Rethinking Blu-ray

At the dawn of HDTV, about a decade ago, prominent industry observers
predicted its quick demise, pointing out that there was no economic incentive
for program providers to spend the extra money to create HDTV programming,
while consumers would shun pricey HDTV sets because standard definition
wide-screen pictures would look almost as good.

And they, too, were wrong.

With the initial high prices of Blu-ray players, critics of this technology
have argued that Blu-ray is too little too late, a product that might have
made it in the days before broadband was considered as a popular delivery
mechanism for moving images. Just as consumers abandoned CDs in favor of
digital audio downloads, so too would they eschew a physical DVD for the
instantaneous gratification of streaming video from the Web.

No one knows if Blu-ray will ultimately succeed, but let’s take a look at a
few factors favoring that possibility:

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/...nking-blu-ray/

--
Certified SPAM-free sig

"UCLAN" wrote in message
...
At the dawn of HDTV, about a decade ago, prominent industry observers
predicted its quick demise, pointing out that there was no economic
incentive for program providers to spend the extra money to create HDTV
programming, while consumers would shun pricey HDTV sets because standard
definition wide-screen pictures would look almost as good.

And they, too, were wrong.

As was Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox, thank God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all

"Kalarama" wrote

As *WERE* Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox, thank
God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all



A 1998 anti-HDTV speech by MS's 480p fanboi. ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...nab4-7-98.mspx

UCLAN wrote:

Just as consumers
abandoned CDs in favor of digital audio downloads, so too would they
eschew a physical DVD for the instantaneous gratification of streaming
video from the Web.

Hardly. A vast majority of music downloads are low-bitrate trash. My
ears prefer a nice 384K rip any day. Streaming video is held to the
same standard.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Kalarama" wrote

As *WERE* Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox, thank
God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all



A 1998 anti-HDTV speech by MS's 480p fanboi. ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...nab4-7-98.mspx

You gotta be kidding. MS has been a LEADER in television media devices and
has invested more into the technology over the years than most other
players. Don't know what you were thinking about in 1998 but to suggest at
that time that pushing the envelope to 480P for mass consumption was anti-HD
is laughable. What fiscally responsible entity of any sort would have
eschewed mass market appliances at anything more data intensive given both
the number of 480i televisions in existence and the state of the
distribution pipeline at that time? Microsoft was trying to sell Web TV
boxes and get their OS into set top boxes from other manufacturers....what
were they supposed to do by your estimation?

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Kalarama" wrote

As *WERE* Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox, thank
God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all



A 1998 anti-HDTV speech by MS's 480p fanboi. ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...nab4-7-98.mspx

You gotta be kidding. MS has been a LEADER in television media devices and
has invested more into the technology over the years than most other
players. Don't know what you were thinking about in 1998 but to suggest at
that time that pushing the envelope to 480P for mass consumption was
anti-HD is laughable. What fiscally responsible entity of any sort would
have eschewed mass market appliances at anything more data intensive given
both the number of 480i televisions in existence and the state of the
distribution pipeline at that time? Microsoft was trying to sell Web TV
boxes and get their OS into set top boxes from other manufacturers....what
were they supposed to do by your estimation?


Stop wasting my time, read the damned articles and answer your own
questions.

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Kalarama" wrote

As *WERE* Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox, thank
God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all



A 1998 anti-HDTV speech by MS's 480p fanboi. ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...nab4-7-98.mspx

You gotta be kidding. MS has been a LEADER in television media devices
and has invested more into the technology over the years than most other
players. Don't know what you were thinking about in 1998 but to suggest
at that time that pushing the envelope to 480P for mass consumption was
anti-HD is laughable. What fiscally responsible entity of any sort would
have eschewed mass market appliances at anything more data intensive
given both the number of 480i televisions in existence and the state of
the distribution pipeline at that time? Microsoft was trying to sell Web
TV boxes and get their OS into set top boxes from other
manufacturers....what were they supposed to do by your estimation?


Stop wasting my time, read the damned articles and answer your own
questions.

Not only did I read the transcript, but I have attended every NAB convention
from 1996 to 2008 out of personal and professional interest as a technology
buff and a location sound mixer for film and video. What specifics are you
citing in that transcript? Also curious what your involvement and knowledge
of this industry is that would lead you to assail Craig Mundie for promoting
products and technology that were certainly appropriate if not forward
thinking for the market forces of their day?

Charles Tomaras
Seattle, WA

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
"Kalarama" wrote

As *WERE* Craig Mundie and Gates of Microsoft and Murdoch of Fox,
thank God..

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/06/bu...pagewanted=all



A 1998 anti-HDTV speech by MS's 480p fanboi. ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...nab4-7-98.mspx

You gotta be kidding. MS has been a LEADER in television media devices
and has invested more into the technology over the years than most other
players. Don't know what you were thinking about in 1998 but to suggest
at that time that pushing the envelope to 480P for mass consumption was
anti-HD is laughable. What fiscally responsible entity of any sort would
have eschewed mass market appliances at anything more data intensive
given both the number of 480i televisions in existence and the state of
the distribution pipeline at that time? Microsoft was trying to sell Web
TV boxes and get their OS into set top boxes from other
manufacturers....what were they supposed to do by your estimation?


Stop wasting my time, read the damned articles and answer your own
questions.

Not only did I read the transcript, but I have attended every NAB
convention from 1996 to 2008 out of personal and professional interest as
a technology buff and a location sound mixer for film and video. What
specifics are you citing in that transcript? Also curious what your
involvement and knowledge of this industry is that would lead you to
assail Craig Mundie for promoting products and technology that were
certainly appropriate if not forward thinking for the market forces of
their day?

Charles Tomaras
Seattle, WA



Please tell us that you don't actually believe that Mr. Mundie was
"promoting products and technology" for any other reason than corporate
financial interests.

And as unnecessary as posting your personal information was, you and I have
very much in common.

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
Please tell us that you don't actually believe that Mr. Mundie was
"promoting products and technology" for any other reason than corporate
financial interests.


I am 100% implying that he was and is continuing to promote corporate
financial interests. Do you honestly believe that NAB is geared towards
ANYTHING but corporate or personal financial interests for ANYONE involved
as exhibitor, presenter or attendee? Was there an open source booth full of
altruistic philanthropists that I've missed all these years? Would you
expect Microsoft, Motorola, Sony, Panasonic etc etc to be anything but
interested in making money? If you want MS driven philanthropy go here to
start your quest:
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
...

"Kalarama" wrote in message
...
Please tell us that you don't actually believe that Mr. Mundie was
"promoting products and technology" for any other reason than corporate
financial interests.


I am 100% implying that he was and is continuing to promote corporate
financial interests. Do you honestly believe that NAB is geared towards
ANYTHING but corporate or personal financial interests for ANYONE involved
as exhibitor, presenter or attendee? Was there an open source booth full
of altruistic philanthropists that I've missed all these years? Would you
expect Microsoft, Motorola, Sony, Panasonic etc etc to be anything but
interested in making money? If you want MS driven philanthropy go here to
start your quest:
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx




What color pom-poms do you like to use when you're doing your
cheerleader/dance routines for Bill?