If the President believes a law is unconstitutional, he is sworn to uphold the Constitution first.
I am surprised that you were able to respond here on Slashdot. Did you dictate your rubbish and have someone else type it for you? Did that person also read the other posts here? You see, Your Ignorance is such that I am wholly convinced that you do not even possess the most basic skills, like reading and writing. Go back to school please. Learn about branches of government and the US Constitution. The one that says that the president must "faithfully execute Congress' laws".
After reading that, try to figure out who has the ultimate say in whether a law is constitutional or not. Hint: It's not the Executive Branch, and if it was the Legislative, it would be kind of odd, given that it was those guys who wrote the (possibly unconstitutional) law in the first place.
As long as a law has not been deemed unconstitutional, if the US president doesn't execute that law, he is in violation of his oath no matter what he thinks about the law.
Particularly in the last 60-70 years, wherever the US has gone they have worked against the will of local populations, killed millions of innocent civilians, installed puppet totalitarian regimes, sold out allies, supported terrorists etc, etc, etc.
Is that so? Now, before you start calling me a flag-saluting American, I am not. I live in the US, but I am an immigrant from Europe.
The US has generally, over the last 60-70 years involved it self in the world based on one single test (that is until the Bush moron took office). The test was "are they being co-opted by the Soviets?" So, in South America the US worked against any government that appeared to be socialist, same thing in Asia. Now, some 20 years later, what can we say about how the US interventions worked? What are the most famous ones? I'll try chronological, but I am selective, please add your own and we can debate. I am selecting the more famous ones.
Korea...
Ah, yes, Korea. Fought basically since the end of WWII, started while McA was still in Tokyo. Ended in a stalemate. The Soviets got the North, the US got the south. Quick question, where would you like to live today, Seoul or Pyongyang? Just curious. South Korea is an interesting place, for many years it was the fastest growing economy in the world. One of the main areas where the world went from massive starvation to no starvation. The US must have been terribly wrong trying to make Korea into what South Korea is today, right? The North is a lot better, right?
Vietnam...
Ah, yes, the French fuck-up that the US was asked to help out with. Didn't go so well for the US, but who lost really? The US or the poor fuckers who had to live in that miserable place for decades afterwards? Do you think the Vietnamese would rather have had the social and economical development of South Korea? I think so too. It's a pity the US lost in Vietnam, isn't it?
Chile...
This is probably the most famous US intervention in South America. At least it is very famous in Europe. The terror of Pinochet. Well, what is the reality here? For one, the reality is that the US never helped install Pinochet. The US was definitely plotting with the military to overthrow Allende, but they were talking to other people than Pinochet. Everybody, including most parts of the military establishment, was surprised when Pinochet took power. But... what happened after he took power? Is there any other country in the region that functions half as well? Chile has had, for the region, an unparalleled social and economical development. Thanks to the generalissimo. We can all agree that his way of making an omelet broke more eggs than we find palatable, but then again, some eggs have to be broken. Compare with Venezuela, if someone doesn't go and break some eggs in Venezuela soon, that population is going to suffer for decades and decades.
Oh, and by the way, in case you wonder, yes, Allende needed to be overthrown. He was a lunatic. He was sending Chile head first into the same abyss that countries like North Korea are in today. Allende was a common thief. He was a Soviet puppy, and he needed to be removed. Pronto.
Palestinians...
Well, here the US has not really had much to do with creating the situation the way it is. This is a problem of Arab manufacture, they created it, they should fix it. The US has tried to help a few times, most notably the US made a significant effort to help Arafat and the PLO as they were being thrown out of Lebanon. Remember that? As the civil war was winding down in Lebanon, the Arabs decided to throw the PLO out of Lebanon. The PLO was justifiably worried about this since they were the only protection that the Palestinian civilian population had in the region. The PLO asked for American help, and they got it. The Americans stepped in as a guarantor of the safety of the civilian Palestinian population. On invitation from PLO. Begging is probably the right term. What happened? R
The reason there's no democracy in Iran is because we destroyed it in it's infancy in 1953 because they tried to nationalize their oil and take profits away from British and American companies.
Two major errors here. Mossadeq was not trying to create a democracy in Iran, quite the contrary, he was trying to create a socialist totalitarian state, and he was well on his way to succeed. In order to finance it he had to nationalize the oil industry, which is another word for "ignoring deals struck with companies and stealing their property". Second error is also quite interesting. It was the British, and not the Americans who brought down Mossadeq. The Americans had an extremely tangential role in this, but it was the first real operation of what was to become the CIA, so they blew their own importance out of all proportions. Essentially the Americans helped a little bit in instigating protest among students. That's it. The British brought down Mossadeq on their own.
Now, to another poster - Iran is actually quite different from what we think. As a country and people, the Iranians are probably the most pro-American population in the region. It sounds amazing, but it's true. Iranians in general have no sympathy for their government, but they have learned that there is no point in trying to change it, it won't. Iran is also, possibly outside of Lebanon, the most likely candidate for a reasonalbe democracy in the region. It is far closer that countries like UAE, Saudi Arabia or Egypt. They just need a real reformer elected and a tiny amount of help.
