High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

HD Scams And Lies

Cowboy X
04-29-2008, 11:37 PM
Interesting article :

http://hdguru.com/the-10-worst-hdtv-scams-lies-and-video-ripoffs/235/

The_Omega_Man
04-30-2008, 01:12 AM
Does this really mean that I wasted my money on UPS + Line conditioner, Monster 700 HDMI Cables and a 32" TV @ 8' 5" viewing distance? :confused: :mad:

h0mi
04-30-2008, 04:57 PM
HDMI is not a scam or rip off, certainly not # 1 on the list. DHCP belongs on the list, not HDMI.

HiramAbiff
04-30-2008, 11:12 PM
Does this really mean that I wasted my money on

UPS

No, they are quite helpful, but more useful for computers IMO. If a gaming console is connected to it, that's good so you won't lose your save data in a power failure.

+ Line conditioner,

No, but I don't think you have what he's describing. In fact, he recommends a UPS with a "power conditioner." So do I. They protect against surges, and if a surge fries just one tiny capacitor or fuse in your tv, that requires a repair, possibly a pricey one.

Monster 700 HDMI Cables

Yes, because it's Monster. Anything Monster is grossly overpriced. For component cables, I go with Acoustic Research. They're as good as you need (you're not running 800 foot cable lengths) and have sturdy connectors. For a digital cable (fiber optic, DVI, etc.) I'd spend as little money as I had to, unless I had really long cable lengths to run. There is no signal degradation, either the signal arrives or it doesn't. You could run into intermittent signal reception at longer cable lengths, but it's not a problem for me.

As for HDMI, nobody likes it but the studios and the equipment manufacturers who have a reason to sell new products. It's far less reliable, especially for longer cable runs, than component, which is why pro installers stick with component.

and a 32" TV @ 8' 5" viewing distance?

Yes, IMO. At 8'5" I think a 42" set is the MINIMUM you would want for a home theater. The recommended viewing angle (horizontally is 30 degrees. That's SMPTE. THX recommends a minimum of 26 degrees and an ideal angle of 36 degrees.

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

Using that site's calculator, your viewing distance merits a screen of 62-75 inches. Why are you sitting so far away?

The_Omega_Man
04-30-2008, 11:28 PM
No, but I don't think you have what he's describing. In fact, he recommends a UPS with a "power conditioner." So do I. They protect against surges, and if a surge fries just one tiny capacitor or fuse in your tv, that requires a repair, possibly a pricey one.

This is what I have as well! ;)



Yes, because it's Monster. Anything Monster is grossly overpriced. For component cables, I go with Acoustic Research. They're as good as you need (you're not running 800 foot cable lengths) and have sturdy connectors. For a digital cable (fiber optic, DVI, etc.) I'd spend as little money as I had to, unless I had really long cable lengths to run. There is no signal degradation, either the signal arrives or it doesn't. You could run into intermittent signal reception at longer cable lengths, but it's not a problem for me.

Agreed, but a) investment has already been made and b) one thing I will NEVER have to worry or wonder about causing a problem is my cables. (And I for the prices that I paid, I better not EVER! MonsterCable Reps, check my Avatar if you think i'm playing here! :cool: )


As for HDMI, nobody likes it but the studios and the equipment manufacturers who have a reason to sell new products. It's far less reliable, especially for longer cable runs, than component, which is why pro installers stick with component.

True, but it is far more convenient than having to run Component cables and a digital Optical or Coax cable, in addition to the Component cables for each connection point. I have cleaned up SOOOO much cable in my HT setups by going all HDMI that the functional pains for being an early adopter, is definitely worth it to me and more importantly to the misses! :lol: Plus, I can now use all of the cool new audio codecs and I can NOW source 1080p/24 to my new Toshiba 46"! :yippee:




Yes, IMO. At 8'5" I think a 42" set is the MINIMUM you would want for a home theater. The recommended viewing angle (horizontally is 30 degrees. That's SMPTE. THX recommends a minimum of 26 degrees and an ideal angle of 36 degrees.

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

Using that site's calculator, your viewing distance merits a screen of 62-75 inches. Why are you sitting so far away?
LOL this is the way my office is set up, I do not have a choice if I want to type this stuff AND watch the TV!

