They have used this policy in SC elementary schools for years. My wife, who teaches in a school here fights this policy VIGGEROUSLY. In some districts, the minimum is 60%, and this even applies when no work is done/handed in at all, and for days tests are missed due to absenses and not made up. With passing at 70%, and minimum 60% on all work done or not, it actually has been encouraging kids who don;t succeed to try LESS. Even the ones who do the work, but believe they will fail become self fulfilling as they typically have deep drops in self esteem, work and study habbits.
It;s one thing to encourage a kid who works hard and occasionally gets a bad score that they can work only a bit harder to do better. When you have a kid failing and getting free grades, convincing them to work harder to get an extra 10% and occasionally pass on their own, vs doing nothing at all, no stress, no effort, and even still, they typically get a few percent of their grade from classroom participation and behavior, and a few percent from ungraded homework, and the occasional 100% from in-class pop quizez.
With this policy in place, my wife has had only one child fail in 8 years, and that was due to a district policy on attendance, not even his grades. Doing the grades without the bump to 60%, and she would have had either 1 or 2 fail each year, and one year would have had 4 fail, mostly because they simply didn't turn in any work when they didn't feel like it.
I have not read Pittsburg's policy, and I hope the minimum 50% applies strictly to work completed by students and tests actually taken. A better policy however is simply to allow retesting. If they're doing poorly, they need HELP, not bonus to scores. It's NOT about pushing kids through to the next grade level, its about them ACHIEVING that grade.
There's another side effect here too we've seen in both schools my wife taught in. There are some kids on the bubble of passing. On their own, they are, and when given proper attention, show that they can excel and occasionally get As. However, they see their friends, who play every night and all weekend, never doing homework, never working on projects, who squeese by and pass as well due to district policy. This has the effect of turning the kids who DO work hard at passing into those that no longer want to try. There is a clear dividing line in my wife's classrooms of those who do and those who don't, and especially at this young age it is VERY improtant that we be teraching that life requires effort, not that life will provide you what you need for free. Most of her kids get As and Bs. A rare few occasionally fall to a C. Then therer are those who allways get Ds, and who would likely fail if the system was not in place. These kids never occasionally get Cs. They allways scrape the bottom. They are also the most distracting and problematic kids in the class.
3 years ago, while teaching 4th grade, my wife did an experiment, along with the rest of the teachers on her grade level; Though the parents of the kids effected were told the district policy was in fact in effect, that their kids could never receive less than a 60% even if they didn't complete the work, she got permission from each and every partent to inform the kids that the policy had been revoked, that the grade they got was the grade they got, that there would be no more free 60% scores, and failure to turn in work was guaranteed a 0, but she offered them to retake any grade for any reason (even letting kids with Bs retake to try to get an A.). She kept this up for over 15 weeks before one of the parents slipped up and let her kid know the truth because the parent wanted to go on a weekend trip to the mountains and the kid was certain she had to do a big project and would fail if they went on vacation... However, during that 15 weeks, the kids in her class who normally got Ds and Fs, who rarely if ever turned in work for the teachers the year before, were all getting Cs and Bs, and occasional As. Their MAP testing scores increaeed dramatically, esp
Some of them, yea. Funny how nobody is saying anything about Golem, the 100% rendered character... The got legolas wrong, but him right? and few every say anything about the work done on the battlefields with the Massive rendering engine.
Actually, anytime they were using the "virtual fellowship" things were a little inconsistent, especially in the first movie.
Also, of the 23 spots I found issue with, more than half were in the first movie, but the 3rd movie had 4 times the number of effects shots. It got consistantly better, and all the big budget films since have been improving more. It;s only low budget guys, and some TV shows, that keep dropping the ball on CGI and getting the rest of them a bad rep.
Oh, sorry for the grammer issues.../. has no internal spelchecker, and I'm too lazy/busy to scan manually. I usually do a read though, but its hard to catch your own spelling mistakes.
Note I said only 42" or 47". 46" is a bastard size and uses some wierd pizel spacing to achieve the image. It is considdered inderior to 47" just like 36" is considdered inferior to 37". I did not state they shipped all TVs BETWEEN 42 and 47, just all 42s and all 47s in plasma 1080p, and that seperately total 1080p shipments were only 21% of all HDTVs sold.
True, people will buy more HDTV in 2008 than the last 2 years. I'm not dusputing the 330% sales increase. What I'm saying is 1080p is still a small part of that, and yes, the MOST PEOPLE argument does stick because it is a FACT based on actual sales reports... MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT BUYING 1080P.
only 21% of people are buying 1080p tvs in 2008 thus far. This is not a linear total, but JUST THIS YEAR.
1080p has a significant price premium over 1080i, and on top of that, short of Blu-ray and now VOD from some satelite providers, there is NO 1080p content generally available. Why buy now when in 2 years when cable switches over to 1080p you can pick one up for 50% less than now... and end up with 2 TVs then for the price of one now, and not miss any real content in the meaintime.
1080i is NOT 1080p. True, most sets are 1080, but that is NOT wehat you said. You said most people are buying "1080p" Nearly ALL 720p sets display 1080i. Only those sub 30" tend to limit to 720 lines. and those under 19" tend to limit to 480p and 720i. Even if every HDTV sold supported 1080i or higher (which they do not), HDTV in general is STILL not 50% of the market total. It;s barely over 30%. So there's another nail in your argument's coffin.
de-interlaced 1080i on a 1080p TV has no difference in overall quality than 1080i. It's the same data, they're just refreshing the entire screen twice with the same image instead of half then half. Some people actually claim de-interlacing and showing 30fps twice that way causes mild flickering, and is actually less smooth to watch than 1080i. There is NO increase in picture quality, and further, hard cuts can be acquard if the interlacing was 2 different scenes not intended to be merged... de-interlacing is a gimmick used to sell sets, not a benefit to watch. Same goes the other way, trying to watch 1080p content on a 1080i set, you loose HALF the data in the translation, and image tearing is common. A very select few TVs are now showing 60 FPS (they're all in the $3K and up price piints) showing 1080p and creating an entermediat frame based on real time difference calculations between the two displayed. Personally, I'd save that money and get an LG 4X HD set when it comes out and upscale instead, since my eyes can't see faster than 34FPS anyway...
As of December 2007, 50% of houses had DIGITAL TV, not HDTV. HDTV at that point was estimated to be 32% penetrated per the CEA. Estimates to have that increase 66% in 2008 are showing to be fairly accurate thus far, meaning we won't have 50% HDTV, let alone 1080i, forget 1080p, by the ned of 2009, possibly into 2010. 1080p 50% penetration isn't expected until 2012, about 3 years after after 2160p (HD4x)is marketly availbale.
Part of the problem is there are no 1080p sets under 37" sold, at all. The second issue is the cheapest one is a knock off brand and even it's $800. At the same time, top name breand, 1080i sets (720p) can be had in the same size for under $600 on sale, and knock offs are under $500, not to mention you can get 720P (1080i) on screens as small as 15". The average house has but 1 TV over 30", the rest are all smaller, and the average house has 3.2 TVs... At that ratio, unless 1080p sets start coming out in smaller sizes at prices less than slightly larger 1080i sets (not happeneing anytime soon), 1080p simply can not statistically be "most" households. For 2 years at least you can't even say "most" households will have 480p. "most" households have digital TV (ED at 480i or SD digital at 260p)
"most" people will be OK with 1080i, until they get their first 1080p set. The differences between 1080i and 1080p are
There may be a 4 month backlog on prosecution and getting you into court, but with a warent issued, when they seize your system, it's contents are immediately dumped and imaged. Wether or not they have time to review your system data or not from the image, each day they keep your PC locked up without actually CHARGING you with a crime is time you can sue the agency for loss of use, and if your found not guilty in the end, that's a MASSIVE ammount of money, which your lawyer would be more than happy to take 50% of as a fee on the back end.
Again, they're really not interested in simple offences. The fines that they might conceivably get by seizing your system would have to exceed their costs, which are substantial, in order for the agency to give a rats ass about you. They're looking for grevious offenders who society will justify the cost of improzonment for. A few song files on your PC vs $30K in costs to the city to do it and backlogging the lagal system with non-violent crimes? no, I don;t think taxpayers will bite.
The RIAA is successful (well, not really so far by their track record) because the money for prosecution comes from pricate sources. Once the bill is footed by taxpayers, they're not going after Joe public for a measly $1000 fine, that likely he can't pay anyway. They'll be looking eclusively at punishing people who have enough property or equity to seize in punishment, and who's punishment fits the crimes without conteset. If the city goes around seizing equipment and property to cover fines, and these cases getoverturned, or the city gets sued for millions instead of the RIAA, then someone's getting unelected from office. Politicias simply won;t let that happen.
You get cuaght with drugs, it;s easy enough to slap you with a few days in prison, and a small fine, and there's usually no contest. Look at who gets causghht pot smoking. It;s people who are out in public and easy to catch, or people who get stung through inside dealers working with cops. They don;t go kicking in doors and arresting people in their homes over misdemeanor crimes (which regardless of the fine, copywrite infringement is not a felony unless they can tack on willful distribution FOR PROFIT).
unless your SVGA monitors include HDCP support, and have an HDMI 1.2 or better connection, then nope, you'll see only SD resolutions, and depending on the monitor, likely as a smaller image in the center of it. CRT is right out. only LCD or PLasma would begin to have this support.
I bought a 22" widescreen 2 years ago and I made CERTAIN is had HDCP support before buying it. Most of my friends in the indusctry were not so thorough, and even with Vista and a Blu-Ray player found they could not display the images without upgrsding both their video card and their monitor.
Of course, simply rip that BD movie and watch it on your PC in full HD spleandor... Of course, you'll still have to have Vista and a BD drive (I think Macs now support BDs as well, just not video playback due to HDCP issues, but I have not checked).
even my PC, brand new components and all, with Vista EE, could not play a BD movie even if I had the drive since the intel chipsets currently available still do not support HDCP, but I can still rip and watch in HD so I really don't care.
I have not added a BD player to the PC yet because I don't have my PS3 yet, and thus have no strong desire to do so until after I can aford the new console.
Manufacturers still need to get on the ball in convey MUCH more clearly wether their stuff has HDCP support built in or not. Of course, since only 7 movies released on BD thus far have enforced this setting, honestly, almost every movie you'll buy WOULD play on your SVGA display, provided you can convert the signal from the BD player to it;s native resolution (which would likely mean using a PC as even XVGA widescreen is only 1050 lines, not 1080.
My TV is 1080i, not 1080p. It;s 2.5 years old. The same size TV in 1080p at that time had a 70% premium over mine... Easy decision. $900 vs $1500... and at the tiome, there was NO 1080p content even available.
Checking BestBuy's current selection of TVs, over 37" about 70% are 1080p. 32-37", far less than half are. Under 32" virtually no TVs support 1080p.
By this time next year, sure, most TVs over 24" will be 1080p, and virtually all over 37" will be. Currently all of them I can find 40" or larger are with few exceptions.
However, if they want to penetrate BD as far as DVD, you have to account that most households today have a 32" TV or smaller in the living room. My circle of close firends, about 15 households worth, are all copmputer and tech geeks. only 7 of us have a 37" or larger TV today, and only 4 of us have HD.
The point is not what's available today. The point is what most peoiple HAVE today. 1080p sales are just now exceeding 1080i and 720p. For 5 years of HD TV sales, this has not been the case. Its very simple statistiucs to KNOW that most people can't possibly have 1080p if more people bought TVs that didn't have it...
Panasonic owns the only 42 and 47" 1080p TVs sold currently. They have about 70% of the total 1080p plasma marketshare. 1080p shipments are only 21% of all plasma TC sales. and these figures are current to within 2 months.
Most people even today, are NOT buying 1080p...
Re:Folks won't replace things that aren't broken
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 1
Ya know... complete BS.
I kept using tapes in my car for YEARS after I could have installed a CD player. Had one in the house and the PC 4 years before I had one in the car. I felt no compelling reason to replace it until it actually DID break.
