend that because you chose 720p, so did "most people."
Keep your DVD's, and start buying BluRay movies moving forward. Why is that so hard to understand?
Just because YOU don't want to purchase movies you already own, doesn't mean everyone has those same 200 movies. I don't have a large movie collection, so maybe *I* want to go and buy an old movie, but in a new HD film conversion?
So, in a nutshell:
- You realized you don't want to collect movies anymore because you don't watch them - You blame BluRay?
Re:You are a sick man .. can I catch it, please ?
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 1
Ohh bullshit. On any flat panel, the screen will de-interlace and you won't be able to see the interlacing on 1080. The lines are so small, and there's no "CRT Bounce" associated with it.
1080i will always look better than 720p if your screen actually is capable of displaying a full 1080 picture.
No, a cheap $50 upscaling player will look like ass.
You're better off either using the TV's scaler or a PS3 for the job (which does an excellent job of scaling DVD's.)
I think HD TV is more important than HD Movies on disc. The reason is because you get wide screen and surround sound, which you didn't get before. Well, you might have gotten 5.1 on HBO and stuff but not the wide screen.
In the end, the people that complain about HD not being much better than SD are mostly people that have 32" or 40" 720P TV's. I have a 52" Sharp, and I can really tell the difference. No scaler will ever be able to make SD look as good as HD on a larger screen.
If you can't tell the difference between DVD and BluRay on a 42" screen, then your eyesight sucks, you're sitting too far from that screen, or you're full of shit.
I tend to think it's the latter.
Plus, BD doesn't just offer better picture. It also has the potential of having a much better interface, MUCH better audio, and the discs are actually more resilient than DVD's.
Yea sure why not include a lossless version at 24-bit 192Khz? That would be awesome because then we'd all get cheap 8GB memory sticks.
While I do enjoy DVD-Audio discs a lot, and I wish there were more, 320Kbit MP3 encoded with a recent encoder will be audibly indistinguishable from CD-quality uncompressed (which is about 1400Kbit.)
I don't care what equipment you have. 320Kbit MP3 mastered from the same 24-bit source (assuming a modern recording studio) as the CD will sound just as good as the CD. MAYBE even better.
You could possibly provide a virtual environment for students. If they want to experiment with various operating systems, code, or whatever - you could provide them with a number of virtual machines for their projects.
You could use VMware, which would probably be the best solution at this point, but it's more expensive than the alternatives. There's also VirtualIron, based on Xen, or free Xen systems to use.
I think it could be a service to your student base.
"Seriously, I'd trust code written by 13 year olds a lot more than that written by major companies."
Then you'd be stupid.
Sure, a young kid can write some novel little things, but serious software? No. It does in fact take teams of people do to that - in the OSS world or corporate world (or as often is the case, a mix of the two.)
Generally speaking, 13 year old boys don't do much on the Internet except beg for shit, yell at shit, and talk shit. Lots of shit is involved.
It's not limited to 13 year olds, but it sure is true for many 1st person shooter type games. I used to enjoy playing games like CS and stuff with my friend but we both eventually got tired of the little kiddies ruining every game.
Your username is TJamieson? My last name is Jamieson, spelled the same way with the IE. If that's your last name, you're probably as tired to telling people "No, it's IE. I.. E... Not just I, not just E. Not EI. GRR!!" as I am =)
ps.
"NIC Card" has always been the most annoying redundancy to me =)
I wasn't rich back then - I was about 19 years old and my friend and I both saved up for the VooDoo2. It was not $600. It was $200.
If you are talking about an Average PC in 1995, you have some problems:
- The original VooDoo Graphics chip was produced in 1996. It didn't show in consumer cards until very late 1996 and mostly 1997 with cards like the Diamond Monster 3D - The VooDoo 2 was released in 1998. It was $200, not $600 - In 1995 by far the most common average PC was an Intel or (more likely) an AMD 486 DX4 - The Pentium 166 MMX wasn't released until 1996 and was not an "average CPU" it was a high end CPU
In 1995 you didn't need to put 128MB RAM into your machine to run Quake, actually you didn't need anything to run it in 1995 because it wasn't released until 1996.