The sad (but not terribly surprising) thing is that even the very pro-American population (relatively speaking) population of Iran is currently terrified of the US. Most of them are convinced that we'll come bomb them any moment now, and who can blame them. Such fear isn't good for long-term relationships.
In contrast, most Middle Eastern nations suppress opinions that don't follow the official party line on history.
Here is an interesting statistic for you, it exemplifies how isolationist, narrow-minded and introspective the Arab nations are. Every year more non-Spanish language books are translated into Spanish than has been translated into Arab ever. 1700 years. Less foreign-language books than you get in a single year in Spanish.
This is such a scary statistic that everybody should sit up and blink. The Arab world is as closed to input as is the brain of Mr. Bush. There is nothing going in, and the only thing that governs their social and political development is superstition and ignorance. Given the size of that part of the world, that is very scary indeed.
The Lebanese should have treated the Palestinians like Israel treated Ethopians, Iranians and Russians.
Or the way Jordan treated the Palestinians. The "Palestinian problem" is of Arab design and manufacture, and it is today exactly the way the Arab world wants it to be.
If you butcher people's families you can bloody well expect them to come and try to kill you right back.
Absolutely, which is why Mr. Bush is such a terrible president. He doesn't care, and never cared, about 9/11 and the victims of terror. He has never really tried to catch anyone of the people behind that act of terrorism, but we accidentally caught some of them in our token effort to look a little tough in Afghanistan.
Mr. Bush and his cronies went after Iraq from day one, and Iraq never had any connection to any form of terrorists at all, and no, paying off the families of suicide bombers is not a connection with terrorists, it is a post-fact connection with their families.
W had no motivation to delay unless they really hadn't made up their mind.
Ah, but again you are just showing that you argue based on your religious hallucinations, not fact. TW was contractually obliged to produce HD-DVDs until April of 2008. If they had announced in September, when the decision was made, that they were going Blu exclusive, they would have damaged their own business.
Almost entirely owing to I AM LEGEND. From very low to just low. Great.
Yeah, so when catalog titles capture sells 72/28 DVD/Blu, then that is nothing. Were you born clueless or did someone hit you over the head with a hammer throughout your childhood?
But hey, keep posting your religious hallucinations. They are almost entertaining, in the same way monkeys in a zoo are entertaining.
The funny thing was that Warner came extremely close to signing a pact with HD-DVD just before CES
This was reported in a number of forums and it was based on a significant misunderstanding. In early November TW told the HD-DVD guys that they were going to go with Blu. Tosh and MS then started courting TW, but they would not budge. On Thursday before CES, Toshiba and Microsoft asked for a meeting with TW, delaying the announcement that TW was going Blu. In the meeting TW was offered TW $500M in incentives (mostly marketing coverage and reduced production cost) to go HD-DVD exclusive, but TW said no thanks.
The fact that a TW executive let it slip that they were going with Blue already in November is well documented, and TW had to paddle quite a bit not to make this an official announcement.
Suddenly the coast is clear and it's time to buy a player, and no one does
Well, you might have noticed that the economy is seriously in the shitter, or perhaps you haven't. I don't know whether you read news or not.
The "the PS3 is the player" argument is unbelievably dumb
Yeah, for someone who has mental blocks in place, sure. I am far from alone in owning a PS3 and zero PS3 games. The PS3 is a perfect home theater component, particularly when you couple it with something like TVersity. Given the number of TVersity downloads, I'd say it sells quite well as a home media system.
You're just a complete idiot
Nowhere near as dumb as you are. Blu-Ray sales have quadrupled in a year. In the first four months of this year more Blu-Ray media was sold than the entire last year. Given that you claim that PS3 users are not Blu-Ray users and that "nobody" is buying stand alone players, how do you explain the rather significant increase in Blu-Ray media sales? Are morons just buying Blu-Rays to piss you off?
As for fanatic, the only moron here who behaves like a raving lunatic, and therefore a likely fanatic, is you.
Don't reply again
Given that you only have posted bile clearly from a lunatic, answering your clueless piss is the only real option. Someone has to show to the sane people reading here, that you are a fanatic lunatic.
Oh, and look what I found. Blu-Ray sales have quadrupled. 400%. Does it hurt to be wrong all the time?
For new titles, according to the Redhill Group, Blu-Ray now typically hits 8-10% of the total number of disks sold. That is, when a new title is released for DVD and Blu-Ray simultaneously, the Blu-Ray/DVD split is about 10/90. That is significant growth. For catalog titles, the numbers are even better, Blu-Ray titles have hit up to almost 1/3 of the total sold.
My incompetence did not choose a camera that recorded in some bullshit fashion
You are correct, choosing that camera is not incompetent. Thinking that the industry standard of MPEG-2 is some weird unknown file format, that is incompetence.
When I make purchases I avoid crap like this.
Continuing to state that MPEG-2 is "crap" just emphasizes the extent of your incompetence.
