|
|
Posted by ChairmanOfTheBored on 01/09/08 00:34
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:16:08 -0600, Gary Morrison <mr88cet@texas.net>
wrote:
>> The ONLY thing about BluRay that I have found to be "technically
>> superior" is the hard coat finish on the discs. THAT is the single most
>> important thing in optical disc technology I have seen come along in
>> years.
>
>So then, you don't perceive having nearly twice as much capacity a point
>of technical superiority?
The figure is NOT twice as much on a per layer count, and anything over
two layers has failed from a mass production POV.
>
>Of course the HDDVD defense against that particular way in which BluRay
>is superior is to say that you don't need that much space to encode an
>HD movie. Well, OK, maybe.
You're an idiot.
> I guess that depends upon how much (lossy)
>compression you want to do, how much bonus material, and so forth.
Sorry, CHUMP! but the 1080p video of BOTH formats is pretty much free of
video artifacts, and BOTH put standard definition bonus media down, and
proves to us that they are merely providing it as an afterthought.
>However, I definitely do know that I can use the extra 10 or 20 gig as a
>pure computer-storage medium.
Have fun having it last as an archival medium. Hard drives are cheap
and a far better technology for such things. They ARE the ultimate "pure
computer-storage medium", and always have been, and will be for some time
to come. Now, they come in a "plug-in-the-wire-and-go" form factor too.
You lose.
> So, if it ever comes down one or the
>other medium *completely* disappearing, both as a video medium and as
>computer storage medium, then I'd certainly hope that BluRay survives.
They could both die. More likely, however, both will survive, so don't
get you "up on the high horse" prediction capabilities roaring yet,
'cause you ain't all that.
Learn how to quote properly in Usenet, idiot.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|