Quake II was release in 1997.
If you had a Pentium MMX 166 and a VooDoo 2 you were rockin' Quake 2 and made your friends jealous.
I'm beginning to think that perhaps you just weren't very good at playing, and got owned by your friends so much that you blame your ruined childhood that ensued because of your shame.
Or, you're just stupid.
id Software did a lot for the computer gaming industry, and personally, I though Doom 3 was a lot of fun to play. id has usually been about balancing both great new technology and solid gameplay. What they did with Doom 3 and fully calculated lighting changed all games since. Have other done things better than id since? Sure. Are id's games the best? Maybe not. They've been very influential in the industry and we're better for it.
Indeed - and it's the same symptom. Instead of making them more environmentally friendly, these new high performance, fuel efficient engines are use to pull more weight.
I don't blame the auto makers as much as some people do. They're bound by the same problems that we are bound by - we can't drive natural gas cars because we can't fill them up, and they can't sell any because we can't fill them up. Replace natural gas with your alternative fuel of choice.
Until fairly recently, with the advancement of battery technology (which HAS improved greatly in the last decade) can the auto makers start seriously looking into electric vehicles. It started with Hybrids (although I think they're a waste of effort) and will hopefully turn into fully electric cars in the not-so-distant future. I do think cars like the Volt will be a good trade-off until that happens.
Yea, the auto makers COULD have done more to push the envelope for alternative fuels but it's not all up to them. And, I really hate it when I see people saying that the reason American auto makers are in trouble is because of fuel efficiency problems - it's because of QUALITY problems, and in recent years the big American automakers have been making a lot of strides in that regard.
Fundamental problems with personal transportation stem from many issues - like most other big problems we face today. It's never a simple answer, because the world is not simple.
Slashdot Mirror
Weird. You actually make sense.
Dude, get the hell out of here before you get converted by the masses to a no-brain dolt.
I know.. isn't it ridiculous? DVD's were unbreakable for quite some time, and even then they weren't able to be copied easily for even longer after that.
You can already make copies of BluRay discs - WAY ahead of schedule over DVD.
Sure, and DVD's have copy protection too. Or are you too young to know that at one time, DVD copy protection was "uncrackable" too?
Besides which, BluRay has already been cracked. It's over. All that's left now is some nice easy little GUI tools to rip, convert, etc. You can do 1:1 copies right now.
Sony can't "phase out DVD." They don't OWN "DVD."
DVD's will be around for a long time because many, many people still do and will continue to own SD TV Sets.
HDTV's are still expensive. I remember when I purchased a 32" Sony Trinitron CRT TV. It was $800, and that was one of the most expensive TV's in the store (Besides the big projector units.) Now, $800 is a very cheap TV in the store for a livingroom TV.
It will take a long time for HD to sit in everyone's homes. Until then, you pay a premium for the technology.
Besides. HD-DVD is gone now, so Blu-Ray is the only choice. It ain't going nowhere. It's going to be the HD format for many years to come. There's no need to "bring more people over to the format" anymore. They will come eventually.
I don't see how this is so hard to see. But apparently you're an idiot.
People said the same thing about VHS vs DVD.
I didn't know memory sticks and minidiscs have a sense of smell. IMHO disks are going the way of the dinosaurs. Streaming media is the future, IMHO.
First of all: We already have "streaming media." It's called TELEVISION.
What you're saying is different: You mean On-Demand, over the internet video.
There will be plenty of room for both for a long time. At LEAST until Internet connections average a MUCH higher speed than they do now.
I want to own things. I like my discs. I like to own what I've purchased. I'm not alone in this. But sometimes I might want to just download something and watch it once.
