I'm a half breed - both man and female. It makes for a very entertaining Saturday night.

But yes, I am a man. I've met several members of this forum and they can attest to that.

Yes - its very interesting to see what they were really there for. When the smoke cleared its easy to see who actually cares about movies in HD (regardless of the color plastic of the cases).

You never know. Over at some other sites you'd be surprised. There are some pretty "guyish' chicks.
Ok, cool. I was just curious.

That article was a fun read. Thanks for posting it.

Pretty much everything in the article applied to me. I have a large DVD collection, prefer the lower price tag, and can't justify buying a large screen television and blu-ray player. I wish I had a pile of cash and could buy three sets (one to keep the kids busy, a second for my wife, and the third to finally be able to play my choices on ), but I don't, and DVD suits my family's needs just fine. I doubt that television shows, and especially Dora, Diego and the Wiggles would benefit from a huge screen and 7.1 sound.

As a general observation, I'm amazed by how militant some people can be about a format. The format is not a one-size-fits-all situation. Hell, if you could buy VHS players and tapes for 1/3 of the price of a DVD (so $1-$2) then it might still have a constituency too.

Yes it does. Some people can comprehend it, and some can't.

What does "IMO" stand for?

in my opinion

Let's see. A thread that didn't worship at the Blu altar drew out a battery of posts of pro-bassoonist lecturing that quickly devolved into a flame war. This sounds terribly familiar....

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/54...using-dvd.html

Found it.

So?

I'm not so sure since there are many DVDs you can buy new for $5-8 and the ease of use (plus the low price of DVD players, and not just off-brand ones either), it's worth the extra dollars.

And the fact that VHS sucks.......

Yep - the only time you will ever see him post in DVDTalk is to defend Blu-ray.

Here are two other threads:
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/55...eeping-up.html
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/53...o-quality.html

Nothingfails?

That sounds like an article written by a 12-year-old... no counterpoints.

If they had an article up that was "Why Blu-ray is Better than DVD" that argued for:

-Uncompressed Sound
-1080p native resolution
-whiz-bang Blu-ray features
-... etc.

Then I might respect them more.

Also he pulls out "... if you're not an uber-geek". Ya know what? Fuck you. [waggles fist in air] You don't need to be a geek to appreciate good picture and sound.

Ahhhh, "opinion".
I see.

I noticed this too - talk about being insecure lol. If he believed everything he typed, he wouldn't have to defend blu at the level he does...what does that tell you.

So true, so very true.

I love this place.

The argument for Blu-Ray to be the next big thing is always the same; Blu-Ray looks and sounds better therefore it is worth the extra $200+ to buy a player and pay $10 more for the films (at retail).

Since when is the quality of the picture become such an obsession?
Most DVDs and especially up-converted look great!

Think when you watch a film at the movie theater, which is still the best way to see a film. The film picture quality was and still is not perfect. You get the grain, odd lines, scratches, maybe a splice or two, cigarette burns between reels etc.

Did these imperfections in the film ever really bother you enough to demand better quality? Would most people pay an extra 30% at the theater to get a better picture if there was an option?

There will always be a market for Blu-Ray, but I feel most people are very satisfied with the look of DVD. If the prices come down to DVD prices, people may very well reconsider.

In any event, I would like to point out that the IGN article readily conceded that Blu-ray is technically superior to DVD. There was no effort made to dismiss the quality of BD, but rather to argue that 1) taking full advantage of BD requires more than just a player (and is therefore cost-prohibitive for many) and 2) the return of increased quality does not justify for the author of the article (or for many fans and collectors) the cost.

The first argument is fact. A 7.1 audio mix won't do anyone any good without a 7.1 system. Even if you went low-end, it's still a much higher cost than just the Blu-ray player. The second argument can only be evaluated as a value judgment. How good is "good enough" vs. how important is "the best?"

I've been tempted to go Blu, but so far I have not been won over by the format. There are a few reasons. First, even though I'm a features junkie, the concept of Blu-ray Live doesn't interest me. The handful of BD-only features, then, just are not a compelling enough reason to upgrade.

Secondly, consider that in barely two years, there was already a double-dip of Casino Royale. As a Bond fan, I'm used to newer, better editions every few years but this is absurd. There is simply no excuse for a format that is touted as holding the equivalent of five DVD's to need, two years later, a release with more features. When the studios can convince me that they're actually taking full advantage of the format, I'll reconsider. Until then, I'd rather stick with DVD. It's still frustrating with double-dips, yes, but at least it's not quite as costly.

Finally, I watch a lot of bonus material at night when my wife and I go to bed. I couldn't do that with BD without getting two players.

Some theaters are proving this to be the case, actually. I know at least one or two that charge more money if a film is shown digitally and even more if it's a digital 3-D release.

Um well I guess you are gonna have to respect them more cause this week they put out the counterpoint called exactly that over at DVD.IGN..

It basically lists all the positives of the Blu-ray format.

I think the "anti-Blu Ray pro-DVD" people are just angry because they have such huge DVD collections, and they fear their collection will become obsolete and then they will be labeled as the next "VHS"-type movie owners. Would there be such a fuss if people didn't buy DVDs or blu rays - if it just was a "renting" society?

DVD, Blu Ray...it's all good I guess. There are advantages and disadvantages to both formats.

The next media evolution to tempt me is to get rid of worldwide Region coding on all DVDs/Blu Rays and to have subtitles (of the main languages) on all of them.

Here's a link to the counterpoint article.

http://bluray.ign.com/articles/966/966082p1.html

Well the reason I am angry is because of "exclusive" special features. That shit has to stop.