While I TRULY LOVE the My Home Theater screen specification calculation results, now THX REALLY needs to develop a Wife's HDTV Attitude Adjusting Specification, when it comes to TV size versus overall room aesthetics! :lol:

HiramAbiff
05-01-2008, 04:16 AM
Darn wives are killing home theater! First they make everything all silver, then they kill off CRT RPTVs, and now they're going after *all* RPTVs. :mad:

PFC5
05-01-2008, 10:29 AM
Darn wives are killing home theater! First they make everything all silver, then they kill off CRT RPTVs, and now they're going after *all* RPTVs. :mad:

So it is the "wives" that came up with the silly idea of making CE components silver? DAMN THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :p

It makes sense though as most woman's logic is diametrically opposed to my logic. :lol:

MikeRox
05-01-2008, 10:30 AM
So it is the "wives" that came up with the silly idea of making CE components silver? DAMN THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :p

It makes sense though as most woman's logic is diametrically opposed to my logic. :lol:

I don't know about the US. But the trend in Europe is that everything is starting to head back towards black.

edders
05-01-2008, 02:34 PM
Darn wives are killing home theater! First they make everything all silver, then they kill off CRT RPTVs, and now they're going after *all* RPTVs. :mad:

mine prefers "Platinum."

Super XP
05-01-2008, 03:38 PM
HDMI is great because you only have 1 cable for both video and audio. The prices are what is a rip-off not the technology.:2cents

Loves2Watch
05-01-2008, 03:48 PM
HDMI is great because you only have 1 cable for both video and audio.

HDMI was invented (as well as HDCP by Intel) for the sole purpose of restricting and controlling content. Component looks just as good (if not better) but Hollywood doesn't like it because they cant control it since it is analog.

ANALOG is better even though we are living in a digital world and that is why some things analog like vinyl records are making a resurgence. As long as there is analog, I will use it.

edders
05-01-2008, 06:58 PM
and the world is NOT DIGITAL, tis ANALOG! Digital has advantages for sound recording such as a low signal to noise and dynamic range, but it can only sample and approximate the musical waveform(s).

Dare
05-02-2008, 01:00 AM
HDMI was invented (as well as HDCP by Intel) for the sole purpose of restricting and controlling content. Component looks just as good (if not better) but Hollywood doesn't like it because they cant control it since it is analog.

ANALOG is better even though we are living in a digital world and that is why some things analog like vinyl records are making a resurgence. As long as there is analog, I will use it.

HDMI is a great interconnect in theory. It wasn't invented to screw anybody, it was just an evolution of DVI with audio channels included.

HDCP is what screws it up for everybody. Hollywood can't bear to give people unrestricted access to the content they sell to them. So they impose all these artificial handicaps on the system to keep people in line with god knows what control freakery, assisted by the CEMs who see it as a way to force people to keep buying new hardware.

What do we have to do to get tyranny like HDCP banned? We need a new bill of rights or something.

BTW, stripping out the DRM using well known methods removes all of HDMI's artificial restrictions.

PFC5
05-02-2008, 01:38 AM
I agree that HDMI would be a great interconnect IF it didn't have HDCP as a mandatory part of the spec. It wouldn't even be too bad I guess IF they actually made sure EVERY device with an HDMI input or output actually worked and all possible handshake protocols were mandatory.

It bugs me that whenever I use a BD player (and HD DVD to a lesser extent) the signal keeps going out after previews are shown, and then again when the FBI notice, etc etc. are shown. I would say that on average the "No Signal" message shows up on the screen 4+ times once the BD disc is read. It just makes makes the format appear to be a incomplete/defective format when in fact it is HDMI use of HDCP that IS DEFECTIVE.

Loves2Watch
05-02-2008, 08:24 AM
High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) is a form of Digital Rights Management (DRM) developed by Intel Corporation to control digital audio and video content as it travels across Digital Visual Interface (DVI) or High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI) connections. The specification is proprietary, and creating an implementation of HDCP requires a license.

HDCP is licensed by Digital Content Protection, a subsidiary of Intel. In addition to paying fees, licensees agree to limit the capabilities of their products. For example, high-definition digital video content must be restricted to DVD quality on non-HDCP compliant video outputs when requested by the source. DVD-Audio content is restricted to DAT quality on non-HDCP digital audio outputs (analog audio outputs have no quality limits). Licensees cannot allow their devices to make copies of content, and must design their products in ways that "effectively frustrate attempts to defeat the content protection requirements.

mshulman
05-02-2008, 09:01 AM
Here's a LIE:

Blu-Ray: Beyond High Definition

What exactly is beyond High Definition about it? Its 1080P which IS High Def.

edders
05-02-2008, 09:18 AM
Or, in layman's terms it "Sucks like a drunken Cheerleader on Prom Night."

