[Nagnagnag] [ot:reply] -> _more_media_issues_

john smith jean_marclawtonll at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 13 10:20:46 EST 2003

"the public wants
  what the public gets"

The Jam: 'Going Underground'


>From: Mark Kolmar <mark@burningrome.com>
>Reply-To: nagnagnag@hollyfeld.org
>To: nagnagnag@hollyfeld.org
>Subject: Re: [Nagnagnag] [ot:reply] -> _more_media_issues_
>Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:05:31 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
>On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, -1 wrote:
> > inexpensive (sub US$100) is relative i guess, if i had a working VHS,
> > and didn't buy movies, or had something else, the price isn't really
> > the issue..especially since they can't record, (and the ones that can
> > are very expensive)..
>DVD Video is currently pretty much a playback-only format, yes, as
>LaserDisc always was.  And keep in mind how long it took for recordable
>CDs to happen.  The recordable DVD formats are very much up in the air,
>and even playback compatability for those is dependent on the player.
>That will start to change as a standard emerges.
> > i think to fully experience DVD-quality video, and sound, you really
> > DO NEED to have a large screen, or widescreen, with surround sound,
> > otherwise is the quality really that much better?
>This emphasizes my earlier point that the current DVD quality is already
>higher resolution than today's typical display that most people are
>already pretty happy with.
> > i have a ton of laserdisc ONLY releases, that will never come on DVD,
> > or are taking a long time (ie: original star wars trilogy)....so
> > there's even less of a reason for me..VHS is ok for me also..
>Again this isn't really an argument against what the DVD format can do.
>In the case of Star Wars in particular, it has to do with weird marketing
>issues from a mentality I can't begin to understand.  For instance, I
>think E.T. already went out of print after a short time on the market, and
>Raiders of the Lost Ark is being withheld.  Those would be consistent
>sellers, I expect, but for whatever reason they don't want them on the
>home video market.
> > they'be a pretty big failure for data, how many
> > games/programs/etc come on DVD-ROM? hardly any..
>I don't follow games too much, except to be able to say that as that
>market demands better and better textures and so on, it will start to be
>more of an option to get a game on DVD-ROM rather than a lot of CD-ROMs.
>Same type of thing happened with floppy disks.
> > playing mp3's through a DVD player is an iffy-affair at best,
> > since they have to be created in different ways for
> > different players..i don't use that feature...
>Yes, this is a problem.  I have a higher-end Panasonic region 1 player
>that definitely has better picture and sound than the TYT-manufactured
>(Korean), Akai- and Daewoo-branded player.  The Panasonic has some trouble
>with MP3s.  But the TYT players (they go under different brands, and in
>UK/Europe too, probably elsewhere) handle any MP3s I've tried.  And of
>course they are able to play any DVD from anywhere in the world....
>That's the major consideration for me.  Finally video standard is just a
>factor to consider, but not an obstacle to getting access to movies by
>Ingmar Bergman, David Lynch, Akira Kurosawa...  This is stuff I couldn't
>get access to before at all, or maybe in lower quality on VHS.  Prices are
>much lower.  And even on LaserDisc, a lot of the time the aspect ratio was
>wrong.  And widescreen was letterboxed so it couldn't take full advantage
>of the resolution either.
> > >Any future format is totally up in the air.  People will demand players
> > >that handle all discs of the same form factor, so future players will
> > >surely handle CDs and current DVDs.
> >
> > anybody can demand backwards comptability,
> > but that doesn't mean that it will happen..
>The electronics companies make what people want, or another company will.
>Now even Sony makes DVD players that play MP3s now -- and they are also a
>record company!
> > as it turns out, the lasers required for reading higher density disks
> > CAN'T read the current DVD disks...(unless you made a player with both
> > in them, which would be expensive)
>Again, the electronics companies will add a laser pickup to handle the
>other media.  This type of demand is why DVD players read CD-Rs now.  At
>first most of them did not....
> > as far as HDTV goes in the US, they're slowing coming along, but the
> > more important issue is that there is a mandate that all broadcasts
> > will go digital in 2006...
>This will keep getting pushed back.  It's a goal, mainly because the US
>gov't wants the spectrum back.  But nobody is going to take TV away from
>the last voter who is clinging to his 13" set.
> > when you say 'you don't think higher resolution would add much'..
> > surely you don't think we should just keep things as they are
> > now? what about when large screen flat panels become cheaper,
> > and everyone has one????
>Things as they are now are mainly still 480 (*) interlaced lines, i.e. 240
>lines alternating (more in PAL).  Normal TV display is about double VHS
>resolution both horizontally and vertically.  Progressive DVD, i.e. 480
>lines not alternating, is already a big step up from that.  I think 480p
>is going to be by far the most common HDTV format.  The effective
>resolution is maybe 1-1/2 times more than analog broadcast, with less
>flicker, and the displays are sharper on top of that.  Most people don't
>really know or care about higher resolution, particularly for sitcoms and
>other ordinary programming.
>And I don't even want to start about how long it will take to get HDTV
>signals over cable.
>As for protection, that's a complicated issue -- but as with DVD, people
>who take in interest in the finer points will be able to dig inside all
>this stuff.
>(*) actually 525 lines in NTSC, 625 in PAL, but not all those are usable,
>and it's all rather complicated....
>Nagnagnag mailing list

MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE* 

More information about the Nagnagnag mailing list