There's room for both, because Internet streaming video won't be yours, and you won't be able to achieve the same quality with a 5Mbit - 15Mbit connection.
Ohhh give it a fucking rest! Anyone can copy a DVD - NOW. But it took several years before it became easy enough for people to do it.
Why do you expect it to be that easy for BD right now? It hasn't been out for very long and you can already copy them. Soon, you'll be able to rip and transcode them just like a DVD, just as easy. It can be done now, but it's a little difficult - just like how DVD's used to be.
Blah Blah Blah.
If you have a decent HDTV, HD will look so much nicer on it that you will only want to buy HD versions.
I don't know a single person that has seen movies on my TV in HD that didn't say "This looks great!"
I'm so sick and tired of all you fucking armchair market experts trying to tell everyone what "MOST PEOPLE" do, think, and care about. Go fuck your righteous self.
Just FYI: You've been able to copy BluRay discs now for well over a year.
So. How do you KNOW what "MOST" americans have?
In case you didn't notice, almost all flat panels in the stores are LCD now. (Gee, who didn't see that coming? Ohh yea. All the Plasma TV fanboys.) Almost all of them support 1080p; if not directly, they can take a 1080i signal and de-interlace them.
I got my TV three years ago, and it's 1080. My friend has a DLP Projector from four years ago - 1080.
For a little while 720p was more common but now it's all 1080.
Don't pretend that because you chose 720p, so did "most people."
Why would you re-purchase your collection?
Keep your DVD's, and start buying BluRay movies moving forward. Why is that so hard to understand?
Just because YOU don't want to purchase movies you already own, doesn't mean everyone has those same 200 movies. I don't have a large movie collection, so maybe *I* want to go and buy an old movie, but in a new HD film conversion?
So, in a nutshell:
- You realized you don't want to collect movies anymore because you don't watch them
- You blame BluRay?
It's just as necessary as any TV.
Ohh bullshit. On any flat panel, the screen will de-interlace and you won't be able to see the interlacing on 1080. The lines are so small, and there's no "CRT Bounce" associated with it.
1080i will always look better than 720p if your screen actually is capable of displaying a full 1080 picture.
No, a cheap $50 upscaling player will look like ass.
You're better off either using the TV's scaler or a PS3 for the job (which does an excellent job of scaling DVD's.)
I think HD TV is more important than HD Movies on disc. The reason is because you get wide screen and surround sound, which you didn't get before. Well, you might have gotten 5.1 on HBO and stuff but not the wide screen.
In the end, the people that complain about HD not being much better than SD are mostly people that have 32" or 40" 720P TV's. I have a 52" Sharp, and I can really tell the difference. No scaler will ever be able to make SD look as good as HD on a larger screen.
If you can't tell the difference between DVD and BluRay on a 42" screen, then your eyesight sucks, you're sitting too far from that screen, or you're full of shit.
I tend to think it's the latter.
Plus, BD doesn't just offer better picture. It also has the potential of having a much better interface, MUCH better audio, and the discs are actually more resilient than DVD's.
Yea sure why not include a lossless version at 24-bit 192Khz? That would be awesome because then we'd all get cheap 8GB memory sticks.
While I do enjoy DVD-Audio discs a lot, and I wish there were more, 320Kbit MP3 encoded with a recent encoder will be audibly indistinguishable from CD-quality uncompressed (which is about 1400Kbit.)
I don't care what equipment you have. 320Kbit MP3 mastered from the same 24-bit source (assuming a modern recording studio) as the CD will sound just as good as the CD. MAYBE even better.
Well yes, but they weren't use in common English. Not really..
You could possibly provide a virtual environment for students. If they want to experiment with various operating systems, code, or whatever - you could provide them with a number of virtual machines for their projects.
You could use VMware, which would probably be the best solution at this point, but it's more expensive than the alternatives. There's also VirtualIron, based on Xen, or free Xen systems to use.
