When did you become a robocop?Brother None said:Cimmerian Nights said:Yeah, I have the Criterion edition of Robocop.
Don't be dissing the artistic merit of Robocop.
When did you become a robocop?Brother None said:Cimmerian Nights said:Yeah, I have the Criterion edition of Robocop.
Don't be dissing the artistic merit of Robocop.
Sander said:DVD was also better than VHS because it was more convenient, could hold more film and could be interactive.
Also, a lot of people won't notice the difference between 720p and 1080p, even when they have the monitor for it. I do, but it is often rather marginal and there aren't that many movies where it's real added value.
I do think that it's useful, but to most of the buying public it won't add that much.
rcorporon said:Simple. Higher resolution.
Blu-Ray is better for the exact same reasons that DVD was better than VHS. It simply looks better.
I have a large, plasma television, and I want to use it to it's fullest potential.
SupermanOctopus said:Also, come on, dude.
It's HD. It's awesome.
Buxbaum666 said:3. You also need an expensive TV and an expensive player. A PS3 is not really an option as it uses more than ten times as much power as a standalone player. That's insane.
Brother None said:Like I said, you're basically suckers that are the puppets of marketeers and you don't even know it. But it's no problem, you're basically making shit cheaper for me.
Don't forget plasma TVs also eat up an average of 340 Watts. That means the two together eat up an insane 510+ Watts. Anyone who ever bought a plasma TV is an idiot.
Any plasma TV will cost you 100 USD extra per year in energy bills for watching TV, and that's assuming you watch an average amount, if you're a TV or film junky it'll be a lot higher. Some even exceed 200 USD extra, and that's just for the TV and not the player.
And the price of energy is only going up.
Seriously, if you think all of this is worth it, you're an idiot.
I agree that image quality is slightly higher but I'm not willing to pay the price. Thing is, you're basically a beta-tester. And you're paying shitloads of money for it.rcorporon said:If you can't see that the image quality of Blu-Ray is higher than that of a standard DVD, then you are blind or need a higher strength for your glasses prescription.
rcorporon said:Then an "idiot" I am.
If you can't see that the image quality of Blu-Ray is higher than that of a standard DVD, then you are blind or need a higher strength for your glasses prescription.
LCDs are usually run a bit more efficiently than plasma TVs, and some older CRTs are pretty inefficient too. But yeah, anything electronic is going to run up your electric bill, but a lot of people have plenty of other ways to become more energy efficient - a more efficient refrigerator, dishwasher, clothes washer, or lighting; use less AC/heat; unplug devices on standby mode; hang dry clothes; drive less. So if you did all of those and then bought the most efficient large-screen TV you could for the size you want, then why should you feel bad about it. You would probably save energy overall.Brother None said:Don't forget plasma TVs also eat up an average of 340 Watts. That means the two together eat up an insane 510+ Watts. Anyone who ever bought a plasma TV is an idiot.
Brother None said:I'm a student, there's no reason for me to be concerned with wealth. That said, I could afford it if I really wanted it. Obviously, I don't. Early adopting is just paying for other people's pleasure, that's not for me. In a few years time, I'll be enjoying BluRay and HDTV technology at no higher cost than I'm paying for my setup now, all thanks to the money you threw at it.
So thanks Hope you enjoy bankrolling me.
Why do you say that you live at home, with your parents as if it is a good thing?SupermanOctopus said:You realize I live at home and don't pay for shit? I did buy my PS3 and the only BluRay I own, Iron Man. My parents payed for our awesome 5X" Plasma and our 32" LCD. As well as electricity. That too.