Not true. First, there is no Lord of the Rings for HD-DVD. It hasn't even been announced. Furthermore, movies like Reds, which are longer in run time, come on two HD-DVD's - one for movie, one for extras. As does Mission Imposssible III and it's a standard 120 minutes - they just wanted a great encoding of the movie and they did so by dumping all extras.
What you've said is not correct at all.
Blu-ray disc, at dual layer, is in a better position for this. 30GB for a movie (a single double layer HD-DVD worth) and then 20 extra GB for extras.
OK, but nobody has announced anything yet. Vivid, for example, still appears exclusive to HD-DVD. Titles like "Adult Film Industry Chooses HD-DVD" suggest that, at the very least, there is a slate of titles announced. 4 titles?
The adult film industry hasn't really chosen anything. There are many adult video companies I'm sure - if there is porn on both formats does it really matter that there are 100 titles on HD-DVD and 75 on Blu-ray? How much porn does a format need before it can say "yeah, we have porn".
"Adult Film Industry Choses HD-DVD". Yes, because they -all- chose HD-DVD.
There really is no three layer HD-DVD media. It's not part of the standard. They don't expect it to be a part of the standard until the end of 2008 at the earliest. Even still, Toshiba would likely need to decide between making current players obsolete, or reserving three layer HD-DVD for 'desktop' purposes, like backup and data storage.
This technology isn't likely going to ship with any Hollywood movies on it anytime soon.
Because I care -so much- about what "Audioholics" think about a new video product. Why do people with little or no established credibility think they'll gain my respect by writing articles entitles "Why product X sucks" or "Why products X and Y are irrelevent".
How about doing what they're supposed to be doing... providing objective information and letting me decide for myself?
Oh... right... because journalism is dead... that's why.
Honestly, my favorite part of this article is this:
"I got into various levels of trouble when I suggested that Apple was going to gravitate towards Windows since it would be easy to do and there was some evidence that the company might want to do it."
What he actually said was that Apple would ditch OS X for Windows. What Apple actually did was allow people who want to run Windows -as well- to install it on a second partition, obviously with the intention of providing a safety net to would-be switchers.
I like John, but I'd rather he not try to restate what he previously stated to make himself look smarter than he really is.
"trust me your mother is in the minority. maybe not the vast minority, but certainly at the most 40%, those 40% who are not exposed to toddlers, keep their homes neat, never drop their dvd's on the floor.. i mean damn those things are fragile."
I don't trust you at all because I don't think your numbers are anywhere near correct. I'd say, on average, the vast majority of households - maybe more than 95%, never even -try- to copy a DVD. i understand that you probably have a little more knowledge than the average person and that's fine - but you're clearly in a minority.
Sure, a Google search will find you tons of rippers for DVD's, but most people never even bother to search for them because it never occurs to them to bother copying a DVD. A DVD is something simpler than that... most people rent them, watch them, return them. maybe buy a few for a home collection... but very very few people know what DRM is and care to try to circumvent it.
That said, the added DRM protection of blu-ray and HD-DVD won't be much different for these people. Rent, play, return.
The only difference with the new formats are the people who bought early HDTV's without HDMI ports - these people will clearly notice 'something is up' with their lack of full resolution support. That said, the component video resolution of a blu-ray or HD-DVD disc will still be above DVD quality, so even still, many of these people will still see an increase and never even realise that they're only getting 1/4 the maximum resolution.
You are spot on about the resolution but at what cost? $20-$30 a disc is IMHO TOO HIGH to modivate Joe Average Consumer to take the leap. Not to mention the cost of the player itself. I'm gonna join the others and sit on the fence with my beverage of choice and watch this whole thing play out before diving in.
First, this isn't really true. When DVD's first came out they were that expensive and the players were as well. There was a clear difference in quality between DVD and VHS and the consumers who saw this bought early. Everyone else waited.
Now, the average joe consumer hasn't actually -seen- HDTV in action.
Case in point... I bought an HDTV. Spent a bunch. Bring it home - girlfriend shakes her head at me, says I wasted my money. I set it up, plug in the new HDTV cable terminal, connect it all and wait 30 minutes or so for the cable co to signal my box that I'm all set for HDTV channels. Throw on HD Discovery...
Suddenly, I didn't waste my money anymore. Now she won't watch anything that is in SD... says it hurts her eyes.
As more people have these awakenings to what HDTV is really all about, more people will spend on hi-def DVD formats, just as what happened with DVD. As this happens, the prices will come down, just as with DVD.
As for all this talk of DRM - DVD also has DRM and 99% of the buying public never notices and never has any trouble with it. Yes, the AACS business sucks for those of us who, erm, 'backup' our discs.... but my mother has never called me to complain about trying to copy DVD's and not being able to get through CSS.