I am unable to play based on the manufacturers codec choice
No, your lack of ability is the cause of your inability to play this, not the manufacturers codec. MPEG-2 is the industry standard for video and the fact that you still don't understand that just deepens my awe at your cluelessness.
I would bitch about any maker that did tha
All camcorder manufacturers have camcorders that record in MPEG-2, so that must mean that you are a genius and everybody else is dumb, right? MPEG-2 is also, together with AVC, the only standards for consumer HD camcorders. None of those codecs are available for Windows Media Player via download, so that means that according to your "logic", every single consumer HD camcorder is crap. The fact that you don't understand how clueless that shows you are is amazing. To drive this home - if you get any consumer level HD camcorder, you will not be able to play the recorded video using Windows Media Player unless you install additional software. If you get an AVCHD camcorder, which is at least half the models, you will not be able to capture the video through WMP at all at this point in time (there are ways to make WMP play H.264, but that would teach you about jumping through hoops.
I'm still not buying more software just to play these videos so it has nothing to do with my incompetence
All of the MPEG-2 camcorders come with a little round plastic thing, they call it a CD. These "CDs" contains software, and this software will allow you to decode MPEG-2, the industry standard for video. Oh, and it's amazing that you persist in this.
Sony's choices made me jump through burning hoops
MPEG-2 made you jump through hoops? MPEG-2 is the industry standard for distributing video. All DVDs are encoded with MPEG-2. If you have cable TV, there is an 80-90% chance that all of the content you watch on TV is MPEG-2. The fact that you don't know this is amazing.
I apologize for my incompetence of not memorizing the model of the camera
That was not your incompetence. Read up on the video format that is called MPEG-2, and you might become just a little bit less incompetent. Maybe.
I was under the unfortunate impression that you might actually have some worthwhile information
Oh, I do. Don't worry. The problem was that you showed an amazing level of arrogance when harshly blamed what is considered the worlds number one or two (Canon people like me tend to put Canon as one) camcorder producer for you own incompetence. When you persisted in stating that MPEG-2 is some sort of weird, unknown codec, you just showed that you are unable to digest information and learn something. If you had asked what the problem might be, displaying some sort of humble attitude towards your own massive lack of knowledge, you would have gotten a more polite answer.
Oh, and to repeat, I am not a Sony fanboy, I use Canon camcorders, but I do recognize that Sony makes some of the very best consumer and prosumer level camcorders in the world. The Sony VX-2000 series is, in my opinion, by far the best prosumer camcorders in it's price range for SD photography. The new HDV line is also very, very good. Oh, and many of them, as with many of the Canon and other HD camcorders, shoot and store in MPEG-2. Of course.
And if you truly think that they need all that storage on Bluray, I suggest you try reencoding a movie for yourself.
I don't think they need all that storage on Blu-Ray. I have encoded movies for my self though, and 10Mb/s for 1080p just doesn't cut it. That means that they do need more storage than you can get on a dual-layer DVD.
So, we are in a situation where DVD is too small, what do we do next? Limit our self to a 50% increase in DVD size or make it a little bigger? What is wrong with enabling more storage? I use my Blu-Ray burner also to store data. 50G is nice. Fits an entire HDV project with stock media and all. Before it is rendered. Perfect.
I regularly encode to, and watch content encoded in H.264. It is a codec, not magic. It needs a decent bitrate to produce a good image.
Apple Movie Trailer site and check out their 1080p contents. They look fantastic
Good idea, I haven't downloaded any of those for a while. I have downloaded the equivalent content from the Sony site accessible from the PS3 though. And yes, the content looks good, but a far cry from the higher bitrate originals.
The best example I have of those is the Shakira Oral Fixation tour example. The banding is, particularly in the beginning of the video, painfully obvious. I got the Blu-Ray from Netflix, and the banding is not there.
I am still trying to download the dark night trailer, but having some problems. I got the Prince Caspian trailer though, and even though the scenes are carefully chosen, and quite short, banding in particular is painfully obvious in several scenes on my big-screen TV. If the end movie was of the same quality as the trailer, it would be butchered for it's video quality in reviews. I am looking forward seeing the dark night trailer on my HD TV, but as of now I am unable do have QT download it properly. As always QT on the PC platform is a bloody nightmare.
I have a Nikon but the base point is still the same.
You are absolutely correct, the base point is the same, and the base point is that you have only shown one thing, a general ineptness and a hasty drawing of conclusions based mainly on your own likes/dislikes coupled with your own ignorance.
It seems it is doing mpeg-2 and from the looks of things it causes problems for a lot of people on a variety of platforms.
Ignorance and ineptness is two of the most common features among people in general. The fact that others share your ineptness doesn't make it less sad. MPEG-2 is a codec that isn't distributed for free, and therefore not a codec Windows Movie Player will download automatically. The same people would not be able to play a DVD for exactly the same reason, you need a licensed MPEG-2 decoder on your PC or Mac to play MPEG-2 video. Now, if you had read the manual that came with the Sony or if you had checked around, you would have known that.
