Yeah because he is the only one who would think of that and not the one who was saying he was more "retarted"

And if Hokeyboy wants to exchange personal attacks please send them to my email so we don't get into trouble.

I don't recall calling anyone a loser.

You are the perfect example of the baffling pro-DVD only people that I keep pointing out. You own over 1500 DVDs! You CAN afford a Blu-Ray player & big screen TV. The average person does not own over 1500 DVDs. You clearly have a great deal of money to spend, doesn't matter how cheap some of those DVDs are. A Blu-Ray player a little over $100 would not be a problem.

This could be easily fixed if studios would just release the SE on BOTH FORMATS. I am not knocking blu-ray, it's a great format and I look at it as the same way LD was to VHS, it is for videophiles and I just think it's dumb to not include something on a DVD that could very easily be included but the choose not to. VHS couldnt include stuff that LD could but DVD can include almost everything that the BR does

I don't understand why the studios are starting to hate on DVD so much. I think DVD has made studios more money than VHS ever did and now there are treating it like the little bastard of the Home Video format. I feel for all the people that want SE Blu-Ray's of certain movies, I think they should get them. I just don't want DVD to be casted off and ignored for Blu-Ray.

The fact that I used the phrase "is makes", misused "worse" when I meant "worst", spelled loser "looser" and then finished it up with an excitable "!!!1!!11!!!one!11!" didn't tip you off that the whole thing was gag?

I so hate the Internet.

To be fair, it's probably not like he bought the 1500 DVDs over the course of a long weekend... might have been stretched out over 13 years.

Still, HDTVs have never been cheaper and more easily affordable. The same with Blu-Ray players and, for the most part, software (although the latter has aways to go). The 46" Samsung I bought a year-and-a-half ago is half the price today (and well under $1,000).

That's assuming the 3D format of choice is in fact Blu-ray.

Hypothetically we may have two choices for someone who doesn't want to watch their movies in 3D; you can purchase the expensive 3D Blu-ray version with all the extras and watch it in 2D or you'll be able to purchase the cheaper 2D Blu-ray version as a bare-bones release.

We will be stuck buying the more expensive product whether we want it or not just to get the extras which used to be standard on the 2D Blu-ray.

To me, that sounds like the same discussion over DVD/Blu-Ray.

nah my bad i was in a pissy mood earlier.

All good. You can be my wingman any day.

You got it

For those of you looking for a relatively inexpensive Blu-ray player, this Sylvania, that Amazon is selling currently for $59.99, is excellent: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...ef=oss_product

It is a great quality Blu-ray player that has played everything I've thrown at it without a single firmware upgrade. The only negative I can come up with about it is that it doesn't have a way to connect to the internet, so that means no BD-Live, but in my experience, those features are usually worthless and BD-Live sometimes freezes players or causes them to take forever to load.

Jump on it now, as I don't know how long it will last.

Then head on over to monoprice and get yourself an HDMI cable for cheap.

Jeez, get a room!

Anti-semite!

I think most people reading will hopefully not make a literal comparsion of Oreos to consumer electronics. The comparison is to illustrate the questionable marketing tactics used to sway consumers.

It's really not about the Blu-ray technology itself, which is of course superior to DVD, but the way in which it is marketed and sold.

Now that had me

Today is a better day

The thing is, right now, I live at college right now (with a TV and a DVD player being sold off after I'm done) with the majority of the money I have going towards education. My collection list is comprised of everything my family owns; they buy the most in the house. The ones I buy are basically for pennies off Amazon or Big Lots or the occasional Blockbuster/Hollywood PPV sale.

I've seen several films on Blu-Ray and honestly, I don't see any real difference that's going to give me some epiphany; the Blu-Ray for Bram Stoker's Dracula is one that just really pissed me off because Blu-Ray's supposed to be the "wave of the future" and the BD transfer looked like a bad VHS dupe. Now my family has a decent set-up: 55" Samsung with a good upgrading Sony player (aside from the reveal of how screwed the SD-DVD copy of TDK is, but that's an argument for another time) and we do have the money to upgrade, but we just don't see the need right now. Even my father - who's one of the most pro-technology people I know - doesn't see why we should upgrade right now (and he practically lives at Best Buy).

Now the day Titanic, The Entity and The Ruling Class are out on R1 Blu, then I'll throw in the towel and "upgrade."

That's just my two cents.

Why would "your" collection comprise your entire family? Especially if you don't live at home, that is just weird, I wouldn't want my mom's movies lumped in with mine & then post it it my sig. I don't include my girlfriends movies in my collection, they are her movies, not mine.

It's a "family" collection; I just happen to be the one who knows how to use DVD Af, so it's registered under me while I keep a separate account of what I keep up at school.

True, but at the same time some studios were releasing the DVD version earlier than the VHS version of some films.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have no problem waiting as long as the product hasn't been gimped. It's really only an issue with Warner anyway. It's amazing how a studio can slide from "best in class" to "buyer beware" in such a short period of time.

That's true, I think they both came out on the same day but the new release VHS titles were released as a rental product with an $89.95 price tag whereas DVD was intended as a sell-through product with a $29.95 price. It was only after four to six months after the initial rental release would you be able to buy a new release VHS title at a sell-through price.

Buying a new release title at $29.95 on DVD was a value added tactic, it wasn't about taking something from VHS you didn't already have before.

Just when I was thinking of visiting the local christian bookstore to buy a copy.

http://entertainment.msnbc.msn.com/_...nity-slur?lite