What does that mean? Well, here's a surprisingly realistic opinion:
Laurie Fincham, Chief Scientist at THX, talks to Home Cinema Choice Magazine about Blu-ray's chances to become a dominant format of the future.No, I guess we really don't. If you've made the leap to HDTV, then you can get HD programming through your cable or satellite provider, should you subscribe. But shucking out several hundred dollars for a player to see a movie in High Def? Pshah!
After HD DVDs demise the UK Magazine asked him for a comment. "Personally, I think it's too late for Blu-ray. I think consumers will only become interested in replacing DVD when HD movies becomes available on flash memory. Do we really need another spinning format?" he told the magazine.
And I'm not getting the $500 PS3 (because who's going to buy the cheaper one that's not backwards-compatible with the PS2?) for the PS upgrade and included Blu-ray. I think, unless prices come way the hell down, I'll be sitting this one out and await the super-huge solid state version.
Posts
2 comments:
Spoken like someone who truly does not know what he is talking about. The really surprises me is the willingness to regurgitate the same drivel posted by another hack writer and calling that an "opinion".
Come on! $800 for a PS3? It has been that much since the hapless sheep of consumers over paid for one on ebay the month following launch.
The truth is that most "audiophiles", "videophiles", etc that care about hi-def, DO want it on a material format. Although downloadable music is not of the same quality as an actual CD, it is close enough that most people don't care. That is not the case with video. That is why, though fairly popular, even bit torrent is not done by the average user.
You come off as someone that is put out because they sided with the losing camp (HD-DVD). That may or may not be the case, but unless you can use some real facts and form some kind of valid argument, your attempt at providing content based on your "opinion" is ridiculous.
Spoken like someone who truly does not understand spellcheck. You were correct in my incorrect pricing for the PS3 "big boy" and I have corrected that to the $499.
Yes, videophiles will shell out the cash for the Blu-ray, but that's not me. Hence, the blog that reflects my feelings about it. I own no HDTV, let alone a player.
And if you're willing to call Laurie Fincham, Chief Scientist at THX a hack, then you're a douche. Check the references before flailing out of control on Mom and Dad's basement couch.
My meaning was that the normal folks, like me, who love the hell out of movies every day, and might just invest in an HDTV in the next year, might not have the loose cash to throw at a Blu-ray player or it's PS3 equivalent (backwards compatable, of course) in turn. At least not before the USB equivalent surfaces, at which point this discussion would be moot.
Post a Comment