Same goes for nearly all of my hardware. I don't go out and buy a new toy simply because I'm bored of the old one. I WILL get a PS3 as soon as I get a small TV for the car and move the PS2 in there (or if the PS2 dies before that happens). If any of my 3 DVD players crap out, I'll shuffle them around the house and get a BD player (or PS3) for the living room. When the bedroom TV craps out, I'll move the 37" HD LCD in there and get a better one for the living room. I don't buy new unless I have a reason to. 90% of America is with me on that. I can't justify $200 for a BD player alone, but if I'm replacing my $100 HDMI enabled upscaling DVD player, then it's not $200, it's $100 in my mind, and that's worth the upgrade...
MOST of us don't buy, we replace, and whn we have the money, replacement means "upgrade"....or we add to a room that doesn't have something currently and buy a new one for the original room. The rooms in our houses get "hand-me-down" technologies. The more we redistribute in our homes, the more stuff we have that fails over time, so the pace we adopt technology accelerates, but still, less than 5% of us go out and buy something just because it's "better." and most of those that do are college kids with few real bills (mortgages, car payemetns, etc) and they have the fluid cash, or others who simply make enough money to do it.
I'm on the upper end. I've had HDTC for about 3 years, a DVR for 4, and I continually upgrade my computers. I didn't get a PS3 yet because I play most of my games on the PC and very little in the living room ($70 for a game I can play for 50 hours has NO comparrison to an MMO I can play for years... especially when there's no monthly fee!...and console RTS games just suck, no content updates, no custom levels, and incredibly poor controls.)
DVDs scratch, and so do BD, but that's whyt I put the originals up and STRICTLY keep copies in the living room. Illegal or not, I interpret this as fair use, no different from what I was legally protected doing with VHS, and I do in fact own ALL of the content in my house (not a single illegally downloaded file).
Also, BD is NOT a replacement for DVD. You don't buy an all new collection, you just buy new stuff in BD and KEEP your old DVDs (upscaled, which is NOT as good as BD regardless of what you hear).
The player may be a bit expensive, and unless it;s an AWESOME disk with HOURS of features, I'm not paying the BD $10-15 premium currently for any of them, but the price for BD will meet DVD just the same as the price for DVD met VHS after a few years (we're not at that point yet, but i expect the price to marginalize to $5 differences by February, after the Christmas demand for disks subsides.
I've watched the same movie upscaled from DVD to 1080p, and also a BD fo rthe exact same movie. The is a HUGE difference in color quality, texture crispness, additional detail, and surround sound quality. This is completely aside for the truly awesome features BD disks have that DVD simply can't. On quality alone, if the price difference vs DVD was within $5, I'd likely buy BD every time. At the current $10-15 premium, only exceptionally special movies get purchased on BD. This margin must be reduced, but currently, demand is high enough to satisfy that price (production facilityies are still under manufacture to meet higher demand curves, and as they come online, cost per disk produced will reduce. Also keep in mind, producing the content for a BD takes a LOT more effort and money than doing the same for DVD, so I do expect SOME difference in price for a couple of years yet.
As for sattelite radio... Why pay $14 a month for a service that gives you the same thing a iPod and Streamripper do? With the
OK, I'm getting a bit sick and tired of this "add DRM" crap.
TO ALL YOU MORONS, DVD HAS DRM TOO!!!!!
It was cracked, and so has Blu-Ray been cracked. There is NO difference, and copying a DVD is STILL JUST AS ILLEGAL AS CRACKING A BD DISK!
The ONLY difference is the cost of BD blank media. Remember the cost of dual larer DVD media a few years ago? Heck, I worked for a big box retailer back in 2002 just to help make ends meet as a second job. At that point, buying a dual layer DVD drive was a $300 purchase, plus blanks at $10 each, even in bulk, you had to rip over 200 movies to reach a break even point, and they were FLYING off shelves anyway. Today? With a 25 stack of dual layer disks costing about $1 a disk or less, plus $60 for a good drive, you can break even after ripping about 8-10 movies... BD will have the same results in the future. You still need to rip no less than 3 movies a month to even justfy the cost of a netfix subscription vs simply buying the movies to own. and that's if you don;t illegally download, which I take NO part in. (if it's worth owning, it's worth giving the artist his due) I do however rip a LOT of content from TV directly, which is perfectly legal...
Of course, with hard drive capacity cheaper than blank BD media, many people are just starting there for the time being.
The price of BD disks WILL have to equalize with DVD for them to get much of my money, but there have been a couple titles that even at that price have had enough features and special stuff vs the same DVD to make the difference worth it to me.
Anyway, QUIT THIS SHIT ABOUT BD DRM!!!! It's NONSENSE! Anyone who can crack DVD can crack BD. Anyone who doesn't know how to crack DVD is no more likely to want to do it to BD anyway. Anyone willing to crack can just as well download cracked copies, since either way it's just as illegal...
First, DRM is a non-issue. DVD HAS DRM!!! BD DRM has been cracked. They're on EXACTLY the same playing field. The only missing piece is a good BD recorder for PCs that's affordable, that doesn't require Vista to use (which will happen soon enough).
Apparently, you also have never upscaled a DVD to 1080p, then watched a BD disk on the same TV. There is a HUGE difference in quality!!! Even on my set at home at 720P I can tell a clear and distinct difference. It's all in the textures, lighting, and color quality. Would my grandfather be able to tell? No, his eyes can't see in that resolution to begin with, but me, I can tell, oh boy can i tell!
Also, Bd disks are NOT just about higher quality. They have AMAZING (the ones worth buying) interactive features that are FAR superior to DVD. The audio may also be in 5.1, but it's recorded at much higher quality, and 7.1 is the standard, not 5.1... (with support for 10.2 when receivers capable of decoding it become affordable enough). I have a Yamaha receiver that supports 7.1 with "presence" (dynamic 9.1 re-encoded sound). A DVD and BD of the same movie do sound distinctly different. The directional nature of the sound, and independent chanel seperation is how Dolby designed it, instead of how DVD "supported" it. The frequency range is also superior and much clearer.
At the current price of disks, i agree with you. I'm not dropping $30 on a BD disk when I can get a DVD for half the cost. I may plop down occasionally for a great disk on BD that's truly an exceptional package of features, but until BD and DVD pricing equalizes (or until hybrid disks are available), they've got a long way to go.
One new feature I'm seeing a lot now: BD disks are starting to come with PC playable versions of the movie on the disk, in a portion of the disk readable by DVD readers. Hybrid playable DVD/BD disks are also supposed to be released early next year allowing a single disk to be cross compatible with all players (just not in HD on non-bd units).
You may not want it yet. I personally held out on DVD until players reached sub $100. I actually had a player in my PC for 2 years before I had one in the living room... Eventually you'll crack. Right now, contrary to popular belief, manufacturers are having a hard enough time making enough blue laser reading systems to put in players, and part of the high price is actually a supply issue. That's slowly doing away, and prices are dropping as a result.
Any way you slice it, BD's price reduction and adoptation in homes has outpaced DVD since the format war ended. We're just 2 full years into BD, less than a year past the war's end, and as manu as 5% of households have aplayer already, and by the end of next year it;s likely to be over 10%. That's actually AMAZING adoption rates for HT technology, much faster than DVD achieved, faster than HDTVs themselves achieved, it's even faster than DVRs...
Give BD a break. Sure it's the new thing, and it OK that it's still too new for you. If it was ideal for everyone, the price would still be at this point, if not higher, since they can't possibly ramp production fast enough to support demand. It;s like the Wii. Nintendo is raking in the cash since the player is still having trouble staying in stock. As soon as there's a surplus, prices get cut. Right now, people are completely happy paying over $200 for a bd player, and $400 for a PS3. Keep in mind, we not only need to supply current demand, but we also need to back stock at least twice that many units in order to meet holiday demand when specials and promos push the price to under the $200 mark and they fly off shelves at that magic number.
Yea. Also saw Monsters Inc in 1080p. I though the big guy's fur looked cool enough on DVD, but it's awesome in HD! You can see each hair individually, and really see that they put a massive amount of effort into texturing the world that simply could not be seen until now.
I put the DVD in the PS3, upscaling to 1080p, then switched to the actual blu-ray disk. NO COMPARRISON! BD was SO much better, even at the same resolution. You see, upscaling simply smoothes the edges a bit, but if the textures were not present in the original, they can't be displayed when upscaling. It can't "invent" textures or re-render on the fly, it's just smoothing pixeles and color shades to avoid pixelation at higher resolutions... It's like the difference between optical and digital zoom on a camera. You don't hear people too cheap to buy a better lense saying "yea, but I can use digital zoom and it;'s just as good!" Those people clearly had never seen 1080p before. Compared to the unenhanced DVD (original format stretched to 37" screen) it was like watching static riddled old analog TV...
Now, am I going to plop down an extra $10-15 premium to buy BD disks vs DVDs? No. Maybe on RARE occasion of a disk that's really worth it, cram packed with hours of special features not available at all on DVD, but then again, I don't even buy a DVD unless it has hours of special features to begin with. If we're talking about a few deleted scenes and director commentary, maybe a behind the scenes documentary, I'm just as likely to record it off HBO HD, legally, at no extra cost....or, rent it through VOD for $4 and record it thorough an HTPC in 1080p anyway... so a BD disk is going to have to be extra special at $30 to get my hard earned coin.
Blockbuster has a very limited BD selection, at least in some cities. Netflix as of March has 1500 BD disks available to rent. (about 1000 titles). Sure, older movies are taking some time to transition, but keep in mind how long it took the same to happen on DVD. As it is, virtually EVERY movie released this year has a BD option, with the exception of the few released exclisively on the defunct format that will be rolling over to BD soon.
Considdering the format is basically 2 years old, having 800+ titles available is WAY ahead of what DVD accomplished in the same time. Old movies can't just be copied over either, there's SIGNIFICANT expense in converting the older version to HD digital format, designing the menu systems and adding all the required BD features, not to mention resampling the audio. Private Ryan was a great movie, but most of us already own it. The studio won't considder the re-release unless they can add something dramatic to the movie beyond a resolution bump, since that alone won;t sell $30 copies to people that already own it, in a market where less than 5% have a player compatible.
You're still on the leading edge by having a player already, which means most of your selection is limited to new stuff as well. Keep in mind, that BD player will UPSCALE all your DVDs to 1080p as well.... Just watching Private Ryan on it will still look and sound a whole lot better than your old-n-busted DVD player, which if you're lucky upscaled to 720i.
1: First, DVD has DRM too... Can't play a DVD in a player that doesn't have the licence unless you crack it. BD has been cracked, so on that count, it's EXACTLY the same as DVD. If you want to boycot BD for DRM, throw out all your DVDs too...
2: BD disks DO play in all BD players! There were some early issues when they turned on the BD copy protection (which to date only 6 releases have even used!!!), but ALL those manufacturers were REQUIRED to fix or replace those players under the BD licence terms, since in the royalty agreement, your player MUST support 100% of the BD features to be called a BD player and have a log on it. The early adopters encounterd some issues, but they've BEEN FIXED, FREE. Since most BD players include a network port, firmware updates are easy, and BD players are INTENDED to be internet connected, as many BD disks include online accessible features, so getting updates should not be an issue. The ones that don't have network ports can be updated using a USB stick in most cases. Others simple require service or replacement, but it's on them to pay for that service for you. Better players are easier to update, and worth the investment vs knock-offs.
3: the player will be $99 or less, in about 3-4 years. DVD players were over $200 each until the 4th Christmat they were available. BD will be under this price point by their 3rd year. Give them a break! They're ahead of the curve... If you're withcing about a $200 set top box, then you probaly don't have a TV with both HDMI and HDCP support either, nor do you likely have a 5.1 or better DIGITAL (fiber optic or HDMI supporting) stereo system. You're NOT a target for BD unless you have this!