Stew4HD
05-02-2008, 09:19 AM
Here's a LIE:

Blu-Ray: Beyond High Definition

What exactly is beyond High Definition about it? Its 1080P which IS High Def.

Just marketing buzz words.. that's all it is.. was supposed to be a stab at HD DVD which called itself what it was.

Some people will actually fall for the hype, as previously shown, well, it still shows. :lol:

mshulman
05-02-2008, 09:23 AM
Just marketing buzz words.. that's all it is.. was supposed to be a stab at HD DVD which called itself what it was.

Some people will actually fall for the hype, as previously shown, well, it still shows. :lol:

I do wonder if they thought about legal impications of saying beyond high definition. It almost implies that when something better than HD comes along, blu-ray will support it.

Nikopol
05-02-2008, 09:30 AM
Or, in layman's terms it "Sucks like a drunken Cheerleader on Prom Night."

Which actually sometimes is a good thing, as noted in the other thread :lol: :thumbsup:

hatt
05-02-2008, 09:32 AM
Here's a LIE:

Blu-Ray: Beyond High Definition

What exactly is beyond High Definition about it? Its 1080P which IS High Def.

Seeing how upconverted DVD and crappy HDTV channels are now considered HD, it sounds pretty close to me.:2cents
:hithere:

HiramAbiff
05-02-2008, 09:31 PM
Here's a LIE:

Blu-Ray: Beyond High Definition

What exactly is beyond High Definition about it? Its 1080P which IS High Def.

These are the same demon spawn who said the PS3 would generate four-dimensional gaming. I'm still not sure what exactly they meant by that.

Soul
05-02-2008, 10:42 PM
HDMI is a great interconnect in theory. It wasn't invented to screw anybody, it was just an evolution of DVI with audio channels included.



HDMI wasn't invented to screw everyone, but I've found that the handshaking between devices is somewhat shaky, at least for now.

I'm sure part of it is because I don't have the "right" equipment, or whatever, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't implemented in a solid state across all devices as of yet. It's still in quite a transitory form.

edders
05-03-2008, 09:21 AM
Which actually sometimes is a good thing, as noted in the other thread :lol: :thumbsup:

Busted...:o

sigill
05-03-2008, 10:12 AM
Here's a LIE:

Blu-Ray: Beyond High Definition

What exactly is beyond High Definition about it? Its 1080P which IS High Def.

I know what you mean. What exactly is beyond High Definition? Its claiming that its something more:confused:
It just more marketing hype i suppose. They will say anything to get a sale!

Dare
05-03-2008, 12:12 PM
HDMI wasn't invented to screw everyone, but I've found that the handshaking between devices is somewhat shaky, at least for now.

I'm sure part of it is because I don't have the "right" equipment, or whatever, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't implemented in a solid state across all devices as of yet. It's still in quite a transitory form.

The handshaking isn't even necessary though. The only reason HDMI does handshaking is for HDCP. If the studios weren't so paranoid and eager to sabotage by including HDCP in the first place, it would just work like it's supposed to when you plugged it in. It would basically work the same way DVI computer monitors work.

Why would anyone even bother capturing a digital signal off the monitor cable anyway? I think CEs are giving themselves way too much credit that their other DRM schemes for media won't be broken. HDCP was a solution looking for a problem, and does nothing but add to the pains in our asses. Remember us, their paying customers?

Lee Stewart
05-03-2008, 12:31 PM
A REAL Scam for HD?

The color depth . . . 8bit . . . the exact same as was for NTSC.

They changed the Ref. from 609 to 701 to make the colors more accurate on the display . . . but they still use 256 shades of gray . . . just like NTSC does.

:mad:

BobY
05-03-2008, 12:34 PM
Studios (music and movie) have always considered it sacred that no consumer recording system should be capable of making a perfect duplicate of copyrighted material.

This is really silly to me, because most consumers who don't care whether their music and video are pirated, also don't care that much about the quality and are perfectly happy to listen to or watch a mediocre copy.

Not long after college, I went to friend's house and they were watching a copy of "Flashdance" on video tape made by smuggling a camcorder into the theater. It was abysmal both in picture and sound quality and I had to ask them why they were bothering to watch it. They really didn't have an answer other than "for kicks".

As for the serious pirates, they have all the equipment they need to make perfect copies, HDCP isn't going to stop them. They have techs who can code an HDCP compliant HDMI port into a gate array. ...Oh, I forgot, that's illegal :rolleyes: (in the words of Captain Jack Sparrow: "Pirate!").