The majority of newer camcorders that records HD, or standard def camcorders that record to flash memory or to DVD record in MPEG-2, the newest ones in AVCHD. If you don't have an MPEG-2 decoder on your PC, you can obviously not see this video.
It is of course not at all surprising that you blame Sony for your incompetence. It has to be someone else's fault, right?
Ultimitely this seems to be the issue with quite a few of the Sony Handycams
It is an issue primarily with you, but an issue you would run into if you got a Sony Handicam, a Canon camcorder, a Panasonic camcorder, or any of the hundreds of models that record MPEG-2. A significant number of them do. But hey, don't let me dissuade you from blaming others for you incompetence, I know it is easier for you to do so.
The original assertion that I responded to was that DVD-9 was plenty of storage for HD video the way we know it today, which, given the fact that a good blu-ray is H.264 or VC-1 encoded at 25Mb/s or so, and lossless 5.1 HD-MA sound, is an absurd idea.
Just out of curiosity, will this SCS tool, allow you to put AVC (mpeg-4 ver10) on Blu-ray discs?
This remains to be seen, but I'd be massively surprised if it didn't, to put it mildly. As for the cost, I am aware of this but given the current trend, I assume this will change dramatically over the next 6-12 months.
As for complicated matters - indeed. Given that I shoot in HDV, I am expecting MPEG-2 to be available, otherwise I'd be pissed. Also I am expecting AVC and VC-1 to be available, possibly without the tool actually doing the VC-1 encoding. It should at least accept a VC-1 source. You can then use the Microsoft tools to encode to VC-1.
Currently I use Uled DVD Movie Factory with the HD pack. I am waiting for SCS to release DVD Architect in a couple of weeks with Blu-Ray authoring capabilities.
So you burn some hd discs and then you hang out at circuit city and best buy to offer advice on cam corders and pass out your samples?
I don't get the point of it.
Well, since you apparently can not read, what you get and do not get is of little consequence.
You own the actual camera in question, and almost certainly a capable player+tv / PC of your own
Yes I do, and when I have friends who are looking for advice on a buying decision for a camcorder, coming to my house is not the particular sensible, they go where they can actually convert the buying decision into an actual product. Is that so hard to understand?
If you were going to assist a friend in buying a camcorder, a TV or a sound system, where would you go? Farmers Market?
I'm talking about H.264. That's about as good as it gets right now
I agree that H.264 is as good as it gets and I am in strong disagreement with you on the quality possible at 10Mb/s. I regularly encode video in H.264 for my PS3 on AVCHD. For me, at 720p, 15M gives a decent result for 720p. For 1080p at 24fps which is my alternative encoding, 15Mb/s doesn't cut it, and I have to go to 22-25. Most HD movies today are 1080p, and encoding that at 10Mb/s for a DVD would yield unacceptable results. I have, for example, a concert video encoded at 10Mb/s, a short snipped, and banding is a very visible problem. On the 25Mb/s 1080p encoding there is no banding.
So, my experience, both in watching trailers for commercial movies at lower bandwithd, and encoding my self to H.264, tells me that your assertion that 8G is enough for HD movies is utterly wrong.
Now, we have not even started talking about 2 hour movies, uncompressed sound and extras.
Again, your assertion that a new media format was not needed for this improved visual and audio experience is provably wrong.
By strange video codec I mean it is not included with the combination of full QT, Flip4Win, and Perian.
I find that very odd, and I would love to know what camera it is you are talking about. As I said, I have not heard of any camera from any major producer that doesn't use one of the mentioned codecs. There are several tools on Windows (GSpot, YAAI) that will help you find the codec, I'd love to know which one it is. As I said, I don't use Sony cameras or camcorders, I am a Canon person my self, but this sounds very odd.
slinging insults because their beloved didn't get the care and attention they think it deserves qualifies
You are still just making up reality as you go I see. I have so far not any thing of the kind, I have just pointed out that you have argued entirely based on your own fantasies, and I have pointed out that fantasies and lies are bad sources for arguments.
if you want to know Warner's decision, just talk to terjeber
Nope, talking to me is not the right thing, neither is listening to marketing people. Given the fact that Warner already in early November (seemingly accidentally) made it clear that they were going to back Blu-Ray, and that they also apparently notified Toshiba about this in November, swallowing what Warner Marketing says about their decision making in January is a little silly. But hey, don't think, just eat the marketing material. It is always 100% truthful.
Nonetheless, use Google
I suggest you do so your self. The fact that stand-alone Blu-Ray player sales have declined is neither unknown nor much of a surprise. With the economy going where it is, neither should you be. On the other hand, you weren't talking about stand-alone player sales, you were talking about media sales. In that regard I can also only recommend google, search for "Nielsen blu-ray 351%". As you might know Nielsen tracks the number of DVDs and Blu-Rays sold in the US, and an increase of 351% is not what I would call a significant drop (as I think was your words).
Now, as for player sales, the total number of Blu-Ray players sold is increasing rather significantly, even with your assertion that stand-alone sales are down. The increase you can find in the increase in PS3 sales.
