 
|
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 |
68.164.94.242
In Reply to: RE: "...ignorant consumers like you who adopted VHS in droves..." - Yeah, right, as if VHS failed to satisfy... posted by Audiophilander on December 16, 2007 at 23:46:33
>> ... the public need for an efficient time shifting platform for scheduled programs and was such "inferior technology" that RCA, Matsushita, et al, failed to remain competitive and improve upon the technology to produce inexpensive multi-speed recorders all those years. <<What can I say, AuPhL? You continue to adopt this "good enough" argument, in the mold of McDonald's, Miller Light...heck, one wonders why you don't just sell your gear and buy Bose. You keep bringing up instances where consumers and manufacturers embraced an inferior technology, as if it's a good thing. It ain't. And your idiotic championing of such instances is stupefying, given that you consider yourself to be a quality-conscious consumer concerned with such things as sound quality. Clearly you are not.
>> FYI, in it's fastest speed VHS was close enough to Betamax in quality that most consumers could rarely (if ever) detect a difference in performance or PQ. <<
Great. Consumers also thought CDs were better than vinyl, Brittney Spears was better than Billie Holiday and George Bush was worth re-electing. Would you agree with them there?
[snip endless drivel in which AuPhL tries to convince me that the inferior format really isn't all that inferior]
>> Note: The actual quote is "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." <<
I stand corrected, and you stand poised to prove me correct.
>> You are indeed an advertiser for Blu-ray, <<
No, I am an advocate of higher capacity for HD optical formats. Anyone sane is. Call it blu-ray, call it whatever you want...that's what I'm for. You, on the other hand, are an advocate of "just good enough", "most consumers can't tell the difference", "capacity is snake oil" and similarly idiotic sentiments that fly in the face of logic and commitment to quality and consumer interests.
>> and your arguments when bolstered by self-serving industry bias, opinion supported more by conjecture than by visual evidence and questionable sales figures from sources of debatable reliability does little to elevate your cause. <<
I don't have a cause, except to see my favorite films (past, present and future) released in the highest-quality manner possible. I don't care what you call the format. I just care that it delivers superior technology. We were lucky two formats were offered for HD to give us a choice. Unfortunately, some of us seem to have chosen unwisely and others seem to have decided it was an opportunity to play both sides of the fence to perpetuate a format war that, like high-res digital audio before it, will lead to stagnation, sluggish adoption, slow rollout and possibly the demise of optical HD formats in the onslaught of escalating downloadable video content.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Edits: 12/18/07 12/18/07Follow Ups:
Capacity can be increased by adapting a multi-layer strategy as HD-DVD purports to eventually do, when it's called for. Extra capacity isn't required for most films, only extras such as documentaries and short subjects. Who really gives a darn whether the non-essential extras are on the same disc as the movie?
> > > "What can I say, AuPhL? You continue to adopt this "good enough" argument, in the mold of McDonald's, Miller Light...heck, one wonders why you don't just sell your gear and buy Bose. You keep bringing up instances where consumers and manufacturers embraced an inferior technology, as if it's a good thing. It ain't. And your idiotic championing of such instances is stupefying, given that you consider yourself to be a quality-conscious consumer concerned with such things as sound quality. Clearly you are not." < < <
Nice misdirection, Jizz, but we weren't comparing high definition video formats, we were comparing two differing videotape systems that had similar goals: time shifting and storage of media at about half the resolution of LD and 2/3 the resolution of NTSC broadcast TV programming. Both formats had a built-in "good enough" element. When comparing VHS to Beta, we're not discussing high-end media or fine cuisine; in fact, what you're really comparing are McDonalds and Burger King. I guess then, it's no surprise that you'd favor the WHOPPER! ;0)
> > > "Great. Consumers also thought CDs were better than vinyl, Brittney Spears was better than Billie Holiday and George Bush was worth re-electing. Would you agree with them there?" < < <
That last bit was really nasty, but since you're a bush-league player yourself I'll forgive the political inaccuracy (you're apparently a few hanging chads and Diebold algorithms shy of a full load). OTOH, some CDs ARE better than their vinyl counterparts and being that I'm not an avid fan of either Brittney or Billie's music, your point has been blunted.