1080PsF
05-03-2008, 07:37 PM
A REAL Scam for HD?

The color depth . . . 8bit . . . the exact same as was for NTSC.

They changed the Ref. from 609 to 701 to make the colors more accurate on the display . . . but they still use 256 shades of gray . . . just like NTSC does.

:mad:The video tape machines, computers, monitors, and scopes on the professional side are 10-bit for HD and even most SD is even 10-bit.

NTSC is analog so there are no bits in NTSC.

If you look on the CIE xy diagram you will see how close the color spaces are.

Here are the values for each of the color spaces and these values are from TeraNex and Tektronix.

Rec. 709

____Red______Green______Blue_______White

x__0.640______0.300_____0.150______0.3127

z__0.330______0.600_____0.060______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.2126_____0.7152____0.0722_____2.2200


601 / SMPTE 145

x__0.630______0.310_____0.155______0.3127

z__0.340______0.595_____0.070______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.299______0.587_____0.114______2.2200


601 / EBU 3213

x__0.640______0.290_____0.150______0.3127

z__0.330______0.600_____0.060______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.299______0.587_____0.114______2.2200

1080PsF
05-03-2008, 07:51 PM
The biggest lie of all is... How good HD broadcast looks.

It still looks like crap!

:eyecrazy

HiramAbiff
05-03-2008, 09:30 PM
The biggest lie of all is... How good HD broadcast looks.

It still looks like crap!

:eyecrazy

Sing it sister!

You haven't seen HD until you've seen HDM, plain and simple.

1080PsF
05-03-2008, 10:17 PM
Sing it sister!

You haven't seen HD until you've seen HDM, plain and simple.No you haven't seen HD until you have seen from a HD-D5 or HDCAM SR. Everything else has way too much compression.

Compression sucks so bad it sucks out loud.

Dare
05-04-2008, 12:46 AM
As for the serious pirates, they have all the equipment they need to make perfect copies, HDCP isn't going to stop them. They have techs who can code an HDCP compliant HDMI port into a gate array. ...Oh, I forgot, that's illegal :rolleyes: (in the words of Captain Jack Sparrow: "Pirate!").

Right on the money. Real pirates aren't stopped by anything the CEs can throw at them. The serious ones are CEs themselves.

DRM was never about piracy (as I keep saying over and over. :)) It's about artificial limits and control, in an effort to separate as much money from their customers as possible. Not by offering better products and services, but by chiseling and milking. DRM is Dark Side. It's bad business.

Dare
05-04-2008, 12:47 AM
No you haven't seen HD until you have seen from a HD-D5 or HDCAM SR. Everything else has way too much compression.

Compression sucks so bad it sucks out loud.

Compression only sucks if you can see it. :p

Joe_news
05-04-2008, 02:23 AM
I like HDMI THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

But the other stuff I agree with. The HD channel thing is So true, I HATE watching all that fake HD on my 50", it looks SO bad... Sadly people will read number 8 and confuse line and power conditions. O well, poor them *hugs Panamax power conditioner*.

1080PsF
05-04-2008, 03:28 AM
Compression only sucks if you can see it. :pA compression rate of 40:1 and higher is very easy to see.

MikeRox
05-04-2008, 05:52 AM
I like HDMI THANK YOU VERY MUCH..

I think most peoples issues with HDMI, are that it has HDCP handshakes etc and offers a picture no better than Component could were it not crippled for "anti piracy measures".

Personally I've not had a bad experience with HDMI yet so I'm not too fussed by it, however I do know quite a few people who have. Infact there have been a couple of people on the gaming board having issues with their PS3s not displaying via HDMI on specific TVs.

The_Omega_Man
05-04-2008, 06:49 AM
Infact there have been a couple of people on the gaming board having issues with their PS3s not displaying via HDMI on specific TVs.


That wouldn't be on Toshiba TVs now would it? ;)

Loves2Watch
05-04-2008, 07:31 AM
DRM was never about piracy (as I keep saying over and over. :)) It's about artificial limits and control, in an effort to separate as much money from their customers as possible. Not by offering better products and services, but by chiseling and milking. DRM is Dark Side. It's bad business.

Agreed and HDCP (invented/developed by Intel) is even more crippling. It seems that Hollywood is continually trying new ways to make you pay over and over again for the same media...

Stew4HD
05-04-2008, 08:42 AM
The biggest lie of all is... How good HD broadcast looks.

It still looks like crap!