4: $99 DVD players don't have all the features of other $99 DVD players, let alone cheaper players (types and numbers of ports, output quality, upscaling quality, size, noise generated, boot time, etc...) What makes you think BD will be different? The $50 DVD players don't have HDMI, $99 players do. When the cheap BD players are $99, $200 players WILL have more features. It will be your choice to buy or not to buy based on these differences. Youy simply buy the model that has what you want... It's called a free market, and we DIE to keep it that way. Regardless of the features, it still has to play what's on the disk, regardless, so it's a non-issue. BD players have MUCH more technolology than a DVD player, and MUCH higher royalties on that technology, it will be YEARS before you see a $99 player. By next christmas, cheapo players might be $149 or so, but will be missing some features (not to mention reliabiltiy and longevity).
5: I completely agree!. BD disks should be the same prince as DVDs, unless they include some really amazing unique features not also available on DVD, and even then, the higher priced version should be optional, with a basic movie + deleted scenes, etc version being the same price as DVD. Hybrid disks also need to become the norm (and will help olower prices due to simpler inventory and logistics management). 1 disk that plays in both BD and DVD players IS an option, they're just not using it.
In a nutshell, if you;re too cheap to buy in now, then you have to be content to wait, since as much as they keep telling us the BD market is weak, manufacturers are having trouble making enough blue laser system to keep up with demand for them... If 10% of homes have a BD player by the end of next year, then it will be considered MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN DVD. Currently, deployment of BD IS outpacing the deployment of DVD, even considdering the high level of technology that has to exist in your home in order to use one.
well, that cheap $30 player does not have HDMI connectivity, nor does it upscale images, so it looks just as crappy as SD does on my set, and forces me to juggle $60 in additional cables and complicate my whole HT setup... I'd much rather buy a $100 name brand upscaling player that I can connect with a single HDMI cable and use with my HT setup with a single cheap universal remote (provided by Time Warner Cable actually) than have to deal with the complexity. After buying 12' long Progressive cables (the 6' jobs don't reach), a fiber optic for audio, and dealing with the the hour it takes to reconfigure it all not to mention getting friends over to move the HT cabinet back from the wall, the cost is the same for more effort and pooper picture quality... I guess if you don't have an HD TV already, or a quality shelf receiver with HDMI support (or even an HDMI switch), then it doesn't matter, but forward thinking is always a good idea because eventually you WILL have that stuff.
Also, the longevity of those $30 players is crap. My father, Uncle, and Sister keep buying them, and seem to buy another one every year or two when the old blows up or starts skipping reading disks. All 3 of my DVD players have lasted more than 4 years. Also, adding an additional 4 year waranty (BestBuy service plans... a waranty without lightning coverage is not worth the paper it's printed on, so I only shop at bestbuy since they're the only ones that offer it!) for $19 on a $100 unit is a good investment. Adding that to a $40 unit, not so good... I've gotten over $4500 worth of free hardware from BestBuy's service plans over the years, all of it better models than the hardware it replaced, by spending not more than $1300 on waranties at BestBuy. I haven't bought a printer in 8 years, I just trade mine in every 18-24 months when one of the ink heads clogs, or when the rollers start having trouble feeding 1 page at a time, and buy another $29 service plan on the new one... I've gotten 2 free DVD players, a free TV, a Free PS2, a free laptop, 4 printers, a digital camera, a 1500VA UPS, a 22" computer display, a $500 stereo receiver, an external hard disk, a vacuum cleaner, a dishwasher, and a fridge, each one replaced for free after the manufacturer's waranty would have otherwise expired. I'd not have gotten any of that buying cheapo-crap discount store hardware, nor ANYTHING from walmart. The return on my investment means I have much better hardware 5 years later than I would have had paying your prices, and in the end, I likely spent less money.
I don't abuse my hardware, I just happen to live in central SC, where humidity and temps are high half the year, and where brownouts and dips in power fry most things in half their expected lifespan. I have UPS on the desktop computers, but getting one for the HT hardware costs more then the waraties, and they're not available for appliances. Besides, a 10-20% premium to double or tripple the waranty, with free replacement after 1-4 repairs, which is near a guarantee on most components nowadays around here, means I don't have to baby the equipment. If it fails, 90% of the time I get a free upgrade, then renew the waranty for another 3-5 years for 20% of what it cost to replace... I actually EXPECT my equipment to break down. If it doesn't, I call bestbuy and add an additional year to the PSP plan, and that usually does the trick.
Personally, if I'm going to buy a $100 DVD player, I'd just as well buy a $300 PS3. (I expect that to be the price come Christmas, maybe $279) My PS2 mini has just about seen the last good game it's ever going to play, and is about to be relegated to living in the car to keep the baby entertained on long drives. Come this Christmas after the next price drop, I'm grabbing a PS3, and then I don't need to worry about needing an upscaling player in the living room anymore, and I'll have 1 less connected device complicating the cabling setup.
It's still an emerging technology, even though the media is trying to convince you otherwise.
Give it 2 years and you likely won't find many TVs that don;t have HD being sold. CRTs are going away completely likely inside that timeframe (19" and smaller flat panels can actually compete on price now since their cost to manufacture is actually less, and all TVs now must have digital decoders built in which raised their cost).
The disks ARE too expensive. They won't really catch on until they match DVDs price, or until they start coming out on hybrid disks instead of 2 seperate formats. That should happen next year.
The new players? When your DVD stop working, and you're in the store looking at a new one, it;s pretty hard to decide between a $190 BD player, good upscaling DVD player (about $100 now, vs the cheap shit not-even-progressive-scan $39 players), or even a PS3 at what likely will be $299 or $249 after christmas this year.
If you still have a generic TV, you are NOT the marketing target for BD. In 2-3 years you will be, assuming routine HT component failure rates. If you have a massive CRT based TV or projector, it may yet last as long as 15-20 years from when you bought it, but especially with the old projection TVs, when that bulb fails (about once every 3 years or so), and it's out of waranty and out of production, $300 for a bulb that will only last another 2-3 years or $600 to replace that TV with a 1080p DLP projector with a 5 year waranty, or maybe $1K for a similar flat panel, that might get you to switch...
The selection is only slightly limited at the moment. Every major (wide) release is coming to both BD and DVD, and has been for a year or more. Older movies are being ported quickly, 10-20 a month or more. There are over 1000 BD movies currently available. Also remember, BD is not intented to REPLACE your DVD collection, only to expand it. DVDs you already own will upscale. I'm also expecting sometime in the future that a digital download service offering to take your DVDs in exchange for HD digital versions (for a few bucks each) may become available, with right to burn to BD disks, allowing some process for updating your collection.
The FCC has been looking into "double dipping" for a while, and though it's not an extreme enough issue for them to deal with yet, I suspect that the FCC may eventually make a ruling that if you own a copy of a movie, and a newer version or new format comes out, that you should be given rights to acquire a copy of that new version for simply a small fee beyond the physical cost of the media and the distribution of it (digital download fees, physical disk shipping, etc). Since we know a BD disk costs less than a buck to mint, including the packaging, I can't imaging that upgrading to a directors HD cut from a DVD would be more than $10. Perhaps they may even allow digital content updates directly to the movie, by prichasing additional documentaries and such your original didn't include for extra fees instead of including them in the shelf release. Sales will need to eveolve somehow to compete with generic digital downloads. I doubt the FCC will be required to act before the industry does, but it's allways a fall back. I DO expect them to act soon enough on digital downloads though: not being able to migrate downloads from one PC to another, even if backed up, is a big issue, and since there's no way to re-download the movie at this time, I think they'll either be forced to start tracking all downloaded purchases and allow redownloads at will, or find some way of allowing the movies to be moved from system to system in a simple and legal way. This may itself lead to a way of biying "rights" instead of buying "content" and then it's a downhill slide to the new perfect medium.
Re:From one consumer's perspective...
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"I don't have an HDTV right now..." Common argument, and I sympathize. If an when you get one, the argument is valid. You can connect a BD player to a non-HDTV, but buying now means that a larger part of your collection, when you do buy an HD set, will already be HD... It's forward investing in your library.
"It's my (probably uninformed as heck) impression that not that many movies are out on Blu-Ray. I'm more into documentaries (which would look superb in HD) -- are they available and affordable" Actually, most of the documentaries coming out are in blu-ray. Discovery Earth and the like all are, and the BD versions have a massive amount of special features to boot.
"The players are not cheap -- and judging from the pattern of all similar tech devices, in a year or three, they'll be under $100 or so -- and eventually be downright cheap, once the thrift stores have switched from selling VHS players to DVD players" Well, players will likely come to under $200 this christmas, and the PS3 to $299 or so. However, although DVD players did reach sub $100 levels about 5 years after they were available, BD players likely won't. There's a LOT of royalties being paid for in each player, and the technology is simply much more expensive. I don't think we'll see sub $100 BD players until about 2 years after the BD replacement is on the market. There's a possibility you might see a sub $100 player that's a "player only" unit in 3 years, requiring a TV with built-in decoders or whatever to do the processing, and including a very limited port selection, but until we make a few generational leaps in set top box chipsets, you won't see this prince.
That said, a $200 player would not prevent most of us from investing. The big deal is the $10-15 premium per movie... I try to buy a DVD a month, sometimes 2 (maybe even 3 if I pick a few up for under $10 each). Doing so with Blue Ray would add over $200 ANNUALLY to my entertainment budget.
"Finally, I have a substantial DVD collection and am in no hurry to re-spend all that money" Well, every BD player not only plays DVDs, but it upscales them to HD (at least 480p, some higher) quality as well. It;s still not BD quality, but it adds a long life to your existing collection. The ONLY reason i might considder replacing SOME of my DVDs is if the bonus features on the BD disk are super cool.
About those bonus features: the real selling points of BD is not just the high def movie, but the INTERACTIVE features. Anyone can throw a behind the scenes docu-mini on a disk, or a few deleted scenes. The point of blu-ray is you can have true interaction with your movie, turn commentary on and off with a click in real time, insert the deleted scenes right into the movie, see scenes from different angles, bookmark segments of the movie to come back to, and a whole lot of other features. Many BD disks also have interactive games and other content built in and many also interact with web sites if your BD player is internet connected.
Some BDs have the same content as their DVD cousins, in shich case I say buy DVD. Others have some bonus documentaries or other regular video conent, in which case I say buy DVD, but rent the BD so you can see the extra content, and your still saving $7 at least.
Then you didn't hook it up right, or have not adjusted the settings properly. You must be using HDMI and your TV must be HDCP compliant. Using progressive cables does not work.
Let me ask you this, how many CGI sequences did you notice in the Lord of the Rings?
I found a total of 23 spots, across the whole of the 3 movies (12 hours), where I noticed a computer generated artifacts, or the failure for rendering to look lifelike. My wife and friends noticed no more than 10 each. There were just over 700 scenes that involved CGI in the trilogy. In face, in the Return of the King, 81% of the scenes included CGI elemets. This was several years ago....
It's not about CGI being hard to accept. It's about the quality time some studios invest and others don't. This has continually improved with time. Iron Man was nearly flawless. The Dark Knight was nearly flawless. Heck, even Battlestar Galactica, a weekly produced show, had great CGI quality.
Get this point straight. ALL FILMS are recorded in high res. In fact, they've been working in resolutions many times greater than 1080p for a long time... The stuff in the editing room is as muchas 4 times that resolution. This is irregardless of wether or not they release to Blu-ray.
CGI doesn't look any more or less real with a shartper image. It's not about the level of detail (in fact, a lot of CGI elements are rendered but are so small you can't even see the texture details on 1080p), it's about movement, light and shadow, and interaction with the environment. If it's not properly integrated to the scene, your brain keys in on it. It's part of how your brain is interpreting 2D images as 3D. If it's not right, it doesn't work, and the brain notices. This has NOTHING to do with resolution, and everything to do with the animator.
