 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.227.70.23
In Reply to: RE: 90,000 Toshiba A2 HD DVD players sold in 3 days ..... posted by ZS KEKL on November 07, 2007 at 00:09:15
the numbers guessed here were for one model at Walmart. Not all players at Walmart and Bestbuy combined.
Please, support Blu-ray.
Follow Ups:
than the 37,000 you guessed for Wal-Mart and Sam's Club combined .
It is , also , time for you to graciously apologize to me , for you making false accusations about me .
ZS KEKL
- http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?sec_id=2&article_ID=11509 (Open in New Window)
That my guess was right on at 37M? You are psychotic who has the pathology of no ability to ever admit you made a very simple mistake; a normal person could admit it and walk away. Whether you are the joke of DVDA forum that got it closed down with your stench, or when you're lying here, you are still nuts. And wrong, you first claimed that 90M units sold by three companies of all models, makes my estimate of 37M of a particular model sold, "wrong" then you waffled and claimed 60M (where did you get that number, its not in the article) makes my estimate wrong....
You are a typical internet lunatic. Nothing more.
Who cares what you think?
You cried and whined because the first story said 90,000 sold at Wal-Mart and Best Buy , and you guessed 37,000 sold for the A2 at Wal-Mart and Sam's Club . So , I posted a link to a second story that said 60,000 sold for the A2 at Wal-Mart , and you're still crying and whining .
You are a moron .
ZS KEKL
Though sales may be dwindling, at least SACD is still hanging on.
I'm glad HD-DVD is doing well, but DUI isn't wrong all the time, just like you ain't right all the time. Try to find some perspective, even if you hate SONY.
AuPh
d
Why not both? There is no reason to believe that HD-DVD won't provide just as worthwhile performance; some of us who own HD players are quite satisfied with their performance and most of the titles being released. If you are really serious about wanting this format war to end, then what you SHOULD be supporting is a dual-format player that is both inexpensive and performs equally well with both.
While I may seem to be a cheerleader for HD, I'm really not; I just want to see fair competition and honest opinions based on what folks are getting out of both (good & bad). Both formats should be given a fair shot now that they're out there; Joe Public will eventually gravitate toward one or the other or both (as in the dual format type of player I mentioned above).
OTOH, if I were going to make an off the cuff prediction (which is subjective and no more divinely inspired than anyone else's), it would probably be that the first format selling players for under $100 will be the eventual victor, but ...! Oh! (heh, heh) I see, that has already happened. ;0)
AuPh
I wanted that particular poster to join the other team than me.
;O)
...affect PQ/SQ and Warner/Universal/Paramount/Dreamworks could have been better if they weren't constrained by HD DVD's storage and bandwidth limitations ? Theoretically it's a known issue, practically, it's been argued the differences are indistinguisable. I'll point to significant changes in PQ on the longer HD DVD movies (e.g. "Troy", "King Kong") but it might be argued these PQ differences are in the master tape. OTOH, I've noticed the same on 25G Blu-ray discs where storage capacity might have been an issue (e.g. "Night at the Museum").The absence of uncompressed/lossless audio tracks is a pretty clear indicator of HD DVD limitations (e.g. absence of lossless with "King Kong", "Transformers") ; HD DVD proponents have argued 1.5M DD+ is indistinguisable from their lossless/uncompressed counterparts or they argue the vast majority of users cannot take advantage of HD audio (I believe the same arguments could have been made concerning DTS or going from 480p to 720p to 1080p).
Clear examples of the differences are lacking because Warner will not maximize the capabilities of both formats on their releases so we can do meaningful comparisons (e.g. they leave out lossless audio tracks on Blu-ray releases when they don't put them on their HD DVD counterparts). Blu-ray (or HD DVD) releases from overseas might be useful (e.g. "Face/Off" where the Blu-ray version has a PCM soundtrack, the HD DVD has a lossy soundtrack, PQ differences are also discussed).