:eyecrazy

HD broadcasts look a ton bette than SD broadcasts to me. It's a very noticeable difference. J6P seems to think so too. I sure as heck won't say it looks like crap after seeing the evolution of broadcast TV. I am just not "that" picky. Though I prefer the best possible picture, I'd rather watch a crappy picture than none at all... but that is just me.

The_Omega_Man
05-04-2008, 08:50 AM
I would have to say with the current generations of HDTV, DTV's broadcast HD (on some channels and program content only), looks simply stunning! For example, Discovery channel's Deadliest Catch series looks so real on our new Toshiba Regza 46" LCD, that my wife and I almost got sea sick, just watching it. :eyecrazy

PFC5
05-04-2008, 09:24 AM
HD broadcasts look a ton bette than SD broadcasts to me. It's a very noticeable difference. J6P seems to think so too. I sure as heck won't say it looks like crap after seeing the evolution of broadcast TV. I am just not "that" picky. Though I prefer the best possible picture, I'd rather watch a crappy picture than none at all... but that is just me.

It sounds like we grew up in the same "era of TV". :lol:

I remember the says where we had this "Power Antenna" which had the rotating antenna on the roof of the house and the direction control in a box with a directional dial with North, South, East, & West on it to control which way the antenna pointed (towards the channel's transmitting antenna.

On a bad weather day, just getting a signal with a picture WITH SNOW in it was a challenge, so although all channels are not great, it is better than what I had growing up. I tried to tell my kids about what it was like and they just cannot believe it. :eek:

I think the problem is that we got these big new HD screens and are trying to display resolutions/signals that were only meant for screens up to 21 inches. No one talks about how bad many analog signals look with them, but THIS is what most of the content available IS still. Come February 2009, this will not change as it will only mean that OTA signals will be the low resolution analog signals converted to digital. It will not change many/most cable systems since they are unaffected by this deadline.

This is WHY the HDTV display mfg NEED to get better scaling technology and soon. I think Super Resolution Technology (SRT not the derogatory SUC term) is desperately needed as our displays get larger and larger until the bandwidth is improved to send everything in true HD. Some of the BD apologists always refer to this tech as "SUC" (Super Upscaling) so that it will not hurt their precious BD format, but it is something that is sorely needed and more important than BD or HD DVD IMO.

The_Omega_Man
05-04-2008, 09:39 AM
It sounds like we grew up in the same "era of TV". :lol:

I remember the says where we had this "Power Antenna" which had the rotating antenna on the roof of the house and the direction control in a box with a directional dial with North, South, East, & West on it to control which way the antenna pointed (towards the channel's transmitting antenna.

On a bad weather day, just getting a signal with a picture WITH SNOW in it was a challenge, so although all channels are not great, it is better than what I had growing up. I tried to tell my kids about what it was like and they just cannot believe it. :eek:

I think the problem is that we got these big new HD screens and are trying to display resolutions/signals that were only meant for screens up to 21 inches. No one talks about how bad many analog signals look with them, but THIS is what most of the content available IS still. Come February 2009, this will not change as it will only mean that OTA signals will be the low resolution analog signals converted to digital. It will not change many/most cable systems since they are unaffected by this deadline.

This is WHY the HDTV display mfg NEED to get better scaling technology and soon. I think Super Resolution Technology (SRT not the derogatory SUC term) is desperately needed as our displays get larger and larger until the bandwidth is improved to send everything in true HD. Some of the BD apologists always refer to this tech as "SUC" (Super Upscaling) so that it will not hurt their precious BD format, but it is something that is sorely needed and more important than BD or HD DVD IMO.


I agree. And when the day does finally arrive that almost everyone (who cares ;) ) has sufficient broadband bandwidth either through terrestrial cables or Wireless access, and Flash Memory becomes large and fast enough for portable HD playback, then pre-recorded optical disc's days will certainly be numbered. Apple is working on this, as are others.

edders
05-04-2008, 10:07 AM
Agreed and HDCP (invented/developed by Intel) is even more crippling. It seems that Hollywood is continually trying new ways to make you pay over and over again for the same media...

And as I have posted before, the Holy Grail of Hollywood is to find a system where the viewer pays every time they view a movie. Kinda kills the whole idea of owning movies and a player doesn't it...but guess they can't figure that one out!

PFC5
05-04-2008, 12:32 PM
I agree. And when the day does finally arrive that almost everyone (who cares ;) ) has sufficient broadband bandwidth either through terrestrial cables or Wireless access, and Flash Memory becomes large and fast enough for portable HD playback, then pre-recorded optical disc's days will certainly be numbered. Apple is working on this, as are others.