Filmakers are storing films in raw format nowadays for future editing in higher resolutions as well. We know 4X HD is on the horizon. (LG already has panels in that resolution available). We also know the new TV standard is 2:1 aspect, not 16:9. Blu-ray has to prove it has the capacity to be used with those resolutions and on those TVs or it just becomes a stepping stone format
I buy movies for 2 reasons: 1; to honor the people that made really great flicks (i'm just as happy to rip letter ones from HBO for free), and 2; for the kick ass DVD extras.
I have an upconverting DVD player. If a movie comes out, even one that I would buy, and the DVD and Blu-ray disk have similar features, why would I pick blu-ray at $10-15 more? Even though I have an HDTV, it's only 720p, likje MOST americans have. An upscaled DVD doesn't look quite as good as a blu-ray, and I do know that when I replace this TV with a 1080p in a couple years the blu-ray quality will improve, but for the moment, thats simply not compelling enough by itself to justfy that kind of cost.
If they came out on hybrid disks, so at least I can still play them in my PC, the other rooms in the house, and loan them to family who don't have blu-ray, I might invest... The price of the disks is the ONLY think keeping me from buying a PS3 to use as a blu-ray player. (why buy a $200 player when you get a console for $100 more...)
Nah, DRM is not the issue on Blu-ray. Most folks don;t even understand the content is encoded that way, and the rest of us can already crackit...
The problem is the disk is $10 more than a DVD of the same movie. To invest a few hundred in a new player for the privilidge of spending $10 more on a movie, especially with upconverting DVD players, is not an attractive option.
Combine that with a lackluster blu-ray release list over the last 4 months, and massive spending in theatres with summer releases, and you'll see where all the money is going.
If they want Blu-ray to replace DVD, it needs to compete with it on price. Make that happen! Sell Blu-ray for the same price... Better yet, make all new disks blu-ray/dvd hybrids, playable in both players, and only release the single version.
Over christmas, a lot of people will be buying PS3s and new blu-ray players. Sales if the disks will take off eventually.
As it is, Blu-ray sales are outpacing DVD's own initial rollout. Have some patience... it;s only been 2 years!
Science and math educations needs to be dramatically increased, I completely agree. Calculus should not necessarily be a graduatrion requirement, but it should be a college enterance requirement. Same goes for statistics.
If you plan to go the trade skill route (plubmer, electrician, construction labor, nurse, etc), but if you're shooting higher (architect, engineer, etc) you should be held to a higher standard coming into schools.
To get the 21 credits necessary to graduate high school in most states, you're only taking 2 sciences, 2 maths, 4 history, 4 english, 3 foreign language, 1 for gym (1/4 creit anually), 1 health/psychology, plus any 4 other classes you want. During the same 4 years, the average student spends up to 30% of their time in a study hall not learning anything new...
Lets take that time that us taxpayers are paying for them to be there, and put them on stricter paths towards chosen careers, or simply general college prep.
Make the requirement for graduation the same 21 credits, if all you're looking for is a diploma so you can go work for a family of local business, etc. For trade school admissions, lets add to this not less than 2 classes in any trade and bump the math and science requirements to 3 years each. for college prep, lets pump math and science to 4 years each and instead of 2 classdes of trade skills, take 2 classes in any college major track or field of study of your choice.
There's no reason someone should ever enter college without having completed algerbra and trig at the very least. Every student should have a grounding in all the base fields of science (chem, bio, physics at the least). All students should have a complete understanding of english coming out of high school, and I don't see any reason colleges should continue requireing students to take compositional english classes, and historic literature classes should be part of the optional "artistic" choices each college student has including theater, painting, music, and other interpretive studies. I do see the value in interpretive learning, but I don't see a reason why every one of us needs an entire year of reading stale old literature if we have a choice to persue other forms of are more interesting to us.
I guess you never got into the higher avenues of programming... I took several programming classes in college that involved massive amounts of calculus! The most heavily used were any classes revolving around graphics programming. There's a TON of math involved in rendering a 3D virtual object on a 2D screen. There's also a lot of calculis in any kind of mapping software, most game design, heck even in statistical analysis.
Short of interface design or database programming, calculus is used in almost all fields of program design.
As for improving problem solving, there's a whole avenue of mathematics called Logic. Logis is actualy a solvalble, manipulatable equasion when you reach to levels of complexity beyond simple statements. (think state space design and optimization, something you should have taken as a programmer at some point in your degree path). Also, ANYTHING that makes you problem solve for any reason is increasing your problem solving abilities. The more levels of complexity, the better you get at multi-tasking and complex system resolution. This is a muscle that needs to be worked like any other. Calculus is not only complex, but many equastions have multiple solution paths. The more you do it, the easier those paths become to spot. It;s like Chess, the more you play, the farther ahead in the game you can reliably predict. Programmers NEED heavy math.
What's sad is that as a CS major, I had to take a foreign language for 3 semesters... but at my school, since Russian, Japanese, and German were'nt offered, what was the point? As a programmer, those are likely the only languages i'd reasonably come across!
I actually started off at college in electrical engineering. Organic Chem was on the menu (still don;t know what that had to di with electrical eng). That's actually not what changed my major (I passed OC without too much difficulty). What did change my path was the requirement for technical physics (201-202). They expected engineering majors to take this their first year (expecting they CLEPed or AP exempted basic physics, which I did along with basic chem, biology, Calc 1, and nearly all of my english requirements). The problem with technical physics is most of the 100+ students in the class were enrolled in calc 1, 2, or 3 at the same time as physics 201, but technical physics labs were using partial and polydifferential equasions (Calc 4 material), many of which we were expected to derive ourselves before even being able to input variables. 80% of the class failed each semester, not because they couldn't handle the material, but because we had not yet been taught the required math skills.
I did pass Phys 201 and 202 the first time though, but during the time I took a serious look at my future, and decided I liked programming more.
Now, I haven't even coded in 10 years... I'm a senior analyst and do the job of IS and CISM majors... College was a complete waste aside from the experience of having been there (which I do feel was more valuable in itself than all the other education I received). Having to work a full time job while in school to afford it shapoed me even further.
First of all, they do need evidence. They need enough evidence to meet probable cause to get a judge to sign a warent to enter your home. They DO have a burden of proof to meet, and that IS constitutionally protected. As far as seizure, if the judge OK's seisure, you're also protected under the constitution to a speedy trial. The courts will likely rule pretty quick that they can copy an image of your system for further investigation, but since forensics on a PC can be done in a few days tops, if they can't provide further proof of illegal activity to a court quickly, a lawyer will very quickly have that system released back into your hands (likely with blank hard drives, but if you're not backing up, that's your fault!). If you;re found innocent, provided there was both a burden of proof, and due process, you can't sue the government for loos of use, but if the system was physically damaged (not data lossm, but damage or extended unreasonably loos of use) then you do have a case, nut only for minor compensation.
Honestly though, this is not about creating a govenrment body to do the RIAA's bidding, it;s about creating a government body so that we can make the RIAA stop! individuals and the media alike are causing swells in the voter community regarding the RIAA, and though it's currently a minor issue, it IS an issue. Likely more imnportant is the fact that the RIAA is pissing off large universities, schools that give candidates a HUGE boost with campaign finance, open public forums to speak in, and more. I'm sure the senators want to see this harassmenty of their voter base end as soon as is possible.
Once this agency takes over, the RIAA is rendered virtually powerless. They'll be outside the law and open to direct criminal prosecution for their actions if they continue on their current track.
Equally, this agency might go looking for some big, press worthy targets, but they're not interested in pissing off the same pool of people the RIAA is.
Besides, the RIAA ius a bunch of nut jobs, eager to do anything they can, and paid extremely well for their efforts. If it all falls apart, either way, they all got rich trying. On the government side of the picture, we're talking about career law enforcement salaries here. These guys not only will NOT be rich if they get fired because they got the agency sued, it ends their careers as well. The RIAA guys are businessmen, and can get another job in their field. A cop gets fired, he's going to low budget security work. Not exactly appealing.
These guys, just like the NYC cops who seize the cars of drunk drivers, will overlook questionable cases and only go for the sure wins. They can'ty afford to make mistakes. If they can be absolutely certain you're stealing files, and can convince a judge of the same, then come in and take your system, odds are, you WILL be guilty. It's a big enough expense to prove themselves right, especially since they'll likely never see any real money back from it and putting you in prison only costs more, but LOOSING a case could cost them millions, and the government does NOT take that kind of risk lightly.
They do not need "suspicion" they need to overcome warentable burden of proof. Failure to return property to an innocent is a violation of the constitution, and people who make government wage will be fired if this is an issue on any level. It's called personal accountabiulity, and the RIAA does not currently have that, so it;s a problem that must be resolved.
Many think it might just be easier to outlaw the RIAA's activities, but doing so has too many side effects. 1) since there is no government organization doing the same, it basically gives us all free license to start sharing, since only gross violaters would ever be noticed by the FBI, the only other fallback. 2) it would also limit PIs all over the country, as well as smaller government offeces. We can't stop the RIAA's activitys alone, we have to offer a legal substitute.
Well, they CAN seize your stuff, but they still have to acquire a WARRENT to do so... They may have a new law to play with, but the courts and the constitution are still obstacles they have to abide.
I actually see this as a good thing, as flawed as the law is and as likely it will be overturned quickly if approved. You see, since there is now an official government branch, the RIAA just became powerless. Their activities can now be considdered illegal and harassing.
The government will do a pretty good job hunting down the worst offenders. They'll go after big time sharing users, people who are sharing so much data it';s easy to trace. As a typical government agency, they'll look for the big wins, not the little guys. It's of no interest to the government to prosecute small cases wqhere the benefit to them does not make financial sense.
Do you hear on the news "today we located and sent summons to 600 minor pot smokers, we considder this a big step in the drug war."...NO, you hear "we had a big bust today, 4 tons of cocaine!"
These are headlines the government looks for. Finding guys who are so guilty it;s not even going to get to court. Overwhelming government evidence.
If you happen to be on bit torrent, and share a small amount of stuff, the government really won;t be interested in finding you. The reason? If you're found NOT guilty, some agency looses MILLIONS in the counter suit, and the investigators KNOW if that happens, their career ends instantly. The RIAA is gambling on winning and loosing cases, and since they're operating on a thin line of law, simply gathering evidence and submitting civil cases, not invading homes and seizing property, they put the blame on the law enforcement folks who actually do knowck on your door. They're partly immune to counter suits that a government won't be.
When the government seizes goods or equipment, or your car, they're doing so after a long line of clear evidence. You blow a 1.7 in a breath meter, then get your car imponded and you brought to jail, theyn they give you a blood test and independentyly confirm the breath meter's results, pretty much, you;re guilty. There's not a lot of argument for you to get your car back. The cops are following clearly documented and practiced arrest policies, and the chance you'll get off on a technicality is extremely slim (and the few times it's happend, NY did not have to be sued to return the car, it simply released iot from impound). Law suits aginst NY for seized cars have been civil suits over the arrest itself, and usually the weekend you spend in jjail waiting arainment, not for the seizure and loss of use for a few days.
On the flip side, I know a few NY cops, and they've actually LET drunk drivers go free without seizing the car. (usually they encourage them to park the car and walk home, or call for a ride if they can). Why? When the meter blows 0.08 or 0.09, and it;s close enough that it might be contested, the law sais they need to arrest and seize the car, but there's that remote chance the meter could be wrong, and that it might get overturned. So instead, they try to keep people safe, sometuimes even OFFERING A RIDE if it's close enough, but they also have to protect the city itself. If they go around seizing cars and it's getting overturned too often, people loose trust in their government.
That's the balance here. Beyond the trouble of getting a warrent to enter your home and seize your systems on EVIDENCE of illegal activity (there is a burden of proof to overcome here), they actually have to heave reasonable belief they're right and will win. To many innocents being victims and this whole agency comes crashing down.
