🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:58:53 -0700 (PDT), "<p>sychotic <c>hicken"
<neil_horlock@hotmail.com> wrote:

>You didn't know about this did you ?
>
>Did you !!!!!
>
>
>Don't say I never do anyone any favours.

What's Facebook?


-- 
Pixel, magic kitten
www.whitefall.nl/johannes

Pixel  "#~ is a mighty pirate...

>>You didn't know about this did you ?
>>
>>Did you !!!!!
>>
>>Don't say I never do anyone any favours.
>
> What's Facebook?

I agree with this post. Is it as good as The Lord of the Rings?

-- 
ervaqre is wicked sick

ervaqre skrev:
> Pixel  "#~ is a mighty pirate...
> 
>>> You didn't know about this did you ?
>>>
>>> Did you !!!!!
>>>
>>> Don't say I never do anyone any favours.
>> What's Facebook?
> 
> I agree with this post. Is it as good as The Lord of the Rings?

Perhaps someone will tell what author wrote this book?

Facebook, that is. I know Ronald Reagan wrote Lord of the Rings.

Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...

>>>> Don't say I never do anyone any favours.
>>> What's Facebook?
>> 
>> I agree with this post. Is it as good as The Lord of the Rings?
>
> Perhaps someone will tell what author wrote this book?
>
> Facebook, that is. I know Ronald Reagan wrote Lord of the Rings.

So that's why they are eating jelly beans all the time. I knew this 
lambas bread was actually just something the European editor made up.

-- 
ervaqre is wicked sick

ervaqre skrev:
> Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...
> 
>>>>> Don't say I never do anyone any favours.
>>>> What's Facebook?
>>> I agree with this post. Is it as good as The Lord of the Rings?
>> Perhaps someone will tell what author wrote this book?
>>
>> Facebook, that is. I know Ronald Reagan wrote Lord of the Rings.
> 
> So that's why they are eating jelly beans all the time. I knew this 
> lambas bread was actually just something the European editor made up.

Jelly beans? I thought they ate spam?

ervaqre skrev:
> Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...
> 
>>>> Facebook, that is. I know Ronald Reagan wrote Lord of the Rings.
>>> So that's why they are eating jelly beans all the time. I knew this 
>>> lambas bread was actually just something the European editor made up.
>> Jelly beans? I thought they ate spam?
> 
> Well, the gaffer certainly ate more jelly beans than spam!

You mean Hamfast Gamgee?

Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...

>>> Jelly beans? I thought they ate spam?
>> 
>> Well, the gaffer certainly ate more jelly beans than spam!
>
> You mean Hamfast Gamgee?

Another gaffer actually. Hmm... a while ago I saw the Lord of the 
Rings in Chinese. It's totally...well, uhmm... wrong.

-- 
ervaqre is teh wicked

ervaqre skrev:
> Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...
> 
>>>> Jelly beans? I thought they ate spam?
>>> Well, the gaffer certainly ate more jelly beans than spam!
>> You mean Hamfast Gamgee?
> 
> Another gaffer actually. Hmm... a while ago I saw the Lord of the 
> Rings in Chinese. It's totally...well, uhmm... wrong.

Was it one of those lip-synced to chinese and then translated to english?

-- 
-- [ Rasmus "Møffe" Bøg Hansen ] -------------------------------------
Memory is like gasoline. You use it up when you are running. Of
course you get it all back when you reboot.
                                          -- Microsoft help desk
----------------------------------------------[ moffe at zz9 dot dk ] --

Rasmus Bøg Hansen is a mighty pirate...

>> Another gaffer actually. Hmm... a while ago I saw the Lord of the 
>> Rings in Chinese. It's totally...well, uhmm... wrong.
>
> Was it one of those lip-synced to chinese and then translated to english?

No, not really. In China it is okay to simply mute the sound whenever 
somebody is speaking and for those parts record the Chinese dubbing 
and just paste it in. They probably downloaded a movie with just one 
audio track, so the music also stops when somebody is speaking. Then 
you download some low-res promotional banners or whatever of the 
movie, use a cracked version of Photoshop to put some Chinese text on 
it it and print this in road-side-poster format with terribly visible 
.jpeg artefacts. Oh, and of course you save the video file in Real 
Media format, burn it to CDs and sell these on the street. 

-- 
ervaqre is teh wicked

ervaqre schreef:
>>> Another gaffer actually. Hmm... a while ago I saw the Lord of the 
>>> Rings in Chinese. It's totally...well, uhmm... wrong.
>> Was it one of those lip-synced to chinese and then translated to english?
> 
> No, not really. In China it is okay to simply mute the sound whenever 
> somebody is speaking and for those parts record the Chinese dubbing 
> and just paste it in. They probably downloaded a movie with just one 
> audio track, so the music also stops when somebody is speaking. Then 
> you download some low-res promotional banners or whatever of the 
> movie, use a cracked version of Photoshop to put some Chinese text on 
> it it and print this in road-side-poster format with terribly visible 
> ..jpeg artefacts. Oh, and of course you save the video file in Real 
> Media format, burn it to CDs and sell these on the street. 
> 
I hates the real media format. I hates it lots. Computers with Real Media Player 
also tend to be infested with spyware and plenty of other unhealthy software.