I think the bandwidth WILL come in the next couple of years, but the problem is that any movies we get from downloads other than that provided by the ISP may be very expensive if the ISP charges based on bandwidth usage. This is the problem with downloads in the future.

The broadband ISPs are mostly cable companies who also want US buying the content from THEM, not some independent provider. :p

kamspy
05-04-2008, 12:43 PM
I hate HDMI. It takes a few seconds for the handshake, so I've been boggled down between watching the NBA Playoffs in HD (via component) and playing GTA4 on my PS3 (HDMI). It use to be easy for me to switch inputs and get a near instant signal, now it's such a hassle that I didn't watch the Hornets rake the Spurs.

GTA4 has me very deep in the doghouse with the wife BTW:o

It's crack I tell you, CRACK

Dare
05-04-2008, 02:00 PM
A compression rate of 40:1 and higher is very easy to see.

Re-he-he-he-he-he-ally? Because Blu-ray has a compression ratio of about 100:1.

Dare
05-04-2008, 02:05 PM
I agree. And when the day does finally arrive that almost everyone (who cares ;) ) has sufficient broadband bandwidth either through terrestrial cables or Wireless access, and Flash Memory becomes large and fast enough for portable HD playback, then pre-recorded optical disc's days will certainly be numbered. Apple is working on this, as are others.

What exactly is the advantage that flash memory has over optical discs?

The_Omega_Man
05-04-2008, 02:10 PM
I think the bandwidth WILL come in the next couple of years, but the problem is that any movies we get from downloads other than that provided by the ISP may be very expensive if the ISP charges based on bandwidth usage. This is the problem with downloads in the future.

The broadband ISPs are mostly cable companies who also want US buying the content from THEM, not some independent provider. :p

I'm not familiar with any of the ISPs charging based upon BW usage. I'm sure that exists or will potentially, however, there are other services beside the ISP services for downloads. One this is for sure, ALL of the major Hollywood studios seem to be on-board with any company wanting to provide the download mechanism.



BTW. Maxim Picked the VuDu device over the apple TV, XBOX 360 and ever hilarious FyreTV (aka Watch-in-Wank:gamer ) :D

I am keeping an eye out for the VuDu myself.:thumbsup:

The_Omega_Man
05-04-2008, 02:23 PM
What exactly is the advantage that flash memory has over optical discs?
Flash is much easier to manage from a storage perspective, no scratching of the media, almost instantaneous data access, Virtually every modern computer produced can have the ability to read/access the media. Even most modern CE consumer level video recording/playback equipment has one or more USB ports. If the form factor can be made small enough you could have portable movie playback on Blackberry or other equipped cell phones. No moving parts on Flash to wear out or power up.

Remember Floppy Discs? Not to many young folks do! :cool:

PFC5
05-04-2008, 02:50 PM
I'm not familiar with any of the ISPs charging based upon BW usage. I'm sure that exists or will potentially, however, there are other services beside the ISP services for downloads. One this is for sure, ALL of the major Hollywood studios seem to be on-board with any company wanting to provide the download mechanism.



BTW. Maxim Picked the VuDu device over the apple TV, XBOX 360 and ever hilarious FyreTV (aka Watch-in-Wank:gamer ) :D

I am keeping an eye out for the VuDu myself.:thumbsup:

Several Large ISPs are doing test markets for charging based on bandwidth consumption of the individual customers. Time-Warner is one of them.

The VuDu is exactly the kind of device such Mb meters used by ISPs would kill. ISPs like Time -Warner want you to buy THEIR content not some independent content, so I fear for this without some kind of MAJOR uproar in the test markets or gov't intervention for it stifling competition.

Really the cable companies would have no defense against the stifling claim since THAT is what they used against the telcos to allow them to get INTO the cable ISP business to begin with. ;)

Dare
05-04-2008, 03:32 PM
Flash is much easier to manage from a storage perspective, no scratching of the media, almost instantaneous data access, Virtually every modern computer produced can have the ability to read/access the media. Even most modern CE consumer level video recording/playback equipment has one or more USB ports. If the form factor can be made small enough you could have portable movie playback on Blackberry or other equipped cell phones. No moving parts on Flash to wear out or power up.


Unfortunately flash is expensive, and it's pretty much physically impossible for it to ever be cheaper than optical. Optical readers are more complicated and expensive than flash readers, but better to have the expense once in the player than to have it repeatedly in every item of media. Both are capable of random access, both have similar capacity, but devices that are really suited to flash are too small to benefit from high definition anyway.