As I said, I don't think so much this is an issue the government really cares about, or that thy're going to pour millions into, I think this is more in response to negative feedback from the RIAA and MPAA's personal actions, and a way for the government to deal with the issue without weakening IP rights. (sto
Slashdot Mirror
They have used this policy in SC elementary schools for years. My wife, who teaches in a school here fights this policy VIGGEROUSLY. In some districts, the minimum is 60%, and this even applies when no work is done/handed in at all, and for days tests are missed due to absenses and not made up. With passing at 70%, and minimum 60% on all work done or not, it actually has been encouraging kids who don;t succeed to try LESS. Even the ones who do the work, but believe they will fail become self fulfilling as they typically have deep drops in self esteem, work and study habbits.
It;s one thing to encourage a kid who works hard and occasionally gets a bad score that they can work only a bit harder to do better. When you have a kid failing and getting free grades, convincing them to work harder to get an extra 10% and occasionally pass on their own, vs doing nothing at all, no stress, no effort, and even still, they typically get a few percent of their grade from classroom participation and behavior, and a few percent from ungraded homework, and the occasional 100% from in-class pop quizez.
With this policy in place, my wife has had only one child fail in 8 years, and that was due to a district policy on attendance, not even his grades. Doing the grades without the bump to 60%, and she would have had either 1 or 2 fail each year, and one year would have had 4 fail, mostly because they simply didn't turn in any work when they didn't feel like it.
I have not read Pittsburg's policy, and I hope the minimum 50% applies strictly to work completed by students and tests actually taken. A better policy however is simply to allow retesting. If they're doing poorly, they need HELP, not bonus to scores. It's NOT about pushing kids through to the next grade level, its about them ACHIEVING that grade.
There's another side effect here too we've seen in both schools my wife taught in. There are some kids on the bubble of passing. On their own, they are, and when given proper attention, show that they can excel and occasionally get As. However, they see their friends, who play every night and all weekend, never doing homework, never working on projects, who squeese by and pass as well due to district policy. This has the effect of turning the kids who DO work hard at passing into those that no longer want to try. There is a clear dividing line in my wife's classrooms of those who do and those who don't, and especially at this young age it is VERY improtant that we be teraching that life requires effort, not that life will provide you what you need for free. Most of her kids get As and Bs. A rare few occasionally fall to a C. Then therer are those who allways get Ds, and who would likely fail if the system was not in place. These kids never occasionally get Cs. They allways scrape the bottom. They are also the most distracting and problematic kids in the class.
3 years ago, while teaching 4th grade, my wife did an experiment, along with the rest of the teachers on her grade level; Though the parents of the kids effected were told the district policy was in fact in effect, that their kids could never receive less than a 60% even if they didn't complete the work, she got permission from each and every partent to inform the kids that the policy had been revoked, that the grade they got was the grade they got, that there would be no more free 60% scores, and failure to turn in work was guaranteed a 0, but she offered them to retake any grade for any reason (even letting kids with Bs retake to try to get an A.). She kept this up for over 15 weeks before one of the parents slipped up and let her kid know the truth because the parent wanted to go on a weekend trip to the mountains and the kid was certain she had to do a big project and would fail if they went on vacation... However, during that 15 weeks, the kids in her class who normally got Ds and Fs, who rarely if ever turned in work for the teachers the year before, were all getting Cs and Bs, and occasional As. Their MAP testing scores increaeed dramatically, esp
Some of them, yea. Funny how nobody is saying anything about Golem, the 100% rendered character... The got legolas wrong, but him right? and few every say anything about the work done on the battlefields with the Massive rendering engine.
Actually, anytime they were using the "virtual fellowship" things were a little inconsistent, especially in the first movie.
Also, of the 23 spots I found issue with, more than half were in the first movie, but the 3rd movie had 4 times the number of effects shots. It got consistantly better, and all the big budget films since have been improving more. It;s only low budget guys, and some TV shows, that keep dropping the ball on CGI and getting the rest of them a bad rep.
Oh, sorry for the grammer issues... /. has no internal spelchecker, and I'm too lazy/busy to scan manually. I usually do a read though, but its hard to catch your own spelling mistakes.
Note I said only 42" or 47". 46" is a bastard size and uses some wierd pizel spacing to achieve the image. It is considdered inderior to 47" just like 36" is considdered inferior to 37". I did not state they shipped all TVs BETWEEN 42 and 47, just all 42s and all 47s in plasma 1080p, and that seperately total 1080p shipments were only 21% of all HDTVs sold.
True, people will buy more HDTV in 2008 than the last 2 years. I'm not dusputing the 330% sales increase. What I'm saying is 1080p is still a small part of that, and yes, the MOST PEOPLE argument does stick because it is a FACT based on actual sales reports... MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT BUYING 1080P.
only 21% of people are buying 1080p tvs in 2008 thus far. This is not a linear total, but JUST THIS YEAR.
1080p has a significant price premium over 1080i, and on top of that, short of Blu-ray and now VOD from some satelite providers, there is NO 1080p content generally available. Why buy now when in 2 years when cable switches over to 1080p you can pick one up for 50% less than now... and end up with 2 TVs then for the price of one now, and not miss any real content in the meaintime.
1080i is NOT 1080p. True, most sets are 1080, but that is NOT wehat you said. You said most people are buying "1080p" Nearly ALL 720p sets display 1080i. Only those sub 30" tend to limit to 720 lines. and those under 19" tend to limit to 480p and 720i. Even if every HDTV sold supported 1080i or higher (which they do not), HDTV in general is STILL not 50% of the market total. It;s barely over 30%. So there's another nail in your argument's coffin.
de-interlaced 1080i on a 1080p TV has no difference in overall quality than 1080i. It's the same data, they're just refreshing the entire screen twice with the same image instead of half then half. Some people actually claim de-interlacing and showing 30fps twice that way causes mild flickering, and is actually less smooth to watch than 1080i. There is NO increase in picture quality, and further, hard cuts can be acquard if the interlacing was 2 different scenes not intended to be merged... de-interlacing is a gimmick used to sell sets, not a benefit to watch. Same goes the other way, trying to watch 1080p content on a 1080i set, you loose HALF the data in the translation, and image tearing is common. A very select few TVs are now showing 60 FPS (they're all in the $3K and up price piints) showing 1080p and creating an entermediat frame based on real time difference calculations between the two displayed. Personally, I'd save that money and get an LG 4X HD set when it comes out and upscale instead, since my eyes can't see faster than 34FPS anyway...
As of December 2007, 50% of houses had DIGITAL TV, not HDTV. HDTV at that point was estimated to be 32% penetrated per the CEA. Estimates to have that increase 66% in 2008 are showing to be fairly accurate thus far, meaning we won't have 50% HDTV, let alone 1080i, forget 1080p, by the ned of 2009, possibly into 2010. 1080p 50% penetration isn't expected until 2012, about 3 years after after 2160p (HD4x)is marketly availbale.
Part of the problem is there are no 1080p sets under 37" sold, at all. The second issue is the cheapest one is a knock off brand and even it's $800. At the same time, top name breand, 1080i sets (720p) can be had in the same size for under $600 on sale, and knock offs are under $500, not to mention you can get 720P (1080i) on screens as small as 15". The average house has but 1 TV over 30", the rest are all smaller, and the average house has 3.2 TVs... At that ratio, unless 1080p sets start coming out in smaller sizes at prices less than slightly larger 1080i sets (not happeneing anytime soon), 1080p simply can not statistically be "most" households. For 2 years at least you can't even say "most" households will have 480p. "most" households have digital TV (ED at 480i or SD digital at 260p)
"most" people will be OK with 1080i, until they get their first 1080p set. The differences between 1080i and 1080p are
There may be a 4 month backlog on prosecution and getting you into court, but with a warent issued, when they seize your system, it's contents are immediately dumped and imaged. Wether or not they have time to review your system data or not from the image, each day they keep your PC locked up without actually CHARGING you with a crime is time you can sue the agency for loss of use, and if your found not guilty in the end, that's a MASSIVE ammount of money, which your lawyer would be more than happy to take 50% of as a fee on the back end.
Again, they're really not interested in simple offences. The fines that they might conceivably get by seizing your system would have to exceed their costs, which are substantial, in order for the agency to give a rats ass about you. They're looking for grevious offenders who society will justify the cost of improzonment for. A few song files on your PC vs $30K in costs to the city to do it and backlogging the lagal system with non-violent crimes? no, I don;t think taxpayers will bite.
The RIAA is successful (well, not really so far by their track record) because the money for prosecution comes from pricate sources. Once the bill is footed by taxpayers, they're not going after Joe public for a measly $1000 fine, that likely he can't pay anyway. They'll be looking eclusively at punishing people who have enough property or equity to seize in punishment, and who's punishment fits the crimes without conteset. If the city goes around seizing equipment and property to cover fines, and these cases getoverturned, or the city gets sued for millions instead of the RIAA, then someone's getting unelected from office. Politicias simply won;t let that happen.
You get cuaght with drugs, it;s easy enough to slap you with a few days in prison, and a small fine, and there's usually no contest. Look at who gets causghht pot smoking. It;s people who are out in public and easy to catch, or people who get stung through inside dealers working with cops. They don;t go kicking in doors and arresting people in their homes over misdemeanor crimes (which regardless of the fine, copywrite infringement is not a felony unless they can tack on willful distribution FOR PROFIT).
unless your SVGA monitors include HDCP support, and have an HDMI 1.2 or better connection, then nope, you'll see only SD resolutions, and depending on the monitor, likely as a smaller image in the center of it. CRT is right out. only LCD or PLasma would begin to have this support.
I bought a 22" widescreen 2 years ago and I made CERTAIN is had HDCP support before buying it. Most of my friends in the indusctry were not so thorough, and even with Vista and a Blu-Ray player found they could not display the images without upgrsding both their video card and their monitor.
Of course, simply rip that BD movie and watch it on your PC in full HD spleandor... Of course, you'll still have to have Vista and a BD drive (I think Macs now support BDs as well, just not video playback due to HDCP issues, but I have not checked).
even my PC, brand new components and all, with Vista EE, could not play a BD movie even if I had the drive since the intel chipsets currently available still do not support HDCP, but I can still rip and watch in HD so I really don't care.
I have not added a BD player to the PC yet because I don't have my PS3 yet, and thus have no strong desire to do so until after I can aford the new console.
Manufacturers still need to get on the ball in convey MUCH more clearly wether their stuff has HDCP support built in or not. Of course, since only 7 movies released on BD thus far have enforced this setting, honestly, almost every movie you'll buy WOULD play on your SVGA display, provided you can convert the signal from the BD player to it;s native resolution (which would likely mean using a PC as even XVGA widescreen is only 1050 lines, not 1080.
My TV is 1080i, not 1080p. It;s 2.5 years old. The same size TV in 1080p at that time had a 70% premium over mine... Easy decision. $900 vs $1500... and at the tiome, there was NO 1080p content even available.
Checking BestBuy's current selection of TVs, over 37" about 70% are 1080p. 32-37", far less than half are. Under 32" virtually no TVs support 1080p.
By this time next year, sure, most TVs over 24" will be 1080p, and virtually all over 37" will be. Currently all of them I can find 40" or larger are with few exceptions.
However, if they want to penetrate BD as far as DVD, you have to account that most households today have a 32" TV or smaller in the living room. My circle of close firends, about 15 households worth, are all copmputer and tech geeks. only 7 of us have a 37" or larger TV today, and only 4 of us have HD.
The point is not what's available today. The point is what most peoiple HAVE today. 1080p sales are just now exceeding 1080i and 720p. For 5 years of HD TV sales, this has not been the case. Its very simple statistiucs to KNOW that most people can't possibly have 1080p if more people bought TVs that didn't have it...
Panasonic owns the only 42 and 47" 1080p TVs sold currently. They have about 70% of the total 1080p plasma marketshare. 1080p shipments are only 21% of all plasma TC sales. and these figures are current to within 2 months.
Most people even today, are NOT buying 1080p...
Ya know... complete BS.
I kept using tapes in my car for YEARS after I could have installed a CD player. Had one in the house and the PC 4 years before I had one in the car. I felt no compelling reason to replace it until it actually DID break.