And so it should.. but a black frame in any encoding is relatively hard to mess up and if it wasn't 'bottomless abyss of blackness', you'd have more problems than you can imagine.
On the other hand, if you look at scenes involving a lot of shadow or a very shallow colour spectrum, you start to see a lot of unnecessary noises in the blacks.
Of course, the fact that you don't notice this is not suprising.. most people don't. But as I said, those who do are well looking forward to 45GB H.264 movies.
"Currently 720p hd quality can be encoded in xvid at 4.3 gigs while still preserving the noise from the film used to produce the movie."
This is only sort of true...
XVid, while great for moving TV around the internet, has serious issues with black levels that photographers/cinematographers/anyone who spends a great deal of time looking at images find absolutely disgusting.
So yes, the video is technically 720p and encoded out to DVD-R, but the resulting image has noticeable problems. Most people won't see this - but those who do find it unacceptable.
That said.. if you're real complaint here is 'not changing disks all the time', it's time to go the gym... i'd rather get off my ass twice to watch through the entire Matrix Trilogy if it means that all 3 films are 45GB H.264 encodings at 1920x1080... and you can keep your 12.9GB/6hr single disc noise-fest.
"Yeah, but somebody set up us the DS. Before launch, people criticized the Nintendo DS for allegedly bringing back the core ideas of the Virtual Boy, and now it's beating the PSP in all developed markets."
It's also half the price and appeals to a large portion of the market.
Personally, I do own a PSP because of Prince of Persia / GTA three-dee goodness on the road. But I guess that's just personal preference.
Well, I wouldn't say that anyone is 'forced' to upgrade to anything - most people buy a console for the titles they like, not for the titles they -will- like. If anything, people will be less 'forced' to upgrade to 360 and more willngly do so because they see a next-gen game that they want to play.
As for PS3 vs. XBox, there isn't much point in discussing that given that the PS3 isn't even available and very little is known about it's on-line functionality. That said, rumors are saying that Sony is going to be offering a very Live styled service for the PS3, so I'm not thinking that there will a lot of difference between the two.
As for your sig... am curious about all the people I read and talk to who are already sold on the revolution. I find this curious - nobody has seen any content running on it and nobody knows anything about it except it has a fishing rod styled controller and it can run downloaded SNES games....
Am I the only one who remembers the power glove or the virtual boy? Two ideas that were every bit as novel as the new two piece gyro controller - but in practice were absolute bombs. i'm just saying that Nintendo isn''t above and beyond putting something useless in the market just because it's different.
"What is the deal with 360 owners? All you guys defend the box like crazed zealots. You and the hordes protesting cartoons of Mohammed have much in common."
Right.. because you have any clue what you're talking about...
"Guys, if you enjoy your toy, enjoy it. Who cares if someone expresses an opion contrary to the "360 Way"? Every single one of you losers gets all upset any time someone rips MS! Try having sex once and a while, it helps."
Again... because you have any clue what you're talking about. Nobody was getting upset - I was just questioning the wisdom of declaring an entire product a 'failure' simply because they couldn't get enough to market to meet an enormous demand and one crying slashdotter couldn't find one at his local shop.
Figure out what the hell is being said before you start showing off what a tool you are....
That's true, but I don't think that applies in this case.
If Microsoft had only been able to get 100,000 out the door - that would have been a 'supply problem'. But they've sold -a lot- more than that.. something like 600,000 last i saw. That's just a case of more supply than demand.
And it's not like they're selling sneakers... these things are exceedingly high end and difficult to manufacture.
Re:Xbox Live still requires broadband
on
Review - Full Auto
·
· Score: 1
Wait... people still have dial-up?
Seriously.. I generally think, at leat with the XBox 360, that the people who are adopting -now- are the kind of people who generally have broadband and have bought into the whole 'Live' deal. Maybe I'm wrong but that's my feeling.
The really cool thing about the 360 is that you can go Live Marketplace, download the demo to this game, and try it out. If you like it, buy it. If not, don't... makes reviews less necessary when everyone can review the game themselves. I tried the demo, didn't like it that much - is fun for a few minutes but nothing I could really get into - so I didn't buy the game. Conversely, I tried the Fight Night 3 demo and never expected to like it but had a total blast - so I'm going to buy the game.
The 'shooting at other cars' part of this game isn't as fun as the 'crashing into stuff' part. That said, Burnout is a better 'crashing into stuff' racer... Project Gotham 3 is a better 'sim car' racer, and Ridge Racer or NFS are better 'drift' racers. With an uber-tuned-up version of Burnout due on the 360 next month, just wait for that.
