|
|
Posted by Derek Janssen on 01/13/07 18:06
MassiveProng wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 04:27:03 -0500, Derek Janssen
> <ejanss@nospam.comcast.net> Gave us:
>
>>>>
>>>>Of course, today's Digital Bits identified the official reason why this
>>>>isn't much to notice (ie. porn "inventing" new technologies was way back
>>>>when we couldn't find it, and hence pretty much topped out at the
>>>>Internet)--
>>>>http://www.thedigitalbits.com
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>A few readers have e-mailed us this week about the news that some of the
>>>>leading porn companies, like Digital Underground and Wicked Pictures,
>>>>have decided to back HD-DVD for cost and ease of production reasons (see
>>>>story here at ABC News)."Porn decided the VHS vs. Betamax format war, so
>>>>it'll decide the HD format war too." is the typical comment. Here's why
>>>>I doubt it: Back in the days of the VHS vs. Beta format war, the only
>>>>way to watch porn was to visit a seedy adult movie theater or on Super-8
>>>>film. So when cheap, convenient porn on tape finally arrived, it was a
>>>>HUGE deal, demand was massive and it benefited VHS greatly. The
>>>>difference today is, cheap porn is already available EVERYWHERE on the
>>>>Internet and particularly on good old standard DVD.
>>>> <icky hi-def naked people snipped>
>>>
>>> Very well done, I must say... I agree. Times have changed.
>>>
>>> That's why I see no war, and once the studios get comfortable, we'll
>>>even see cross over pressings.
>>
>>...Uh, you did read the part where the porn studios (among other
>>mom-and-pop's) said they adopted HD because Blu was too danged expensive
>>for struggling indies to produce?
>
> Does that not mean then, that the end result is a few "indies" that
> are now struggling a bit less? as in employed.
It means, like porn (which, as noted, won't matter all that much)--but
more importantly like everybody else when VHS first broke out--it means
that every small company can leap on:
The biggest battle to mainstream customer acceptance is to establish
which product looks "normal" by being out there everywhere, and which
one looks like the cheap rival we wish would go away...
Before CES, Blu looked more and more like the "normal" format for being
supported by the most movie studios--But, if looser licensing and
cheaper production costs means that more companies find it easier to
jump onto HD overnight, that means more default HD titles out on shelves
to go with the cheaper players.
Whereas up till now, the 50-50 split's been too confusing for normal folk.
(Now, don't facts make a more interesting topic discussion post than the
backyard-wrestling "fucktard" stuff?....Guess my age and win a prize!) :)
Derek Janssen (who's basically wiping up the field, here)
ejanss@comcast.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|