Same goes for nearly all of my hardware. I don't go out and buy a new toy simply because I'm bored of the old one. I WILL get a PS3 as soon as I get a small TV for the car and move the PS2 in there (or if the PS2 dies before that happens). If any of my 3 DVD players crap out, I'll shuffle them around the house and get a BD player (or PS3) for the living room. When the bedroom TV craps out, I'll move the 37" HD LCD in there and get a better one for the living room. I don't buy new unless I have a reason to. 90% of America is with me on that. I can't justify $200 for a BD player alone, but if I'm replacing my $100 HDMI enabled upscaling DVD player, then it's not $200, it's $100 in my mind, and that's worth the upgrade...
MOST of us don't buy, we replace, and whn we have the money, replacement means "upgrade". ...or we add to a room that doesn't have something currently and buy a new one for the original room. The rooms in our houses get "hand-me-down" technologies. The more we redistribute in our homes, the more stuff we have that fails over time, so the pace we adopt technology accelerates, but still, less than 5% of us go out and buy something just because it's "better." and most of those that do are college kids with few real bills (mortgages, car payemetns, etc) and they have the fluid cash, or others who simply make enough money to do it.
I'm on the upper end. I've had HDTC for about 3 years, a DVR for 4, and I continually upgrade my computers. I didn't get a PS3 yet because I play most of my games on the PC and very little in the living room ($70 for a game I can play for 50 hours has NO comparrison to an MMO I can play for years... especially when there's no monthly fee! ...and console RTS games just suck, no content updates, no custom levels, and incredibly poor controls.)
DVDs scratch, and so do BD, but that's whyt I put the originals up and STRICTLY keep copies in the living room. Illegal or not, I interpret this as fair use, no different from what I was legally protected doing with VHS, and I do in fact own ALL of the content in my house (not a single illegally downloaded file).
Also, BD is NOT a replacement for DVD. You don't buy an all new collection, you just buy new stuff in BD and KEEP your old DVDs (upscaled, which is NOT as good as BD regardless of what you hear).
The player may be a bit expensive, and unless it;s an AWESOME disk with HOURS of features, I'm not paying the BD $10-15 premium currently for any of them, but the price for BD will meet DVD just the same as the price for DVD met VHS after a few years (we're not at that point yet, but i expect the price to marginalize to $5 differences by February, after the Christmas demand for disks subsides.
I've watched the same movie upscaled from DVD to 1080p, and also a BD fo rthe exact same movie. The is a HUGE difference in color quality, texture crispness, additional detail, and surround sound quality. This is completely aside for the truly awesome features BD disks have that DVD simply can't. On quality alone, if the price difference vs DVD was within $5, I'd likely buy BD every time. At the current $10-15 premium, only exceptionally special movies get purchased on BD. This margin must be reduced, but currently, demand is high enough to satisfy that price (production facilityies are still under manufacture to meet higher demand curves, and as they come online, cost per disk produced will reduce. Also keep in mind, producing the content for a BD takes a LOT more effort and money than doing the same for DVD, so I do expect SOME difference in price for a couple of years yet.
As for sattelite radio... Why pay $14 a month for a service that gives you the same thing a iPod and Streamripper do? With the
OK, I'm getting a bit sick and tired of this "add DRM" crap.
TO ALL YOU MORONS, DVD HAS DRM TOO!!!!!
It was cracked, and so has Blu-Ray been cracked. There is NO difference, and copying a DVD is STILL JUST AS ILLEGAL AS CRACKING A BD DISK!
The ONLY difference is the cost of BD blank media. Remember the cost of dual larer DVD media a few years ago? Heck, I worked for a big box retailer back in 2002 just to help make ends meet as a second job. At that point, buying a dual layer DVD drive was a $300 purchase, plus blanks at $10 each, even in bulk, you had to rip over 200 movies to reach a break even point, and they were FLYING off shelves anyway. Today? With a 25 stack of dual layer disks costing about $1 a disk or less, plus $60 for a good drive, you can break even after ripping about 8-10 movies... BD will have the same results in the future. You still need to rip no less than 3 movies a month to even justfy the cost of a netfix subscription vs simply buying the movies to own. and that's if you don;t illegally download, which I take NO part in. (if it's worth owning, it's worth giving the artist his due) I do however rip a LOT of content from TV directly, which is perfectly legal...
Of course, with hard drive capacity cheaper than blank BD media, many people are just starting there for the time being.
The price of BD disks WILL have to equalize with DVD for them to get much of my money, but there have been a couple titles that even at that price have had enough features and special stuff vs the same DVD to make the difference worth it to me.
Anyway, QUIT THIS SHIT ABOUT BD DRM!!!! It's NONSENSE! Anyone who can crack DVD can crack BD. Anyone who doesn't know how to crack DVD is no more likely to want to do it to BD anyway. Anyone willing to crack can just as well download cracked copies, since either way it's just as illegal...
First, DRM is a non-issue. DVD HAS DRM!!! BD DRM has been cracked. They're on EXACTLY the same playing field. The only missing piece is a good BD recorder for PCs that's affordable, that doesn't require Vista to use (which will happen soon enough).
Apparently, you also have never upscaled a DVD to 1080p, then watched a BD disk on the same TV. There is a HUGE difference in quality!!! Even on my set at home at 720P I can tell a clear and distinct difference. It's all in the textures, lighting, and color quality. Would my grandfather be able to tell? No, his eyes can't see in that resolution to begin with, but me, I can tell, oh boy can i tell!
Also, Bd disks are NOT just about higher quality. They have AMAZING (the ones worth buying) interactive features that are FAR superior to DVD. The audio may also be in 5.1, but it's recorded at much higher quality, and 7.1 is the standard, not 5.1... (with support for 10.2 when receivers capable of decoding it become affordable enough). I have a Yamaha receiver that supports 7.1 with "presence" (dynamic 9.1 re-encoded sound). A DVD and BD of the same movie do sound distinctly different. The directional nature of the sound, and independent chanel seperation is how Dolby designed it, instead of how DVD "supported" it. The frequency range is also superior and much clearer.
At the current price of disks, i agree with you. I'm not dropping $30 on a BD disk when I can get a DVD for half the cost. I may plop down occasionally for a great disk on BD that's truly an exceptional package of features, but until BD and DVD pricing equalizes (or until hybrid disks are available), they've got a long way to go.
One new feature I'm seeing a lot now: BD disks are starting to come with PC playable versions of the movie on the disk, in a portion of the disk readable by DVD readers. Hybrid playable DVD/BD disks are also supposed to be released early next year allowing a single disk to be cross compatible with all players (just not in HD on non-bd units).
You may not want it yet. I personally held out on DVD until players reached sub $100. I actually had a player in my PC for 2 years before I had one in the living room... Eventually you'll crack. Right now, contrary to popular belief, manufacturers are having a hard enough time making enough blue laser reading systems to put in players, and part of the high price is actually a supply issue. That's slowly doing away, and prices are dropping as a result.
Any way you slice it, BD's price reduction and adoptation in homes has outpaced DVD since the format war ended. We're just 2 full years into BD, less than a year past the war's end, and as manu as 5% of households have aplayer already, and by the end of next year it;s likely to be over 10%. That's actually AMAZING adoption rates for HT technology, much faster than DVD achieved, faster than HDTVs themselves achieved, it's even faster than DVRs...
Give BD a break. Sure it's the new thing, and it OK that it's still too new for you. If it was ideal for everyone, the price would still be at this point, if not higher, since they can't possibly ramp production fast enough to support demand. It;s like the Wii. Nintendo is raking in the cash since the player is still having trouble staying in stock. As soon as there's a surplus, prices get cut. Right now, people are completely happy paying over $200 for a bd player, and $400 for a PS3. Keep in mind, we not only need to supply current demand, but we also need to back stock at least twice that many units in order to meet holiday demand when specials and promos push the price to under the $200 mark and they fly off shelves at that magic number.
Yea. Also saw Monsters Inc in 1080p. I though the big guy's fur looked cool enough on DVD, but it's awesome in HD! You can see each hair individually, and really see that they put a massive amount of effort into texturing the world that simply could not be seen until now.
I put the DVD in the PS3, upscaling to 1080p, then switched to the actual blu-ray disk. NO COMPARRISON! BD was SO much better, even at the same resolution. You see, upscaling simply smoothes the edges a bit, but if the textures were not present in the original, they can't be displayed when upscaling. It can't "invent" textures or re-render on the fly, it's just smoothing pixeles and color shades to avoid pixelation at higher resolutions... It's like the difference between optical and digital zoom on a camera. You don't hear people too cheap to buy a better lense saying "yea, but I can use digital zoom and it;'s just as good!" Those people clearly had never seen 1080p before. Compared to the unenhanced DVD (original format stretched to 37" screen) it was like watching static riddled old analog TV...
Now, am I going to plop down an extra $10-15 premium to buy BD disks vs DVDs? No. Maybe on RARE occasion of a disk that's really worth it, cram packed with hours of special features not available at all on DVD, but then again, I don't even buy a DVD unless it has hours of special features to begin with. If we're talking about a few deleted scenes and director commentary, maybe a behind the scenes documentary, I'm just as likely to record it off HBO HD, legally, at no extra cost. ...or, rent it through VOD for $4 and record it thorough an HTPC in 1080p anyway... so a BD disk is going to have to be extra special at $30 to get my hard earned coin.
Blockbuster has a very limited BD selection, at least in some cities. Netflix as of March has 1500 BD disks available to rent. (about 1000 titles). Sure, older movies are taking some time to transition, but keep in mind how long it took the same to happen on DVD. As it is, virtually EVERY movie released this year has a BD option, with the exception of the few released exclisively on the defunct format that will be rolling over to BD soon.
Considdering the format is basically 2 years old, having 800+ titles available is WAY ahead of what DVD accomplished in the same time. Old movies can't just be copied over either, there's SIGNIFICANT expense in converting the older version to HD digital format, designing the menu systems and adding all the required BD features, not to mention resampling the audio. Private Ryan was a great movie, but most of us already own it. The studio won't considder the re-release unless they can add something dramatic to the movie beyond a resolution bump, since that alone won;t sell $30 copies to people that already own it, in a market where less than 5% have a player compatible.
You're still on the leading edge by having a player already, which means most of your selection is limited to new stuff as well. Keep in mind, that BD player will UPSCALE all your DVDs to 1080p as well.... Just watching Private Ryan on it will still look and sound a whole lot better than your old-n-busted DVD player, which if you're lucky upscaled to 720i.
1: First, DVD has DRM too... Can't play a DVD in a player that doesn't have the licence unless you crack it. BD has been cracked, so on that count, it's EXACTLY the same as DVD. If you want to boycot BD for DRM, throw out all your DVDs too...
2: BD disks DO play in all BD players! There were some early issues when they turned on the BD copy protection (which to date only 6 releases have even used!!!), but ALL those manufacturers were REQUIRED to fix or replace those players under the BD licence terms, since in the royalty agreement, your player MUST support 100% of the BD features to be called a BD player and have a log on it. The early adopters encounterd some issues, but they've BEEN FIXED, FREE. Since most BD players include a network port, firmware updates are easy, and BD players are INTENDED to be internet connected, as many BD disks include online accessible features, so getting updates should not be an issue. The ones that don't have network ports can be updated using a USB stick in most cases. Others simple require service or replacement, but it's on them to pay for that service for you. Better players are easier to update, and worth the investment vs knock-offs.
3: the player will be $99 or less, in about 3-4 years. DVD players were over $200 each until the 4th Christmat they were available. BD will be under this price point by their 3rd year. Give them a break! They're ahead of the curve... If you're withcing about a $200 set top box, then you probaly don't have a TV with both HDMI and HDCP support either, nor do you likely have a 5.1 or better DIGITAL (fiber optic or HDMI supporting) stereo system. You're NOT a target for BD unless you have this!