Remember Floppy Discs? Not to many young folks do! :cool:

My first computer saved data to an audio cassette tape. I could only dream of a floppy disk drive, and that was for 5 1/4" disks, ya little whippersnapper. :p

1080PsF
05-04-2008, 03:45 PM
Re-he-he-he-he-he-ally? Because Blu-ray has a compression ratio of about 100:1.Now you are catching on...

Dare
05-05-2008, 09:46 AM
Now you are catching on...

Okay, so compression is visible on Blu-rays.

Just the fact that any Blu-rays exist without any artifacts demonstrates that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Moving along...

The_Omega_Man
05-06-2008, 01:45 AM
Unfortunately flash is expensive, and it's pretty much physically impossible for it to ever be cheaper than optical. Optical readers are more complicated and expensive than flash readers, but better to have the expense once in the player than to have it repeatedly in every item of media. Both are capable of random access, both have similar capacity, but devices that are really suited to flash are too small to benefit from high definition anyway.



My first computer saved data to an audio cassette tape. I could only dream of a floppy disk drive, and that was for 5 1/4" disks, ya little whippersnapper. :p


Memory prices keep coming down, they tend to follow hard drive pricing trends. I would imaging that memory based media reproduction would be faster and less expensive, with higher yields than that of current optical media production. Thus (hopefully) translating to a lower aggregate consumer cost. Flash Memory is mass produced in many more places than BD for example.

Plus it has the COOL NEW factor to it. To me BD and HD DVD are only evolutionary products, while Flash memory represents a revolutionary potential movie transport medium. Remember the data cards in the original Star Trek series that held video and other data? .... Maybe Gene Roddenberry had a real premonition of things to come, or maybe Life really does imitate art!

And while we are reminiscing on the past, I am old enough to have worked with and on 8" SS floppy drives! :o

AND 5 - 10 - 20 - 40 MB hard drives when they first came out! We've come a long way since the 4 K bit Static RAM circuit boards, that I started with! So for me, just about ANYTHING is possible!

1080PsF
05-06-2008, 04:02 AM
Okay, so compression is visible on Blu-rays.

Just the fact that any Blu-rays exist without any artifacts demonstrates that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Moving along...I know that I'm a retard about a lot of things and it's hitting me really hard here because I don't understand your comment about Blu-rays. Are you saying that Blu-rays do or don't have artifacts? Because they have plenty of artifacts and you are so right I don't have any idea about video. Oh that's right I work with HD everyday and have been running HD video for over 10 years and SD for over 20. I don't just watch it, I make the masters that make the dubs you watch. Not only do I run tape but I also help studios with thier problems and help companies like Sony, TeraNex, Snell & Wilcox, and Panasonic to troubleshoot thier new equipment so you are so right that I don't have any clue about what I'm talking about.

MikeRox
05-06-2008, 05:13 AM
My first computer saved data to an audio cassette tape. I could only dream of a floppy disk drive, and that was for 5 1/4" disks, ya little whippersnapper. :p

Aaaaah so did mine :D Sinclair ZX Spectrum that I used for teething :lol: (the chew marks are still in it now!) 48k of RAM (it was the deluxe model!) 16 colours! man, state of the art baby!

We did get a +3 later on with built in 3" floppy disc drive (yeah 3" lol) in solid plastic shells, and I ain't that old and I remember all that :p

Lee Stewart
05-06-2008, 06:28 AM
When they can make media at a rate of 15 to 20 per minute at a cost of $4.00 or less . . .

Call me will you?

:rolleyes:

Lee Stewart
05-06-2008, 06:51 AM
The video tape machines, computers, monitors, and scopes on the professional side are 10-bit for HD and even most SD is even 10-bit.

NTSC is analog so there are no bits in NTSC.

If you look on the CIE xy diagram you will see how close the color spaces are.

Here are the values for each of the color spaces and these values are from TeraNex and Tektronix.

Rec. 709

____Red______Green______Blue_______White

x__0.640______0.300_____0.150______0.3127

z__0.330______0.600_____0.060______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.2126_____0.7152____0.0722_____2.2200


601 / SMPTE 145

x__0.630______0.310_____0.155______0.3127

z__0.340______0.595_____0.070______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.299______0.587_____0.114______2.2200


601 / EBU 3213

x__0.640______0.290_____0.150______0.3127

z__0.330______0.600_____0.060______0.3290

Luma Eq.__________________________Gamma
___0.299______0.587_____0.114______2.2200

I am aware of the color values being close. But post production is not what the consumer sees . . . ie; 10bit versus 8bit.