> > > "Call it blu-ray, call it whatever you want...that's what I'm for." < < <
Really? So, if HD-DVD researchers managed to triple the formats capacity overnight using multi-layer application of media and Blu-ray was slow to match it or there research couldn't side-step serious problems arising from the short focal length of Blu-ray's laser, would you switch from being a Blu-ray fan-boy to being an HD-DVD advocate? Inquiring minds want to know! 8^D
> > > "You, on the other hand, are an advocate of "just good enough", "most consumers can't tell the difference", "capacity is snake oil" and similarly idiotic sentiments that fly in the face of logic and commitment to quality and consumer interests." < < <
If one can't tell the difference between a 1080P presentation on Blu-ray and the same presentation on HD-DVD, then obviously "good enough" is a relevant consideration.
BTW, you really need to learn how to quote in the proper context, dude. The "most consumers can't tell the difference" misquote related to VHS/Beta comparisons, which weren't high definition by any stretch of the imagination. What I said was: "FYI, in it's fastest speed VHS was close enough to Betamax in quality that most consumers could rarely (if ever) detect a difference in performance or PQ." That's just a statement of fact.
The "capacity is snake oil" quote you've alleged also misrepresents my position, but UNUSED capacity which is hyped as being important in lieu of content when doing A/B comparisons of high definition movies that have exactly the same quality transfer IS snake oil.
> > > "I don't have a cause, except to see my favorite films (past, present and future) released in the highest-quality manner possible. I don't care what you call the format. I just care that it delivers superior technology." < < <
There's your Pinocchio-syndrome flaring an ugly nostril again. If you aren't a pompom carrying fan-boy, cheer-leading "Blu-rah-rah" up and down this page like a silly teenager doing cart-wheels to get everyone's attention then maybe Webster's needs to redefine advocacy and add a few more anecdotal entries to reflect your level of bias. ;^D
> > > "We were lucky two formats were offered for HD to give us a choice. Unfortunately, some of us seem to have chosen unwisely..." < < <
Initially I wasn't thinking this at all, but I'm confident that I've chosen wisely and in accordance with my own needs and requirements for a high definition delivery system.
> > > "...others seem to have decided it was an opportunity to play both sides of the fence to perpetuate a format war that, like high-res digital audio before it, will lead to stagnation, sluggish adoption, slow rollout and possibly the demise of optical HD formats in the onslaught of escalating downloadable video content." < < <
If there's any downside to this format war, it's the obligation HD-DVD folks have to play cyber-nanny to selfish single-minded cheer-leaders who fire off salvo after salvo of weighted propaganda trashing the format that the pompom wavers have casually dismissed in the desperate hope that their format will succeed and that the other folks choice will end up orphaned.
I guess that about covers it!
Ciao,
AuPh (since it's the holidays, that's AuPh with no L, Jazzbo! -grin)
> > Capacity can be increased by adapting a multi-layer strategy as HD-DVD purports to eventually do, when it's called for. < <LMAO...so you care about hypothetical capacity but not real capacity. Too funny. HD DVD is already using a two-layer approach. And Blu-ray can theoretically hold a few hundred gigs--far beyond HD-DVD's theoretical limitations.
> > Extra capacity isn't required for most films, only extras such as documentaries and short subjects. < <
We've been over this. The limitations of HD DVD are already affecting bitrates, audio content and other decisions that impact the quality of releases...unless you don't mind if a film is split over two discs.
> > Who really gives a darn whether the non-essential extras are on the same disc as the movie? < <
I usually don't care, although there is occasionally some featurettes and other worthwhile material that are important. It would be nice to get those in HD as well, but you won't find that on an HD DVD.
> > Nice misdirection, Jizz, but we weren't comparing high definition video formats, we were comparing two differing videotape systems that had similar goals: < <
No we weren't.
> > Really? So, if HD-DVD researchers managed to triple the formats capacity overnight using multi-layer application of media and Blu-ray was slow to match it or there research couldn't side-step serious problems arising from the short focal length of Blu-ray's laser, would you switch from being a Blu-ray fan-boy to being an HD-DVD advocate? Inquiring minds want to know! < <
Better yet, have the HD DVD camp fold under the condition that Blu-ray is renamed HD DVD. You've got the greater capacity/bandwidth, so that's all I care about. Which is what I've been saying from the beginning. You're the idiot who can't focus on capacity as a critical issue here.