Again, every assertion you have made is wrong. How can you assume that your conclusion is anything but wrong?
You regular take your discs to "Circ City and Best Buy" and play them?
Yes, I do. I do it for two reasons. None of them because I need a new Blu-Ray player. Let me explain.
I own a HD camcorder, and I use this to shoot at birthday parties and other family events. Often people ask me about the quality of HD camcorders (not about TVs and players). They wonder if they will actually get good quality. I like shooting and editing, and to show friends and acquaintances what the result can be, I have so far this year created AVCHD disks to show them. They ask me to assist in purchasing a camcorder, and we drop in to a store and talk. That's when they see the AVCHD disk. I have also handed out some disks, but people are interestingly a little shy about asking for permission to view at Circuit City or Best Buy, even though I tell them it has never been an issue for me to get permission.
BTW, this will change in the middle of this month since SCS is releasing their Blu-Ray authoring tool then to match my new Blu-Ray writer.
So they let you pop in a random disc into a player to see if it works?
I always ask nicely and I have so far not received a single negative answer. The closest I have gotten to that was a "You have to ask that other dude". This is also the experience from anyone I have chatted with in the video editing forums I frequent, so I am unsure as to why you think it impossible. Have you tried it and been denied?
If you go back about 12 months and read some of the video editing forums like creativecow or others you will find many curious "editors" doing exactly the same thing.
Just curious about your attitude though. Did I tear down some religious symbol you have been worshiping?
Not to mention that using Amazon for stats doesn't really make that strong of a case.
A, finally, a good point. I felt it not necessary to quote the Nielsen data that showed that Blu-Ray sales increased 351% in Q1 not needed since someone else had already quoted that number, but hey, I can still quote it.
So, Amazon and Nielsen both disagree with your delusions. How can that be?
Slashdot Mirror
I am surprised that you were able to respond here on Slashdot. Did you dictate your rubbish and have someone else type it for you? Did that person also read the other posts here? You see, Your Ignorance is such that I am wholly convinced that you do not even possess the most basic skills, like reading and writing. Go back to school please. Learn about branches of government and the US Constitution. The one that says that the president must "faithfully execute Congress' laws".
After reading that, try to figure out who has the ultimate say in whether a law is constitutional or not. Hint: It's not the Executive Branch, and if it was the Legislative, it would be kind of odd, given that it was those guys who wrote the (possibly unconstitutional) law in the first place.
As long as a law has not been deemed unconstitutional, if the US president doesn't execute that law, he is in violation of his oath no matter what he thinks about the law.
Is that so? Now, before you start calling me a flag-saluting American, I am not. I live in the US, but I am an immigrant from Europe.
The US has generally, over the last 60-70 years involved it self in the world based on one single test (that is until the Bush moron took office). The test was "are they being co-opted by the Soviets?" So, in South America the US worked against any government that appeared to be socialist, same thing in Asia. Now, some 20 years later, what can we say about how the US interventions worked? What are the most famous ones? I'll try chronological, but I am selective, please add your own and we can debate. I am selecting the more famous ones.
Korea...
Ah, yes, Korea. Fought basically since the end of WWII, started while McA was still in Tokyo. Ended in a stalemate. The Soviets got the North, the US got the south. Quick question, where would you like to live today, Seoul or Pyongyang? Just curious. South Korea is an interesting place, for many years it was the fastest growing economy in the world. One of the main areas where the world went from massive starvation to no starvation. The US must have been terribly wrong trying to make Korea into what South Korea is today, right? The North is a lot better, right?
Vietnam...
Ah, yes, the French fuck-up that the US was asked to help out with. Didn't go so well for the US, but who lost really? The US or the poor fuckers who had to live in that miserable place for decades afterwards? Do you think the Vietnamese would rather have had the social and economical development of South Korea? I think so too. It's a pity the US lost in Vietnam, isn't it?
Chile...
This is probably the most famous US intervention in South America. At least it is very famous in Europe. The terror of Pinochet. Well, what is the reality here? For one, the reality is that the US never helped install Pinochet. The US was definitely plotting with the military to overthrow Allende, but they were talking to other people than Pinochet. Everybody, including most parts of the military establishment, was surprised when Pinochet took power. But... what happened after he took power? Is there any other country in the region that functions half as well? Chile has had, for the region, an unparalleled social and economical development. Thanks to the generalissimo. We can all agree that his way of making an omelet broke more eggs than we find palatable, but then again, some eggs have to be broken. Compare with Venezuela, if someone doesn't go and break some eggs in Venezuela soon, that population is going to suffer for decades and decades.
Oh, and by the way, in case you wonder, yes, Allende needed to be overthrown. He was a lunatic. He was sending Chile head first into the same abyss that countries like North Korea are in today. Allende was a common thief. He was a Soviet puppy, and he needed to be removed. Pronto.
Palestinians...