"Until I can go down to my chain store and buy a console for MSRP or less, I could give crap less. As far I am concerned the Xbox 360 so far is a failure."
So you don't own one and have made up your mind? Very grown-up of you. MS has sold 600,000 of them and it's a 'failure'. Well, I actually own one - bought it from Best Buy a month ago - it's very cool. Hardly a 'failure'.
Wait a couple weeks - MS says they're going to flood the market. 'Supply issues will be gone', so sayeth Mr. Moore.
Then, when you've tried it, if you still think it's a failure, maybe people will care what you think.
Besides.. the fact that the original comment is 0,Funny with 30/20 Overrated/Flamebait suggests that the half the people who read it 'missed your point'... at least be in a position of superiority before you act superior, dick.
My Mac kicks your Linux in the scrotum, my PSP spanks your DS and I really have no opinion on the straight/gay issue... I personally prefer the ladies, but to each their own when it comes to getting off, I figure.
I mean let's be real: This is a GAME console, if you don't care about it for playing games, there's little reason to get one, espically at the current prices. $500 is plenty to build a media PC better than any X-box.
Wow.. at least I'm not the only one high right now.
You show me where to get a tri-core system with 512MB of memory and a video card more powerful than pretty much everything available off the shelf. Better yet, show me where to get it for $399.
"In fact x86-64 is pretty much the same instrucion set except that it has been extended to support 64-bit registers, etc. So you could very well say that x86-64 ISA is a derivative of the x86-32 bit ISA."
Well, stop using the web then... since it's not a US invention, developed at CERN by a British scientist. Considering the average person thinks the web -IS- the internet, your childish boasting about your deprecated military/industrial complex loses most of it's teeth.
I'm not even going to comment on the rest of your drivel - you should realize that twits like you are pretty much the cause of most "anti-US dick waving" on Slashdot.
Nobody likes a loud-mouth moron with no clue acting like they have any idea what they're talking about. Sound familiar?
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. First, there is no Lord of the Rings for HD-DVD. It hasn't even been announced. Furthermore, movies like Reds, which are longer in run time, come on two HD-DVD's - one for movie, one for extras. As does Mission Imposssible III and it's a standard 120 minutes - they just wanted a great encoding of the movie and they did so by dumping all extras.
What you've said is not correct at all.
Blu-ray disc, at dual layer, is in a better position for this. 30GB for a movie (a single double layer HD-DVD worth) and then 20 extra GB for extras.
OK, but nobody has announced anything yet. Vivid, for example, still appears exclusive to HD-DVD.
Titles like "Adult Film Industry Chooses HD-DVD" suggest that, at the very least, there is a slate of titles announced. 4 titles?
The adult film industry hasn't really chosen anything. There are many adult video companies I'm sure - if there is porn on both formats does it really matter that there are 100 titles on HD-DVD and 75 on Blu-ray? How much porn does a format need before it can say "yeah, we have porn".
"Adult Film Industry Choses HD-DVD". Yes, because they -all- chose HD-DVD.
There really is no three layer HD-DVD media. It's not part of the standard. They don't expect it to be a part of the standard until the end of 2008 at the earliest. Even still, Toshiba would likely need to decide between making current players obsolete, or reserving three layer HD-DVD for 'desktop' purposes, like backup and data storage.
This technology isn't likely going to ship with any Hollywood movies on it anytime soon.
A better title should be "one studio commits to releasing 4 titles and hasn't even officially dropped Blu-ray". Wait to show fanboy bias, Slashdot.
Because I care -so much- about what "Audioholics" think about a new video product. Why do people with little or no established credibility think they'll gain my respect by writing articles entitles "Why product X sucks" or "Why products X and Y are irrelevent".
How about doing what they're supposed to be doing... providing objective information and letting me decide for myself?
Oh... right... because journalism is dead... that's why.
Honestly, my favorite part of this article is this:
"I got into various levels of trouble when I suggested that Apple was going to gravitate towards Windows since it would be easy to do and there was some evidence that the company might want to do it."
What he actually said was that Apple would ditch OS X for Windows. What Apple actually did was allow people who want to run Windows -as well- to install it on a second partition, obviously with the intention of providing a safety net to would-be switchers.
I like John, but I'd rather he not try to restate what he previously stated to make himself look smarter than he really is.
"trust me your mother is in the minority. maybe not the vast minority, but certainly at the most 40%, those 40% who are not exposed to toddlers, keep their homes neat, never drop their dvd's on the floor.. i mean damn those things are fragile."