> > If one can't tell the difference between a 1080P presentation on Blu-ray and the same presentation on HD-DVD, then obviously "good enough" is a relevant consideration. < <
We've been over this before, auphl. Warner and other studios playing both sides are using the same content for both formats, dumbing down the capabilities of HD and refusing to capitalize on the advantages of Blu-ray. To then come along and say "I can't tell the difference" is silly.
> > BTW, you really need to learn how to quote in the proper context, dude. The "most consumers can't tell the difference" misquote related to VHS/Beta comparisons, which weren't high definition by any stretch of the imagination. < <
Well the subject here is formats--superior vs inferior. You proudly starting braying about the irrelevance of VHS being "good enough". That is EXACTLY analogous to your position here. I'm simply pointing out that your position proves you do not care about quality or choosing the superior format. ADMIT IT already.
> > What I said was: "FYI, in it's fastest speed VHS was close enough to Betamax in quality that most consumers could rarely (if ever) detect a difference in performance or PQ." That's just a statement of fact. < <
It's also a statement of fact that most consumers prefer McDonald's to sushi. Would you rather eat crap or fresh fish? I just raise the question to show you that your argument flies in the face of what you purport to value: quality. You clearly have gone over to the "good enough" way of thinking.
> > The "capacity is snake oil" quote you've alleged also misrepresents my position, < <
Then you've misrepresented your own opinion because you accused me of peddling snake oil in EXACTLY that context.
> > but UNUSED capacity which is hyped as being important in lieu of content when doing A/B comparisons of high definition movies that have exactly the same quality transfer IS snake oil. < <
It's unused because HD DVD has dumbed down HD video for both formats. Studios aren't going to produce the same content twice for a handful of consumers. It's not that complicated auph. Do you really not understand that? I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You're not all that bright or detail oriented.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > "LMAO...so you care about hypothetical capacity but not real capacity. Too funny. HD DVD is already using a two-layer approach. And Blu-ray can theoretically hold a few hundred gigs--far beyond HD-DVD's theoretical limitations." < < <
As far as I can tell capacity isn't a critical issue for anyone but you, and that is very hypothetical since it isn't being utilized. What I presented was for your benefit, since YOU are so concerned about all that unused space. What do you plan on warehousing in all of that theoretical space anyway, ...SONY adverts?
> > > "We've been over this. The limitations of HD DVD are already affecting bitrates, audio content and other decisions that impact the quality of releases...unless you don't mind if a film is split over two discs." < < <
PROVE IT; list examples where this is the case. In other words, put up or shut up.
> > > "We've been over this before, auphl. Warner and other studios playing both sides are using the same content for both formats, dumbing down the capabilities of HD and refusing to capitalize on the advantages of Blu-ray. To then come along and say "I can't tell the difference" is silly." < < <
Another straw man argument. Regardless of the reasons that the studios do what they do I'm telling you that we will get the same basic products on both formats that we'd get if there were only one.
> > > "Then you've misrepresented your own opinion because you accused me of peddling snake oil in EXACTLY that context." < < <
Nope, it was relating to unused space (capacity), and you're still trying to sell the same snake oil, but with a slightly different label.
AuPh
> > As far as I can tell capacity isn't a critical issue for anyone but you, < <
That's interesting, considering multiple industries and thousands of products are developed to capitalize on increasing capacity on optical disc surfaces (including BD and HD DVD). But you're telling me it's not an issue for anyone except me. Either you're really stupid or you are lying.
> > and that is very hypothetical since it isn't being utilized. < <
That's a lie. It is being utilized.