Well, here the US has not really had much to do with creating the situation the way it is. This is a problem of Arab manufacture, they created it, they should fix it. The US has tried to help a few times, most notably the US made a significant effort to help Arafat and the PLO as they were being thrown out of Lebanon. Remember that? As the civil war was winding down in Lebanon, the Arabs decided to throw the PLO out of Lebanon. The PLO was justifiably worried about this since they were the only protection that the Palestinian civilian population had in the region. The PLO asked for American help, and they got it. The Americans stepped in as a guarantor of the safety of the civilian Palestinian population. On invitation from PLO. Begging is probably the right term. What happened? R
Two major errors here. Mossadeq was not trying to create a democracy in Iran, quite the contrary, he was trying to create a socialist totalitarian state, and he was well on his way to succeed. In order to finance it he had to nationalize the oil industry, which is another word for "ignoring deals struck with companies and stealing their property". Second error is also quite interesting. It was the British, and not the Americans who brought down Mossadeq. The Americans had an extremely tangential role in this, but it was the first real operation of what was to become the CIA, so they blew their own importance out of all proportions. Essentially the Americans helped a little bit in instigating protest among students. That's it. The British brought down Mossadeq on their own.
Now, to another poster - Iran is actually quite different from what we think. As a country and people, the Iranians are probably the most pro-American population in the region. It sounds amazing, but it's true. Iranians in general have no sympathy for their government, but they have learned that there is no point in trying to change it, it won't. Iran is also, possibly outside of Lebanon, the most likely candidate for a reasonalbe democracy in the region. It is far closer that countries like UAE, Saudi Arabia or Egypt. They just need a real reformer elected and a tiny amount of help.
The sad (but not terribly surprising) thing is that even the very pro-American population (relatively speaking) population of Iran is currently terrified of the US. Most of them are convinced that we'll come bomb them any moment now, and who can blame them. Such fear isn't good for long-term relationships.
Here is an interesting statistic for you, it exemplifies how isolationist, narrow-minded and introspective the Arab nations are. Every year more non-Spanish language books are translated into Spanish than has been translated into Arab ever. 1700 years. Less foreign-language books than you get in a single year in Spanish.
This is such a scary statistic that everybody should sit up and blink. The Arab world is as closed to input as is the brain of Mr. Bush. There is nothing going in, and the only thing that governs their social and political development is superstition and ignorance. Given the size of that part of the world, that is very scary indeed.
Or the way Jordan treated the Palestinians. The "Palestinian problem" is of Arab design and manufacture, and it is today exactly the way the Arab world wants it to be.
Absolutely, which is why Mr. Bush is such a terrible president. He doesn't care, and never cared, about 9/11 and the victims of terror. He has never really tried to catch anyone of the people behind that act of terrorism, but we accidentally caught some of them in our token effort to look a little tough in Afghanistan.
Mr. Bush and his cronies went after Iraq from day one, and Iraq never had any connection to any form of terrorists at all, and no, paying off the families of suicide bombers is not a connection with terrorists, it is a post-fact connection with their families.
Ah, but again you are just showing that you argue based on your religious hallucinations, not fact. TW was contractually obliged to produce HD-DVDs until April of 2008. If they had announced in September, when the decision was made, that they were going Blu exclusive, they would have damaged their own business.
Yeah, so when catalog titles capture sells 72/28 DVD/Blu, then that is nothing. Were you born clueless or did someone hit you over the head with a hammer throughout your childhood?
But hey, keep posting your religious hallucinations. They are almost entertaining, in the same way monkeys in a zoo are entertaining.
This was reported in a number of forums and it was based on a significant misunderstanding. In early November TW told the HD-DVD guys that they were going to go with Blu. Tosh and MS then started courting TW, but they would not budge. On Thursday before CES, Toshiba and Microsoft asked for a meeting with TW, delaying the announcement that TW was going Blu. In the meeting TW was offered TW $500M in incentives (mostly marketing coverage and reduced production cost) to go HD-DVD exclusive, but TW said no thanks.
The fact that a TW executive let it slip that they were going with Blue already in November is well documented, and TW had to paddle quite a bit not to make this an official announcement.
Well, you might have noticed that the economy is seriously in the shitter, or perhaps you haven't. I don't know whether you read news or not.
Yeah, for someone who has mental blocks in place, sure. I am far from alone in owning a PS3 and zero PS3 games. The PS3 is a perfect home theater component, particularly when you couple it with something like TVersity. Given the number of TVersity downloads, I'd say it sells quite well as a home media system.
Nowhere near as dumb as you are. Blu-Ray sales have quadrupled in a year. In the first four months of this year more Blu-Ray media was sold than the entire last year. Given that you claim that PS3 users are not Blu-Ray users and that "nobody" is buying stand alone players, how do you explain the rather significant increase in Blu-Ray media sales? Are morons just buying Blu-Rays to piss you off?
As for fanatic, the only moron here who behaves like a raving lunatic, and therefore a likely fanatic, is you.
Given that you only have posted bile clearly from a lunatic, answering your clueless piss is the only real option. Someone has to show to the sane people reading here, that you are a fanatic lunatic.