I think it could be a service to your student base.
Don't do it! They'll pwn you!
Interestingly enough, the most commonly known uses of Neo began with things like Neo-Nazi and Neoconservatism (which was intended to be a criticism.)
I think using the word Neo for anything is annoying.
Just say NEW.
"Seriously, I'd trust code written by 13 year olds a lot more than that written by major companies."
Then you'd be stupid.
Sure, a young kid can write some novel little things, but serious software? No. It does in fact take teams of people do to that - in the OSS world or corporate world (or as often is the case, a mix of the two.)
Generally speaking, 13 year old boys don't do much on the Internet except beg for shit, yell at shit, and talk shit. Lots of shit is involved.
It's not limited to 13 year olds, but it sure is true for many 1st person shooter type games. I used to enjoy playing games like CS and stuff with my friend but we both eventually got tired of the little kiddies ruining every game.
Your username is TJamieson? My last name is Jamieson, spelled the same way with the IE. If that's your last name, you're probably as tired to telling people "No, it's IE. I.. E... Not just I, not just E. Not EI. GRR!!" as I am =)
ps.
"NIC Card" has always been the most annoying redundancy to me =)
I wasn't rich back then - I was about 19 years old and my friend and I both saved up for the VooDoo2. It was not $600. It was $200.
If you are talking about an Average PC in 1995, you have some problems:
- The original VooDoo Graphics chip was produced in 1996. It didn't show in consumer cards until very late 1996 and mostly 1997 with cards like the Diamond Monster 3D
- The VooDoo 2 was released in 1998. It was $200, not $600
- In 1995 by far the most common average PC was an Intel or (more likely) an AMD 486 DX4
- The Pentium 166 MMX wasn't released until 1996 and was not an "average CPU" it was a high end CPU
In 1995 you didn't need to put 128MB RAM into your machine to run Quake, actually you didn't need anything to run it in 1995 because it wasn't released until 1996.
Quake II was release in 1997.
If you had a Pentium MMX 166 and a VooDoo 2 you were rockin' Quake 2 and made your friends jealous.
I'm beginning to think that perhaps you just weren't very good at playing, and got owned by your friends so much that you blame your ruined childhood that ensued because of your shame.
Or, you're just stupid.
id Software did a lot for the computer gaming industry, and personally, I though Doom 3 was a lot of fun to play. id has usually been about balancing both great new technology and solid gameplay. What they did with Doom 3 and fully calculated lighting changed all games since. Have other done things better than id since? Sure. Are id's games the best? Maybe not. They've been very influential in the industry and we're better for it.
ps. id hasn't failed. YOU FAIL.
Wow, good one. Now grow some testicles and try that without hitting the Anonymous button.
I never post anonymously. If you don't want people to know you've said something, then you don't stand by your own words and you truly are a coward.
Indeed - and it's the same symptom. Instead of making them more environmentally friendly, these new high performance, fuel efficient engines are use to pull more weight.
I don't blame the auto makers as much as some people do. They're bound by the same problems that we are bound by - we can't drive natural gas cars because we can't fill them up, and they can't sell any because we can't fill them up. Replace natural gas with your alternative fuel of choice.
Until fairly recently, with the advancement of battery technology (which HAS improved greatly in the last decade) can the auto makers start seriously looking into electric vehicles. It started with Hybrids (although I think they're a waste of effort) and will hopefully turn into fully electric cars in the not-so-distant future. I do think cars like the Volt will be a good trade-off until that happens.
Yea, the auto makers COULD have done more to push the envelope for alternative fuels but it's not all up to them. And, I really hate it when I see people saying that the reason American auto makers are in trouble is because of fuel efficiency problems - it's because of QUALITY problems, and in recent years the big American automakers have been making a lot of strides in that regard.
Fundamental problems with personal transportation stem from many issues - like most other big problems we face today. It's never a simple answer, because the world is not simple.