4: $99 DVD players don't have all the features of other $99 DVD players, let alone cheaper players (types and numbers of ports, output quality, upscaling quality, size, noise generated, boot time, etc...) What makes you think BD will be different? The $50 DVD players don't have HDMI, $99 players do. When the cheap BD players are $99, $200 players WILL have more features. It will be your choice to buy or not to buy based on these differences. Youy simply buy the model that has what you want... It's called a free market, and we DIE to keep it that way. Regardless of the features, it still has to play what's on the disk, regardless, so it's a non-issue. BD players have MUCH more technolology than a DVD player, and MUCH higher royalties on that technology, it will be YEARS before you see a $99 player. By next christmas, cheapo players might be $149 or so, but will be missing some features (not to mention reliabiltiy and longevity).
5: I completely agree!. BD disks should be the same prince as DVDs, unless they include some really amazing unique features not also available on DVD, and even then, the higher priced version should be optional, with a basic movie + deleted scenes, etc version being the same price as DVD. Hybrid disks also need to become the norm (and will help olower prices due to simpler inventory and logistics management). 1 disk that plays in both BD and DVD players IS an option, they're just not using it.
In a nutshell, if you;re too cheap to buy in now, then you have to be content to wait, since as much as they keep telling us the BD market is weak, manufacturers are having trouble making enough blue laser system to keep up with demand for them... If 10% of homes have a BD player by the end of next year, then it will be considered MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN DVD. Currently, deployment of BD IS outpacing the deployment of DVD, even considdering the high level of technology that has to exist in your home in order to use one.
well, that cheap $30 player does not have HDMI connectivity, nor does it upscale images, so it looks just as crappy as SD does on my set, and forces me to juggle $60 in additional cables and complicate my whole HT setup... I'd much rather buy a $100 name brand upscaling player that I can connect with a single HDMI cable and use with my HT setup with a single cheap universal remote (provided by Time Warner Cable actually) than have to deal with the complexity. After buying 12' long Progressive cables (the 6' jobs don't reach), a fiber optic for audio, and dealing with the the hour it takes to reconfigure it all not to mention getting friends over to move the HT cabinet back from the wall, the cost is the same for more effort and pooper picture quality... I guess if you don't have an HD TV already, or a quality shelf receiver with HDMI support (or even an HDMI switch), then it doesn't matter, but forward thinking is always a good idea because eventually you WILL have that stuff.
Also, the longevity of those $30 players is crap. My father, Uncle, and Sister keep buying them, and seem to buy another one every year or two when the old blows up or starts skipping reading disks. All 3 of my DVD players have lasted more than 4 years. Also, adding an additional 4 year waranty (BestBuy service plans... a waranty without lightning coverage is not worth the paper it's printed on, so I only shop at bestbuy since they're the only ones that offer it!) for $19 on a $100 unit is a good investment. Adding that to a $40 unit, not so good... I've gotten over $4500 worth of free hardware from BestBuy's service plans over the years, all of it better models than the hardware it replaced, by spending not more than $1300 on waranties at BestBuy. I haven't bought a printer in 8 years, I just trade mine in every 18-24 months when one of the ink heads clogs, or when the rollers start having trouble feeding 1 page at a time, and buy another $29 service plan on the new one... I've gotten 2 free DVD players, a free TV, a Free PS2, a free laptop, 4 printers, a digital camera, a 1500VA UPS, a 22" computer display, a $500 stereo receiver, an external hard disk, a vacuum cleaner, a dishwasher, and a fridge, each one replaced for free after the manufacturer's waranty would have otherwise expired. I'd not have gotten any of that buying cheapo-crap discount store hardware, nor ANYTHING from walmart. The return on my investment means I have much better hardware 5 years later than I would have had paying your prices, and in the end, I likely spent less money.
I don't abuse my hardware, I just happen to live in central SC, where humidity and temps are high half the year, and where brownouts and dips in power fry most things in half their expected lifespan. I have UPS on the desktop computers, but getting one for the HT hardware costs more then the waraties, and they're not available for appliances. Besides, a 10-20% premium to double or tripple the waranty, with free replacement after 1-4 repairs, which is near a guarantee on most components nowadays around here, means I don't have to baby the equipment. If it fails, 90% of the time I get a free upgrade, then renew the waranty for another 3-5 years for 20% of what it cost to replace... I actually EXPECT my equipment to break down. If it doesn't, I call bestbuy and add an additional year to the PSP plan, and that usually does the trick.
Personally, if I'm going to buy a $100 DVD player, I'd just as well buy a $300 PS3. (I expect that to be the price come Christmas, maybe $279) My PS2 mini has just about seen the last good game it's ever going to play, and is about to be relegated to living in the car to keep the baby entertained on long drives. Come this Christmas after the next price drop, I'm grabbing a PS3, and then I don't need to worry about needing an upscaling player in the living room anymore, and I'll have 1 less connected device complicating the cabling setup.
It's still an emerging technology, even though the media is trying to convince you otherwise.
Give it 2 years and you likely won't find many TVs that don;t have HD being sold. CRTs are going away completely likely inside that timeframe (19" and smaller flat panels can actually compete on price now since their cost to manufacture is actually less, and all TVs now must have digital decoders built in which raised their cost).
The disks ARE too expensive. They won't really catch on until they match DVDs price, or until they start coming out on hybrid disks instead of 2 seperate formats. That should happen next year.
The new players? When your DVD stop working, and you're in the store looking at a new one, it;s pretty hard to decide between a $190 BD player, good upscaling DVD player (about $100 now, vs the cheap shit not-even-progressive-scan $39 players), or even a PS3 at what likely will be $299 or $249 after christmas this year.
If you still have a generic TV, you are NOT the marketing target for BD. In 2-3 years you will be, assuming routine HT component failure rates. If you have a massive CRT based TV or projector, it may yet last as long as 15-20 years from when you bought it, but especially with the old projection TVs, when that bulb fails (about once every 3 years or so), and it's out of waranty and out of production, $300 for a bulb that will only last another 2-3 years or $600 to replace that TV with a 1080p DLP projector with a 5 year waranty, or maybe $1K for a similar flat panel, that might get you to switch...
The selection is only slightly limited at the moment. Every major (wide) release is coming to both BD and DVD, and has been for a year or more. Older movies are being ported quickly, 10-20 a month or more. There are over 1000 BD movies currently available. Also remember, BD is not intented to REPLACE your DVD collection, only to expand it. DVDs you already own will upscale. I'm also expecting sometime in the future that a digital download service offering to take your DVDs in exchange for HD digital versions (for a few bucks each) may become available, with right to burn to BD disks, allowing some process for updating your collection.
The FCC has been looking into "double dipping" for a while, and though it's not an extreme enough issue for them to deal with yet, I suspect that the FCC may eventually make a ruling that if you own a copy of a movie, and a newer version or new format comes out, that you should be given rights to acquire a copy of that new version for simply a small fee beyond the physical cost of the media and the distribution of it (digital download fees, physical disk shipping, etc). Since we know a BD disk costs less than a buck to mint, including the packaging, I can't imaging that upgrading to a directors HD cut from a DVD would be more than $10. Perhaps they may even allow digital content updates directly to the movie, by prichasing additional documentaries and such your original didn't include for extra fees instead of including them in the shelf release. Sales will need to eveolve somehow to compete with generic digital downloads. I doubt the FCC will be required to act before the industry does, but it's allways a fall back. I DO expect them to act soon enough on digital downloads though: not being able to migrate downloads from one PC to another, even if backed up, is a big issue, and since there's no way to re-download the movie at this time, I think they'll either be forced to start tracking all downloaded purchases and allow redownloads at will, or find some way of allowing the movies to be moved from system to system in a simple and legal way. This may itself lead to a way of biying "rights" instead of buying "content" and then it's a downhill slide to the new perfect medium.
"I don't have an HDTV right now..."
Common argument, and I sympathize. If an when you get one, the argument is valid. You can connect a BD player to a non-HDTV, but buying now means that a larger part of your collection, when you do buy an HD set, will already be HD... It's forward investing in your library.
"It's my (probably uninformed as heck) impression that not that many movies are out on Blu-Ray. I'm more into documentaries (which would look superb in HD) -- are they available and affordable"
Actually, most of the documentaries coming out are in blu-ray. Discovery Earth and the like all are, and the BD versions have a massive amount of special features to boot.
"The players are not cheap -- and judging from the pattern of all similar tech devices, in a year or three, they'll be under $100 or so -- and eventually be downright cheap, once the thrift stores have switched from selling VHS players to DVD players" Well, players will likely come to under $200 this christmas, and the PS3 to $299 or so. However, although DVD players did reach sub $100 levels about 5 years after they were available, BD players likely won't. There's a LOT of royalties being paid for in each player, and the technology is simply much more expensive. I don't think we'll see sub $100 BD players until about 2 years after the BD replacement is on the market. There's a possibility you might see a sub $100 player that's a "player only" unit in 3 years, requiring a TV with built-in decoders or whatever to do the processing, and including a very limited port selection, but until we make a few generational leaps in set top box chipsets, you won't see this prince.
That said, a $200 player would not prevent most of us from investing. The big deal is the $10-15 premium per movie... I try to buy a DVD a month, sometimes 2 (maybe even 3 if I pick a few up for under $10 each). Doing so with Blue Ray would add over $200 ANNUALLY to my entertainment budget.
"Finally, I have a substantial DVD collection and am in no hurry to re-spend all that money"
Well, every BD player not only plays DVDs, but it upscales them to HD (at least 480p, some higher) quality as well. It;s still not BD quality, but it adds a long life to your existing collection. The ONLY reason i might considder replacing SOME of my DVDs is if the bonus features on the BD disk are super cool.
About those bonus features: the real selling points of BD is not just the high def movie, but the INTERACTIVE features. Anyone can throw a behind the scenes docu-mini on a disk, or a few deleted scenes. The point of blu-ray is you can have true interaction with your movie, turn commentary on and off with a click in real time, insert the deleted scenes right into the movie, see scenes from different angles, bookmark segments of the movie to come back to, and a whole lot of other features. Many BD disks also have interactive games and other content built in and many also interact with web sites if your BD player is internet connected.
Some BDs have the same content as their DVD cousins, in shich case I say buy DVD. Others have some bonus documentaries or other regular video conent, in which case I say buy DVD, but rent the BD so you can see the extra content, and your still saving $7 at least.
Then you didn't hook it up right, or have not adjusted the settings properly. You must be using HDMI and your TV must be HDCP compliant. Using progressive cables does not work.
Ummm... I can rip blu-ray... and it's still illegal to rip DVD, so, what's the deal exactly?
You forget, DVD has DRM too!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let me ask you this, how many CGI sequences did you notice in the Lord of the Rings?
I found a total of 23 spots, across the whole of the 3 movies (12 hours), where I noticed a computer generated artifacts, or the failure for rendering to look lifelike. My wife and friends noticed no more than 10 each. There were just over 700 scenes that involved CGI in the trilogy. In face, in the Return of the King, 81% of the scenes included CGI elemets. This was several years ago....
It's not about CGI being hard to accept. It's about the quality time some studios invest and others don't. This has continually improved with time. Iron Man was nearly flawless. The Dark Knight was nearly flawless. Heck, even Battlestar Galactica, a weekly produced show, had great CGI quality.
Get this point straight. ALL FILMS are recorded in high res. In fact, they've been working in resolutions many times greater than 1080p for a long time... The stuff in the editing room is as muchas 4 times that resolution. This is irregardless of wether or not they release to Blu-ray.
CGI doesn't look any more or less real with a shartper image. It's not about the level of detail (in fact, a lot of CGI elements are rendered but are so small you can't even see the texture details on 1080p), it's about movement, light and shadow, and interaction with the environment. If it's not properly integrated to the scene, your brain keys in on it. It's part of how your brain is interpreting 2D images as 3D. If it's not right, it doesn't work, and the brain notices. This has NOTHING to do with resolution, and everything to do with the animator.