I don't trust you at all because I don't think your numbers are anywhere near correct. I'd say, on average, the vast majority of households - maybe more than 95%, never even -try- to copy a DVD. i understand that you probably have a little more knowledge than the average person and that's fine - but you're clearly in a minority.
Sure, a Google search will find you tons of rippers for DVD's, but most people never even bother to search for them because it never occurs to them to bother copying a DVD. A DVD is something simpler than that... most people rent them, watch them, return them. maybe buy a few for a home collection... but very very few people know what DRM is and care to try to circumvent it.
That said, the added DRM protection of blu-ray and HD-DVD won't be much different for these people. Rent, play, return.
The only difference with the new formats are the people who bought early HDTV's without HDMI ports - these people will clearly notice 'something is up' with their lack of full resolution support. That said, the component video resolution of a blu-ray or HD-DVD disc will still be above DVD quality, so even still, many of these people will still see an increase and never even realise that they're only getting 1/4 the maximum resolution.
I suppose the words "to coincide with the entry of compatible disc players" doesn't make any sense to you?
To translate: "Sony is releasing the movies on May 23rd WHEN THEY WILL ALSO BE releasing compatible disc players."
So... you're on about what, now?
You are spot on about the resolution but at what cost? $20-$30 a disc is IMHO TOO HIGH to modivate Joe Average Consumer to take the leap. Not to mention the cost of the player itself. I'm gonna join the others and sit on the fence with my beverage of choice and watch this whole thing play out before diving in.
First, this isn't really true. When DVD's first came out they were that expensive and the players were as well. There was a clear difference in quality between DVD and VHS and the consumers who saw this bought early. Everyone else waited.
Now, the average joe consumer hasn't actually -seen- HDTV in action.
Case in point... I bought an HDTV. Spent a bunch. Bring it home - girlfriend shakes her head at me, says I wasted my money. I set it up, plug in the new HDTV cable terminal, connect it all and wait 30 minutes or so for the cable co to signal my box that I'm all set for HDTV channels. Throw on HD Discovery...
Suddenly, I didn't waste my money anymore. Now she won't watch anything that is in SD... says it hurts her eyes.
As more people have these awakenings to what HDTV is really all about, more people will spend on hi-def DVD formats, just as what happened with DVD. As this happens, the prices will come down, just as with DVD.
As for all this talk of DRM - DVD also has DRM and 99% of the buying public never notices and never has any trouble with it. Yes, the AACS business sucks for those of us who, erm, 'backup' our discs.... but my mother has never called me to complain about trying to copy DVD's and not being able to get through CSS.
And so it should .. but a black frame in any encoding is relatively hard to mess up and if it wasn't 'bottomless abyss of blackness', you'd have more problems than you can imagine.
On the other hand, if you look at scenes involving a lot of shadow or a very shallow colour spectrum, you start to see a lot of unnecessary noises in the blacks.
Of course, the fact that you don't notice this is not suprising.. most people don't. But as I said, those who do are well looking forward to 45GB H.264 movies.
"Currently 720p hd quality can be encoded in xvid at 4.3 gigs while still preserving the noise from the film used to produce the movie."
This is only sort of true...
XVid, while great for moving TV around the internet, has serious issues with black levels that photographers/cinematographers/anyone who spends a great deal of time looking at images find absolutely disgusting.
So yes, the video is technically 720p and encoded out to DVD-R, but the resulting image has noticeable problems. Most people won't see this - but those who do find it unacceptable.
That said.. if you're real complaint here is 'not changing disks all the time', it's time to go the gym... i'd rather get off my ass twice to watch through the entire Matrix Trilogy if it means that all 3 films are 45GB H.264 encodings at 1920x1080... and you can keep your 12.9GB/6hr single disc noise-fest.
"Yeah, but somebody set up us the DS. Before launch, people criticized the Nintendo DS for allegedly bringing back the core ideas of the Virtual Boy, and now it's beating the PSP in all developed markets."
It's also half the price and appeals to a large portion of the market.
Personally, I do own a PSP because of Prince of Persia / GTA three-dee goodness on the road. But I guess that's just personal preference.
Well, I wouldn't say that anyone is 'forced' to upgrade to anything - most people buy a console for the titles they like, not for the titles they -will- like. If anything, people will be less 'forced' to upgrade to 360 and more willngly do so because they see a next-gen game that they want to play.
As for PS3 vs. XBox, there isn't much point in discussing that given that the PS3 isn't even available and very little is known about it's on-line functionality. That said, rumors are saying that Sony is going to be offering a very Live styled service for the PS3, so I'm not thinking that there will a lot of difference between the two.