Oh, and look what I found. Blu-Ray sales have quadrupled. 400%. Does it hurt to be wrong all the time?
For new titles, according to the Redhill Group, Blu-Ray now typically hits 8-10% of the total number of disks sold. That is, when a new title is released for DVD and Blu-Ray simultaneously, the Blu-Ray/DVD split is about 10/90. That is significant growth. For catalog titles, the numbers are even better, Blu-Ray titles have hit up to almost 1/3 of the total sold.
All the time. Painful.
You are correct, choosing that camera is not incompetent. Thinking that the industry standard of MPEG-2 is some weird unknown file format, that is incompetence.
Continuing to state that MPEG-2 is "crap" just emphasizes the extent of your incompetence.
No, your lack of ability is the cause of your inability to play this, not the manufacturers codec. MPEG-2 is the industry standard for video and the fact that you still don't understand that just deepens my awe at your cluelessness.
All camcorder manufacturers have camcorders that record in MPEG-2, so that must mean that you are a genius and everybody else is dumb, right? MPEG-2 is also, together with AVC, the only standards for consumer HD camcorders. None of those codecs are available for Windows Media Player via download, so that means that according to your "logic", every single consumer HD camcorder is crap. The fact that you don't understand how clueless that shows you are is amazing. To drive this home - if you get any consumer level HD camcorder, you will not be able to play the recorded video using Windows Media Player unless you install additional software. If you get an AVCHD camcorder, which is at least half the models, you will not be able to capture the video through WMP at all at this point in time (there are ways to make WMP play H.264, but that would teach you about jumping through hoops.
All of the MPEG-2 camcorders come with a little round plastic thing, they call it a CD. These "CDs" contains software, and this software will allow you to decode MPEG-2, the industry standard for video. Oh, and it's amazing that you persist in this.
MPEG-2 made you jump through hoops? MPEG-2 is the industry standard for distributing video. All DVDs are encoded with MPEG-2. If you have cable TV, there is an 80-90% chance that all of the content you watch on TV is MPEG-2. The fact that you don't know this is amazing.
That was not your incompetence. Read up on the video format that is called MPEG-2, and you might become just a little bit less incompetent. Maybe.
Oh, I do. Don't worry. The problem was that you showed an amazing level of arrogance when harshly blamed what is considered the worlds number one or two (Canon people like me tend to put Canon as one) camcorder producer for you own incompetence. When you persisted in stating that MPEG-2 is some sort of weird, unknown codec, you just showed that you are unable to digest information and learn something. If you had asked what the problem might be, displaying some sort of humble attitude towards your own massive lack of knowledge, you would have gotten a more polite answer.
Oh, and to repeat, I am not a Sony fanboy, I use Canon camcorders, but I do recognize that Sony makes some of the very best consumer and prosumer level camcorders in the world. The Sony VX-2000 series is, in my opinion, by far the best prosumer camcorders in it's price range for SD photography. The new HDV line is also very, very good. Oh, and many of them, as with many of the Canon and other HD camcorders, shoot and store in MPEG-2. Of course.
I don't think they need all that storage on Blu-Ray. I have encoded movies for my self though, and 10Mb/s for 1080p just doesn't cut it. That means that they do need more storage than you can get on a dual-layer DVD.
So, we are in a situation where DVD is too small, what do we do next? Limit our self to a 50% increase in DVD size or make it a little bigger? What is wrong with enabling more storage? I use my Blu-Ray burner also to store data. 50G is nice. Fits an entire HDV project with stock media and all. Before it is rendered. Perfect.
HD is luxory. 1080p is HD. There is no real point in moving to HD unless you move to 1080p and 42" or better.
I regularly encode to, and watch content encoded in H.264. It is a codec, not magic. It needs a decent bitrate to produce a good image.
Good idea, I haven't downloaded any of those for a while. I have downloaded the equivalent content from the Sony site accessible from the PS3 though. And yes, the content looks good, but a far cry from the higher bitrate originals.
The best example I have of those is the Shakira Oral Fixation tour example. The banding is, particularly in the beginning of the video, painfully obvious. I got the Blu-Ray from Netflix, and the banding is not there.
I am still trying to download the dark night trailer, but having some problems. I got the Prince Caspian trailer though, and even though the scenes are carefully chosen, and quite short, banding in particular is painfully obvious in several scenes on my big-screen TV. If the end movie was of the same quality as the trailer, it would be butchered for it's video quality in reviews. I am looking forward seeing the dark night trailer on my HD TV, but as of now I am unable do have QT download it properly. As always QT on the PC platform is a bloody nightmare.
Good answer. Go away. You are just sad.
The original assertion that I responded to was that DVD-9 was plenty of storage for HD video the way we know it today, which, given the fact that a good blu-ray is H.264 or VC-1 encoded at 25Mb/s or so, and lossless 5.1 HD-MA sound, is an absurd idea.
Ulead currently re-encodes anything at above 15 Mb/s video. If the AVCHD from the HF100 is at or below 15 Mb/s, it should not be re-encoded.