I've been disappointed with the alleged PQ issues on the Universal releases which is a probable reflection of indifferent encoding/master tape selection prior to release. I can't help but wonder how well they might have turned out using higher default video bitrates on the encoding thus removing a lot of the TLC needed to "smooth out" the more obvious compression artifacts ?
The biggest worry is the possibility of a successful bid by Toshiba to steal the market with barebones hardware/pricing. It would be a big shame if Blu-ray were to lose this battle because it represents the best chance for maintaining the high resolution audio market, even if it is "tainted" with high def video.
For all of your harping on more storage space, 55% of BDs are BD-25s. Most of the titles that are on BD-50s aren't using all of the space due to replication issues.> > > Clear examples of the differences are lacking because Warner will not maximize the capabilities of both formats on their releases so we can do meaningful comparisons (e.g. they leave out lossless audio tracks on Blu-ray releases when they don't put them on their HD DVD counterparts). Blu-ray (or HD DVD) releases from overseas might be useful (e.g. "Face/Off" where the Blu-ray version has a PCM soundtrack, the HD DVD has a lossy soundtrack, PQ differences are also discussed). < < <
That's actually not true. Before going HD DVD exclusive, Paramount was doing different encodes for each format, and critics couldn't tell the difference. Funny how people forget that.
Nature's Journey was optimized for the max of each format, and if you sit 2 feet from your TV, you *might* see a difference. Imports are a mixed bag. with Underworld Evolution, the import HD DVD is said to look better than the BD version by people who compared them. Others, its the other way around.> > > I've been disappointed with the alleged PQ issues on the Universal releases which is a probable reflection of indifferent encoding/master tape selection prior to release. I can't help but wonder how well they might have turned out using higher default video bitrates on the encoding thus removing a lot of the TLC needed to "smooth out" the more obvious compression artifacts ? < < <
Both formats have good and bad titles. That's not really the fault of the format, but of the studio and/or the people doing the transfer. If you go by my collection, BD is mostly mediocre. I don't blame BD for that, though I guess I could blame Sony, since its mostly their movies that are mediocre.
The truth is, that both formats are capable of being fantastic, as well as really bad if people screw up. Of course, many are in the middle.Jack
And a lot of them were fairly mediocre in PQ; some because of the learning curve (e.g. DVD production values are no longer good enough for HD video), the use of less efficient MPEG2 and probaby less than ideal bitrates.
The best Blu-ray movies for PQ are on 50G discs which constitute the majority of the recent releases.
And as I was saying, the biggest discriminator between Blu-ray and HD DVD is the absence of lossless/uncompressed audio tracks with HD DVD ( <15%). The vast majority of Blu-rays without lossless are the Warner releases who probably didn't want the Blu-ray version to upstage the HD DVD counterpart. It's not just storage (notice even the 25G Blu-rays have lossless) but bandwidth which is a likely cause; the studios have to allocate the available audio/video bit rates between video and audio and the video is the higher priority. I.e. Better to dump the lossless audio than let significant compression artifacts plague the video. In contrast, lossless audio is basically a freebie (i.e. no impact on available video bandwidth) for Blu-ray for 5.1 24/48 PCM.
which actually surprises me. Saw 3, Scary Movie, Vacancy, Robocop, to name a few recent titles, are BD-25s. Almost all of the smaller independent studios use BD-25s. RBfilms said BD-50 wasn't even an option for him, even if he wanted it.
In most cases where HD DVDs don't have lossless, the reason is strictly due to the studio's decision not to include it (don't ask me why), not for technical reasons. Kind of like some BDA studios choosing to still use MPEG-2. BTW, I don't consider DTS-MA all that wonderful, or even useful, since none of the machines actually decode it.
Jack
for Wal-Mart and Sam's Club combined .
I doubt that you would have increased your guess to 90,000 for Wal-Mart , Sam's Club , and Best Buy combined .
ZS KEKL
of not admitting he made a mistake. You made a mistake. Admit it, and let's not foul this place up like you do the hi-rez formats.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
