Video Asylum

TVs, VCRs, DVD players, Home Theater systems and more.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Think about this

Posted by 4season on August 23, 2007 at 16:58:25:
I don't have details about all that went on with Blockbuster, but didn't it strike you as interesting that we heard about both Blockbuster's and Target's move from the Blu-Ray group PR machinery rather than Blockbuster or Target themselves? Not what I'd expect if Blockbuster's had been entirely their own internal business decision.

You can post a link to whatever MS-related article you want, but it ultimately doesn't matter where the $150M came: Microsoft, Toshiba, Intel, whatever: They are all Hollywood outsiders, so who cares? OTOH, The Blu-Ray group's hands are tied because Sony is both a major player in the Blu-Ray consortium and the motion picture industry. It'd be ironic as hell if Sony Pictures were forced to go format-neutral in order to keep the B-D consortium out of legal trouble.