PS: . . . my bad - I always mix up the numbers.:o

mobiushky
05-06-2008, 09:04 AM
Memory prices keep coming down, they tend to follow hard drive pricing trends. I would imaging that memory based media reproduction would be faster and less expensive, with higher yields than that of current optical media production. Thus (hopefully) translating to a lower aggregate consumer cost. Flash Memory is mass produced in many more places than BD for example.

Plus it has the COOL NEW factor to it. To me BD and HD DVD are only evolutionary products, while Flash memory represents a revolutionary potential movie transport medium. Remember the data cards in the original Star Trek series that held video and other data? .... Maybe Gene Roddenberry had a real premonition of things to come, or maybe Life really does imitate art!

And while we are reminiscing on the past, I am old enough to have worked with and on 8" SS floppy drives! :o

AND 5 - 10 - 20 - 40 MB hard drives when they first came out! We've come a long way since the 4 K bit Static RAM circuit boards, that I started with! So for me, just about ANYTHING is possible!

There are two major hurdles to flash media that will not be resolved by storage capacity. One is that they are too open. Like you said, nearly every modern computer has a reader. Granted optical media is much less "locked down" as it used to be and there are ways to crack any modern copy protection scheme. But Flash memory only makes it easier, not harder. Second, flash memory does wear out. Even though there are no moving parts, the current average for life is about 300,000 to 500,000 write cycles. Essentially they begin to lose capacity over time. Now that could, and probably will be solved, but it's still a problem. At this point, it's not a big deal since they are small enough to not contain so much data they can't be replaced. But what if it was your movie that suddenly stops working?

Personally, I think some form of persistant storage will replace optical. Probably in the form of solid state. Like a main media server for your house.

Dare
05-06-2008, 11:01 AM
Memory prices keep coming down, they tend to follow hard drive pricing trends. I would imaging that memory based media reproduction would be faster and less expensive, with higher yields than that of current optical media production. Thus (hopefully) translating to a lower aggregate consumer cost. Flash Memory is mass produced in many more places than BD for example.

Plus it has the COOL NEW factor to it. To me BD and HD DVD are only evolutionary products, while Flash memory represents a revolutionary potential movie transport medium. Remember the data cards in the original Star Trek series that held video and other data? .... Maybe Gene Roddenberry had a real premonition of things to come, or maybe Life really does imitate art!


How can it ever be possible for a chip fabrication process to have higher yields for lower cost than a stamping machine that can crank out optical discs by the thousands using cheap materials?

Besides, I wouldn't call memory chips revolutionary. They have been around since the '50s. Roddenberry wasn't predicting the future, he was including stuff from the real world. (Didn't they call those little cards 'tapes'? :D) Optical discs didn't appear until the '70s, and proved themselves to be a cheaper alternative to data storage on silicon ROMs. Nobody in Star Trek imagined shiny discs.

The only way Flash memory would be viable is if you brought your own card to a kiosk and loaded a movie onto it. They would never in a million years sell packaged Flash cards with movies prerecorded onto them. For the capacity, optical will always be cheaper. We'll have terabyte optical by the time blank 50GB flash gets down to the price of a single blank 50GB disc. (And the price of optical is a moving target.)

PFC5
05-06-2008, 12:39 PM
How can it ever be possible for a chip fabrication process to have higher yields for lower cost than a stamping machine that can crank out optical discs by the thousands using cheap materials?

Besides, I wouldn't call memory chips revolutionary. They have been around since the '50s. Roddenberry wasn't predicting the future, he was including stuff from the real world. (Didn't they call those little cards 'tapes'? :D) Optical discs didn't appear until the '70s, and proved themselves to be a cheaper alternative to data storage on silicon ROMs. Nobody in Star Trek imagined shiny discs.

The only way Flash memory would be viable is if you brought your own card to a kiosk and loaded a movie onto it. They would never in a million years sell packaged Flash cards with movies prerecorded onto them. For the capacity, optical will always be cheaper. We'll have terabyte optical by the time blank 50GB flash gets down to the price of a single blank 50GB disc. (And the price of optical is a moving target.)

We do not know the tech used in those cards on ST. For all we know, they could have been 3D holographic optical devices. :D

I agree with you that without some radical change how flash memory or some future tech works, flash memory will "likely" always be more expensive per GB. But it doesn't need to continually increase forever for movies. Once the cost gets so low for say 50GB on flash or (insert some new tech) it might be the best way to go.

Never say never is my motto when it comes to technology. :D