Filmakers are storing films in raw format nowadays for future editing in higher resolutions as well. We know 4X HD is on the horizon. (LG already has panels in that resolution available). We also know the new TV standard is 2:1 aspect, not 16:9. Blu-ray has to prove it has the capacity to be used with those resolutions and on those TVs or it just becomes a stepping stone format
I buy movies for 2 reasons: 1; to honor the people that made really great flicks (i'm just as happy to rip letter ones from HBO for free), and 2; for the kick ass DVD extras.
I have an upconverting DVD player. If a movie comes out, even one that I would buy, and the DVD and Blu-ray disk have similar features, why would I pick blu-ray at $10-15 more? Even though I have an HDTV, it's only 720p, likje MOST americans have. An upscaled DVD doesn't look quite as good as a blu-ray, and I do know that when I replace this TV with a 1080p in a couple years the blu-ray quality will improve, but for the moment, thats simply not compelling enough by itself to justfy that kind of cost.
If they came out on hybrid disks, so at least I can still play them in my PC, the other rooms in the house, and loan them to family who don't have blu-ray, I might invest... The price of the disks is the ONLY think keeping me from buying a PS3 to use as a blu-ray player. (why buy a $200 player when you get a console for $100 more...)
Nah, DRM is not the issue on Blu-ray. Most folks don;t even understand the content is encoded that way, and the rest of us can already crackit...
The problem is the disk is $10 more than a DVD of the same movie. To invest a few hundred in a new player for the privilidge of spending $10 more on a movie, especially with upconverting DVD players, is not an attractive option.
Combine that with a lackluster blu-ray release list over the last 4 months, and massive spending in theatres with summer releases, and you'll see where all the money is going.
If they want Blu-ray to replace DVD, it needs to compete with it on price. Make that happen! Sell Blu-ray for the same price... Better yet, make all new disks blu-ray/dvd hybrids, playable in both players, and only release the single version.
Over christmas, a lot of people will be buying PS3s and new blu-ray players. Sales if the disks will take off eventually.
As it is, Blu-ray sales are outpacing DVD's own initial rollout. Have some patience... it;s only been 2 years!
Science and math educations needs to be dramatically increased, I completely agree. Calculus should not necessarily be a graduatrion requirement, but it should be a college enterance requirement. Same goes for statistics.
If you plan to go the trade skill route (plubmer, electrician, construction labor, nurse, etc), but if you're shooting higher (architect, engineer, etc) you should be held to a higher standard coming into schools.
To get the 21 credits necessary to graduate high school in most states, you're only taking 2 sciences, 2 maths, 4 history, 4 english, 3 foreign language, 1 for gym (1/4 creit anually), 1 health/psychology, plus any 4 other classes you want. During the same 4 years, the average student spends up to 30% of their time in a study hall not learning anything new...
Lets take that time that us taxpayers are paying for them to be there, and put them on stricter paths towards chosen careers, or simply general college prep.
Make the requirement for graduation the same 21 credits, if all you're looking for is a diploma so you can go work for a family of local business, etc. For trade school admissions, lets add to this not less than 2 classes in any trade and bump the math and science requirements to 3 years each. for college prep, lets pump math and science to 4 years each and instead of 2 classdes of trade skills, take 2 classes in any college major track or field of study of your choice.
There's no reason someone should ever enter college without having completed algerbra and trig at the very least. Every student should have a grounding in all the base fields of science (chem, bio, physics at the least). All students should have a complete understanding of english coming out of high school, and I don't see any reason colleges should continue requireing students to take compositional english classes, and historic literature classes should be part of the optional "artistic" choices each college student has including theater, painting, music, and other interpretive studies. I do see the value in interpretive learning, but I don't see a reason why every one of us needs an entire year of reading stale old literature if we have a choice to persue other forms of are more interesting to us.
I guess you never got into the higher avenues of programming... I took several programming classes in college that involved massive amounts of calculus! The most heavily used were any classes revolving around graphics programming. There's a TON of math involved in rendering a 3D virtual object on a 2D screen. There's also a lot of calculis in any kind of mapping software, most game design, heck even in statistical analysis.
Short of interface design or database programming, calculus is used in almost all fields of program design.
As for improving problem solving, there's a whole avenue of mathematics called Logic. Logis is actualy a solvalble, manipulatable equasion when you reach to levels of complexity beyond simple statements. (think state space design and optimization, something you should have taken as a programmer at some point in your degree path).
Also, ANYTHING that makes you problem solve for any reason is increasing your problem solving abilities. The more levels of complexity, the better you get at multi-tasking and complex system resolution. This is a muscle that needs to be worked like any other. Calculus is not only complex, but many equastions have multiple solution paths. The more you do it, the easier those paths become to spot. It;s like Chess, the more you play, the farther ahead in the game you can reliably predict. Programmers NEED heavy math.
What's sad is that as a CS major, I had to take a foreign language for 3 semesters... but at my school, since Russian, Japanese, and German were'nt offered, what was the point? As a programmer, those are likely the only languages i'd reasonably come across!
I actually started off at college in electrical engineering. Organic Chem was on the menu (still don;t know what that had to di with electrical eng). That's actually not what changed my major (I passed OC without too much difficulty). What did change my path was the requirement for technical physics (201-202). They expected engineering majors to take this their first year (expecting they CLEPed or AP exempted basic physics, which I did along with basic chem, biology, Calc 1, and nearly all of my english requirements). The problem with technical physics is most of the 100+ students in the class were enrolled in calc 1, 2, or 3 at the same time as physics 201, but technical physics labs were using partial and polydifferential equasions (Calc 4 material), many of which we were expected to derive ourselves before even being able to input variables. 80% of the class failed each semester, not because they couldn't handle the material, but because we had not yet been taught the required math skills.
I did pass Phys 201 and 202 the first time though, but during the time I took a serious look at my future, and decided I liked programming more.
Now, I haven't even coded in 10 years... I'm a senior analyst and do the job of IS and CISM majors... College was a complete waste aside from the experience of having been there (which I do feel was more valuable in itself than all the other education I received). Having to work a full time job while in school to afford it shapoed me even further.
First of all, they do need evidence. They need enough evidence to meet probable cause to get a judge to sign a warent to enter your home. They DO have a burden of proof to meet, and that IS constitutionally protected. As far as seizure, if the judge OK's seisure, you're also protected under the constitution to a speedy trial. The courts will likely rule pretty quick that they can copy an image of your system for further investigation, but since forensics on a PC can be done in a few days tops, if they can't provide further proof of illegal activity to a court quickly, a lawyer will very quickly have that system released back into your hands (likely with blank hard drives, but if you're not backing up, that's your fault!). If you;re found innocent, provided there was both a burden of proof, and due process, you can't sue the government for loos of use, but if the system was physically damaged (not data lossm, but damage or extended unreasonably loos of use) then you do have a case, nut only for minor compensation.
Honestly though, this is not about creating a govenrment body to do the RIAA's bidding, it;s about creating a government body so that we can make the RIAA stop! individuals and the media alike are causing swells in the voter community regarding the RIAA, and though it's currently a minor issue, it IS an issue. Likely more imnportant is the fact that the RIAA is pissing off large universities, schools that give candidates a HUGE boost with campaign finance, open public forums to speak in, and more. I'm sure the senators want to see this harassmenty of their voter base end as soon as is possible.
Once this agency takes over, the RIAA is rendered virtually powerless. They'll be outside the law and open to direct criminal prosecution for their actions if they continue on their current track.
Equally, this agency might go looking for some big, press worthy targets, but they're not interested in pissing off the same pool of people the RIAA is.
Besides, the RIAA ius a bunch of nut jobs, eager to do anything they can, and paid extremely well for their efforts. If it all falls apart, either way, they all got rich trying. On the government side of the picture, we're talking about career law enforcement salaries here. These guys not only will NOT be rich if they get fired because they got the agency sued, it ends their careers as well. The RIAA guys are businessmen, and can get another job in their field. A cop gets fired, he's going to low budget security work. Not exactly appealing.
These guys, just like the NYC cops who seize the cars of drunk drivers, will overlook questionable cases and only go for the sure wins. They can'ty afford to make mistakes. If they can be absolutely certain you're stealing files, and can convince a judge of the same, then come in and take your system, odds are, you WILL be guilty. It's a big enough expense to prove themselves right, especially since they'll likely never see any real money back from it and putting you in prison only costs more, but LOOSING a case could cost them millions, and the government does NOT take that kind of risk lightly.
They do not need "suspicion" they need to overcome warentable burden of proof. Failure to return property to an innocent is a violation of the constitution, and people who make government wage will be fired if this is an issue on any level. It's called personal accountabiulity, and the RIAA does not currently have that, so it;s a problem that must be resolved.
Many think it might just be easier to outlaw the RIAA's activities, but doing so has too many side effects. 1) since there is no government organization doing the same, it basically gives us all free license to start sharing, since only gross violaters would ever be noticed by the FBI, the only other fallback. 2) it would also limit PIs all over the country, as well as smaller government offeces. We can't stop the RIAA's activitys alone, we have to offer a legal substitute.
This agency may have a completely flawedf desig
Well, they CAN seize your stuff, but they still have to acquire a WARRENT to do so... They may have a new law to play with, but the courts and the constitution are still obstacles they have to abide.
I actually see this as a good thing, as flawed as the law is and as likely it will be overturned quickly if approved. You see, since there is now an official government branch, the RIAA just became powerless. Their activities can now be considdered illegal and harassing.
The government will do a pretty good job hunting down the worst offenders. They'll go after big time sharing users, people who are sharing so much data it';s easy to trace. As a typical government agency, they'll look for the big wins, not the little guys. It's of no interest to the government to prosecute small cases wqhere the benefit to them does not make financial sense.
Do you hear on the news "today we located and sent summons to 600 minor pot smokers, we considder this a big step in the drug war." ...NO, you hear "we had a big bust today, 4 tons of cocaine!"
These are headlines the government looks for. Finding guys who are so guilty it;s not even going to get to court. Overwhelming government evidence.
If you happen to be on bit torrent, and share a small amount of stuff, the government really won;t be interested in finding you. The reason? If you're found NOT guilty, some agency looses MILLIONS in the counter suit, and the investigators KNOW if that happens, their career ends instantly. The RIAA is gambling on winning and loosing cases, and since they're operating on a thin line of law, simply gathering evidence and submitting civil cases, not invading homes and seizing property, they put the blame on the law enforcement folks who actually do knowck on your door. They're partly immune to counter suits that a government won't be.
When the government seizes goods or equipment, or your car, they're doing so after a long line of clear evidence. You blow a 1.7 in a breath meter, then get your car imponded and you brought to jail, theyn they give you a blood test and independentyly confirm the breath meter's results, pretty much, you;re guilty. There's not a lot of argument for you to get your car back. The cops are following clearly documented and practiced arrest policies, and the chance you'll get off on a technicality is extremely slim (and the few times it's happend, NY did not have to be sued to return the car, it simply released iot from impound). Law suits aginst NY for seized cars have been civil suits over the arrest itself, and usually the weekend you spend in jjail waiting arainment, not for the seizure and loss of use for a few days.
On the flip side, I know a few NY cops, and they've actually LET drunk drivers go free without seizing the car. (usually they encourage them to park the car and walk home, or call for a ride if they can). Why? When the meter blows 0.08 or 0.09, and it;s close enough that it might be contested, the law sais they need to arrest and seize the car, but there's that remote chance the meter could be wrong, and that it might get overturned. So instead, they try to keep people safe, sometuimes even OFFERING A RIDE if it's close enough, but they also have to protect the city itself. If they go around seizing cars and it's getting overturned too often, people loose trust in their government.
That's the balance here. Beyond the trouble of getting a warrent to enter your home and seize your systems on EVIDENCE of illegal activity (there is a burden of proof to overcome here), they actually have to heave reasonable belief they're right and will win. To many innocents being victims and this whole agency comes crashing down.
As I said, I don't think so much this is an issue the government really cares about, or that thy're going to pour millions into, I think this is more in response to negative feedback from the RIAA and MPAA's personal actions, and a way for the government to deal with the issue without weakening IP rights. (sto