This remains to be seen, but I'd be massively surprised if it didn't, to put it mildly. As for the cost, I am aware of this but given the current trend, I assume this will change dramatically over the next 6-12 months.
As for complicated matters - indeed. Given that I shoot in HDV, I am expecting MPEG-2 to be available, otherwise I'd be pissed. Also I am expecting AVC and VC-1 to be available, possibly without the tool actually doing the VC-1 encoding. It should at least accept a VC-1 source. You can then use the Microsoft tools to encode to VC-1.
Currently I use Uled DVD Movie Factory with the HD pack. I am waiting for SCS to release DVD Architect in a couple of weeks with Blu-Ray authoring capabilities.
Well, since you apparently can not read, what you get and do not get is of little consequence.
Yes I do, and when I have friends who are looking for advice on a buying decision for a camcorder, coming to my house is not the particular sensible, they go where they can actually convert the buying decision into an actual product. Is that so hard to understand?
If you were going to assist a friend in buying a camcorder, a TV or a sound system, where would you go? Farmers Market?
I agree that H.264 is as good as it gets and I am in strong disagreement with you on the quality possible at 10Mb/s. I regularly encode video in H.264 for my PS3 on AVCHD. For me, at 720p, 15M gives a decent result for 720p. For 1080p at 24fps which is my alternative encoding, 15Mb/s doesn't cut it, and I have to go to 22-25. Most HD movies today are 1080p, and encoding that at 10Mb/s for a DVD would yield unacceptable results. I have, for example, a concert video encoded at 10Mb/s, a short snipped, and banding is a very visible problem. On the 25Mb/s 1080p encoding there is no banding.
So, my experience, both in watching trailers for commercial movies at lower bandwithd, and encoding my self to H.264, tells me that your assertion that 8G is enough for HD movies is utterly wrong.
Now, we have not even started talking about 2 hour movies, uncompressed sound and extras.
Again, your assertion that a new media format was not needed for this improved visual and audio experience is provably wrong.
I find that very odd, and I would love to know what camera it is you are talking about. As I said, I have not heard of any camera from any major producer that doesn't use one of the mentioned codecs. There are several tools on Windows (GSpot, YAAI) that will help you find the codec, I'd love to know which one it is. As I said, I don't use Sony cameras or camcorders, I am a Canon person my self, but this sounds very odd.
You are still just making up reality as you go I see. I have so far not any thing of the kind, I have just pointed out that you have argued entirely based on your own fantasies, and I have pointed out that fantasies and lies are bad sources for arguments.
Nope, talking to me is not the right thing, neither is listening to marketing people. Given the fact that Warner already in early November (seemingly accidentally) made it clear that they were going to back Blu-Ray, and that they also apparently notified Toshiba about this in November, swallowing what Warner Marketing says about their decision making in January is a little silly. But hey, don't think, just eat the marketing material. It is always 100% truthful.
I suggest you do so your self. The fact that stand-alone Blu-Ray player sales have declined is neither unknown nor much of a surprise. With the economy going where it is, neither should you be. On the other hand, you weren't talking about stand-alone player sales, you were talking about media sales. In that regard I can also only recommend google, search for "Nielsen blu-ray 351%". As you might know Nielsen tracks the number of DVDs and Blu-Rays sold in the US, and an increase of 351% is not what I would call a significant drop (as I think was your words).
Now, as for player sales, the total number of Blu-Ray players sold is increasing rather significantly, even with your assertion that stand-alone sales are down. The increase you can find in the increase in PS3 sales.
Again, every assertion you have made is wrong. How can you assume that your conclusion is anything but wrong?
Yes, I do. I do it for two reasons. None of them because I need a new Blu-Ray player. Let me explain.
I own a HD camcorder, and I use this to shoot at birthday parties and other family events. Often people ask me about the quality of HD camcorders (not about TVs and players). They wonder if they will actually get good quality. I like shooting and editing, and to show friends and acquaintances what the result can be, I have so far this year created AVCHD disks to show them. They ask me to assist in purchasing a camcorder, and we drop in to a store and talk. That's when they see the AVCHD disk. I have also handed out some disks, but people are interestingly a little shy about asking for permission to view at Circuit City or Best Buy, even though I tell them it has never been an issue for me to get permission.
BTW, this will change in the middle of this month since SCS is releasing their Blu-Ray authoring tool then to match my new Blu-Ray writer.
I always ask nicely and I have so far not received a single negative answer. The closest I have gotten to that was a "You have to ask that other dude". This is also the experience from anyone I have chatted with in the video editing forums I frequent, so I am unsure as to why you think it impossible. Have you tried it and been denied?
If you go back about 12 months and read some of the video editing forums like creativecow or others you will find many curious "editors" doing exactly the same thing.
Just curious about your attitude though. Did I tear down some religious symbol you have been worshiping?
A, finally, a good point. I felt it not necessary to quote the Nielsen data that showed that Blu-Ray sales increased 351% in Q1 not needed since someone else had already quoted that number, but hey, I can still quote it.
So, Amazon and Nielsen both disagree with your delusions. How can that be?