As for your sig... am curious about all the people I read and talk to who are already sold on the revolution. I find this curious - nobody has seen any content running on it and nobody knows anything about it except it has a fishing rod styled controller and it can run downloaded SNES games....
Am I the only one who remembers the power glove or the virtual boy? Two ideas that were every bit as novel as the new two piece gyro controller - but in practice were absolute bombs. i'm just saying that Nintendo isn''t above and beyond putting something useless in the market just because it's different.
"What is the deal with 360 owners? All you guys defend the box like crazed zealots. You and the hordes protesting cartoons of Mohammed have much in common."
Right.. because you have any clue what you're talking about...
"Guys, if you enjoy your toy, enjoy it. Who cares if someone expresses an opion contrary to the "360 Way"? Every single one of you losers gets all upset any time someone rips MS! Try having sex once and a while, it helps."
Again... because you have any clue what you're talking about. Nobody was getting upset - I was just questioning the wisdom of declaring an entire product a 'failure' simply because they couldn't get enough to market to meet an enormous demand and one crying slashdotter couldn't find one at his local shop.
Figure out what the hell is being said before you start showing off what a tool you are....
Troll.
That's true, but I don't think that applies in this case.
If Microsoft had only been able to get 100,000 out the door - that would have been a 'supply problem'.
But they've sold -a lot- more than that.. something like 600,000 last i saw. That's just a case of more supply than demand.
And it's not like they're selling sneakers... these things are exceedingly high end and difficult to manufacture.
Wait... people still have dial-up?
Seriously.. I generally think, at leat with the XBox 360, that the people who are adopting -now- are the kind of people who generally have broadband and have bought into the whole 'Live' deal. Maybe I'm wrong but that's my feeling.
The really cool thing about the 360 is that you can go Live Marketplace, download the demo to this game, and try it out. If you like it, buy it. If not, don't... makes reviews less necessary when everyone can review the game themselves. I tried the demo, didn't like it that much - is fun for a few minutes but nothing I could really get into - so I didn't buy the game. Conversely, I tried the Fight Night 3 demo and never expected to like it but had a total blast - so I'm going to buy the game.
The 'shooting at other cars' part of this game isn't as fun as the 'crashing into stuff' part. That said, Burnout is a better 'crashing into stuff' racer... Project Gotham 3 is a better 'sim car' racer, and Ridge Racer or NFS are better 'drift' racers. With an uber-tuned-up version of Burnout due on the 360 next month, just wait for that.
"Until I can go down to my chain store and buy a console for MSRP or less, I could give crap less. As far I am concerned the Xbox 360 so far is a failure."
So you don't own one and have made up your mind? Very grown-up of you. MS has sold 600,000 of them and it's a 'failure'.
Well, I actually own one - bought it from Best Buy a month ago - it's very cool. Hardly a 'failure'.
Wait a couple weeks - MS says they're going to flood the market. 'Supply issues will be gone', so sayeth Mr. Moore.
Then, when you've tried it, if you still think it's a failure, maybe people will care what you think.
Besides.. the fact that the original comment is 0,Funny with 30/20 Overrated/Flamebait suggests that the half the people who read it 'missed your point'... at least be in a position of superiority before you act superior, dick.
Wow.... good to see that there are still total assholes in the world.
'Truth' is in the eye of the beholder.
My Mac kicks your Linux in the scrotum, my PSP spanks your DS and I really have no opinion on the straight/gay issue... I personally prefer the ladies, but to each their own when it comes to getting off, I figure.
I mean let's be real: This is a GAME console, if you don't care about it for playing games, there's little reason to get one, espically at the current prices. $500 is plenty to build a media PC better than any X-box.
Wow.. at least I'm not the only one high right now.
You show me where to get a tri-core system with 512MB of memory and a video card more powerful than pretty much everything available off the shelf. Better yet, show me where to get it for $399.
Let's be real here... you're on glue.
"In fact x86-64 is pretty much the same instrucion set except that it has been extended to support 64-bit registers, etc. So you could very well say that x86-64 ISA is a derivative of the x86-32 bit ISA."
AND that it has twice the registers.
This was out on MacNN and Digg yesterday. /. - news for nerds from yesterday.
Ahh
Well, stop using the web then... since it's not a US invention, developed at CERN by a British scientist. Considering the average person thinks the web -IS- the internet, your childish boasting about your deprecated military/industrial complex loses most of it's teeth.
I'm not even going to comment on the rest of your drivel - you should realize that twits like you are pretty much the cause of most "anti-US dick waving" on Slashdot.
Nobody likes a loud-mouth moron with no clue acting like they have any idea what they're talking about. Sound familiar?
Dumbass.