> > PROVE IT; list examples where this is the case. In other words, put up or shut up. < <
I already have. I've posted examples and you responded by calling me a cheerleader. You're clearly not up for a rational discussion. In fact, your main argument against all my points is to ignore it and call me a cheerleader.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...show a widespread failure of HD-DVD to present high definition mastered single disc transfers of major films equal to that of Blu-ray (not including documentaries, bonus extras and the like which only has marginal importance to some viewers) and I'll graciously accept your point. Oh, and BTW, we'll ignore the Blu-ray Blade Runner work-print glitch for the moment just to give you time to recover from your last cheer-leader practice! ;0)
AuPh
Oscar has cited numerous examples of BDs that have much higher bitrates than their HD DVD counterparts. You continue to ignore all salient points and just focus on mind-numbing insults.
Just go back and look through any of our threads last week, the week before or the weeks before to find valid points I made that you systematically ignored and replied with dumbass taunts while swearing up and down the board that you really did adopt HD DVD because of Casablanca.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > "Oscar has cited numerous examples of BDs that have much higher bitrates than their HD DVD counterparts. You continue to ignore all salient points and just focus on mind-numbing insults." < < <
Don't blame Oscar for your f*ck-up. We aren't talking about opinions in respect to bit-rates provided by second hand sources. I want FACTS. If you can't provide clear A/B comparisons that you yourself have conducted, then your advocacy of Blu-ray is as phony as your rhetoric.
> > > "Just go back and look through any of our threads last week, the week before or the weeks before to find valid points I made that you systematically ignored and replied with dumbass taunts while swearing up and down the board that you really did adopt HD DVD because of Casablanca." < < <
Valid points? ...! LOL! You have N-O-N-E. BTW, the exaggerated WHOPPERS you keep regurgitating must leave an awful taste in your mouth, but it can't be much worse than the Shinola you consume from SONY that keeps your pompoms waving in the breeze.
AuPh
If you really gave a shit about anything technical with these formats, you'd already know the differences. I've already clued you in as much as I'm going to and the fact that you haven't been paying attention as you peppered your replies with "pom pom" "blu chearleader outfit" and tons of other idiotic banter simply proves my point. By the way, can you PROVE casablanca and a couple other titles made it worth adopting an inferior format?
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > "you have access to the same info I do, auph" < < <Isn't that sort of like the Bush WH spin about Congress having access to the same data they had in respect to WMD? We all know how truthful that one turned out! LOL!
What interests me are first hand visual comparisons; you've provided none, and the evidence you dole out is purely anecdotal. Sorry, but your credibility has just hit 'Iraq' bottom with me. ;0)
> > > "If you really gave a shit about anything technical with these formats, you'd already know the differences." < < <
I'm interested in PQ, format flexibility (region free play) & specific titles. You know what you can do with all that technical data, but maybe you should clean the seeds out of your bong first. ;0)
> > > "I've already clued you in as much as I'm going to..." < < <
I'm thankful for small favors, but this is more than I'd hoped. Since the impression that you are clueless has been growing steadily among patrons of this forum then maybe we can all look forward to a more peaceful page with less cheer-leading and bombast in the guise of your 'clues'. :o)
> > > "the fact that you haven't been paying attention as you peppered your replies with "pom pom" "blu chearleader outfit" and tons of other idiotic banter simply proves my point." < < <
If you can't stand the high resolution pepper spray (Ole` resonating capacity-sicum) then maybe you should quit providing pointless rhetoric which invites reciprocal banter that teases you mercilessly and challenges your veracity.
To mix a few metaphors: You've made your bed, persist in LYING in it, and have gotten up with fleas on numerous occasions. If SONY doesn't leave any money on your dresser for services rendered, then you're the sleeping dog. ;^D
> > > "By the way, can you PROVE casablanca and a couple other titles made it worth adopting an inferior format?" < < <
1. I can prove that there are more interesting titles on HD-DVD for me than there are currently from Blu-ray.
2. You haven't proven that HD-DVD is inferior to Blu-ray, except perhaps through anecdotal or theoretical evidence relating to capacity, which amounts to no evidence at all based upon PQ comparisons.
3. Blu-ray has had glitches and codec problems of it's own and has a worse record of meeting customer expectations regarding release dates. From a marketing standpoint Blu-ray would appear to be the inferior format; I don't need to make assertions because the facts speak for themselves.
I rest my case (*yawn* - literally, it's getting late, after all! -grin).
Ciao,
AuPh
| 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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