-- 
Danny.

DG is a mighty pirate...

>> and just paste it in. They probably downloaded a movie with just one 
>> audio track, so the music also stops when somebody is speaking. Then 
>> you download some low-res promotional banners or whatever of the 
>> movie, use a cracked version of Photoshop to put some Chinese text on 
>> it it and print this in road-side-poster format with terribly visible 
>> ..jpeg artefacts. Oh, and of course you save the video file in Real 
>> Media format, burn it to CDs and sell these on the street. 
>> 
> I hates the real media format. I hates it lots. Computers with Real Media Player 
> also tend to be infested with spyware and plenty of other unhealthy software.

When I still used Windows several years ago there was something like 
RealAlternative. This only installed the codecs, but not the Real 
Player and associated bloatware. In China however, they all install 
some cracked version of Real Ultimate Whatever, because apparently it 
is quite easy to convert DVDs with this. 

Of course, on the real rather than the Chinese internet, there's not 
really a need to play anything that's encoded in the Real format. 
Everybody's on Xvid or .h264 these days.

-- 
ervaqre is teh wicked

ervaqre schreef:
>>> and just paste it in. They probably downloaded a movie with just one 
>>> audio track, so the music also stops when somebody is speaking. Then 
>>> you download some low-res promotional banners or whatever of the 
>>> movie, use a cracked version of Photoshop to put some Chinese text on 
>>> it it and print this in road-side-poster format with terribly visible 
>>> ..jpeg artefacts. Oh, and of course you save the video file in Real 
>>> Media format, burn it to CDs and sell these on the street. 
>>>
>> I hates the real media format. I hates it lots. Computers with Real Media Player 
>> also tend to be infested with spyware and plenty of other unhealthy software.
> 
> When I still used Windows several years ago there was something like 
> RealAlternative. This only installed the codecs, but not the Real 
> Player and associated bloatware. In China however, they all install 
> some cracked version of Real Ultimate Whatever, because apparently it 
> is quite easy to convert DVDs with this. 

People who know how to install real alternative also know how to prevent 
bloatware, virusses and all those other cuddly bits of code. The quality of real 
video tends to be quite low in general.

> Of course, on the real rather than the Chinese internet, there's not 
> really a need to play anything that's encoded in the Real format. 
> Everybody's on Xvid or .h264 these days.
> 
Don't forget the .flv thing. It's not just a Youtube thing anymore. The m4v and 
mp4 extensions have also gained ground, especially podcasters seem to like them.

No wonder VLC gets touted as the best thing since sliced bread. It can play 
almost anything without needing codec kung-fu.

-- 
Danny.

DG is a mighty pirate...

>> Of course, on the real rather than the Chinese internet, there's not 
>> really a need to play anything that's encoded in the Real format. 
>> Everybody's on Xvid or .h264 these days.
>> 
> Don't forget the .flv thing. It's not just a Youtube thing anymore. The m4v and 
> mp4 extensions have also gained ground, especially podcasters seem to like them.

Ha! You are mixing up container formats with video and audio formats 
here! A .flv file can contain video encoded with h.264 and audio with 
mp3 for example. So your player needs to be able to 1) know how to 
handle the container format, and 2) be able to decode both the video 
and audio the file contains. 

Container formats like mp4 offer nice additions though, such as 
multiple audio tracks in different languages, chapters or subtitles.  

> No wonder VLC gets touted as the best thing since sliced bread. It can play 
> almost anything without needing codec kung-fu.

Even though I don't like it myself (it used to have problems with 
embedded subs used in a lot of anime), it is what I recommend to 
everybody else.

-- 
ervaqre is teh wicked

Op 23-12-2009 9:15, ervaqre schreef:
>>> Of course, on the real rather than the Chinese internet, there's not
>>> really a need to play anything that's encoded in the Real format.
>>> Everybody's on Xvid or .h264 these days.
>>>
>> Don't forget the .flv thing. It's not just a Youtube thing anymore. The m4v and
>> mp4 extensions have also gained ground, especially podcasters seem to like them.
>
> Ha! You are mixing up container formats with video and audio formats
> here! A .flv file can contain video encoded with h.264 and audio with
> mp3 for example. So your player needs to be able to 1) know how to
> handle the container format, and 2) be able to decode both the video
> and audio the file contains.

Wasn't it originally or even predominantly used with a codec those flash guys 
bought from somewhere? Wikipedia also mentions this as a h.263 like codec.

>
> Container formats like mp4 offer nice additions though, such as
> multiple audio tracks in different languages, chapters or subtitles.

At any rate, try and find a standalone DVD player that will play all those 
weirdo formats. You won't. Only a HTPC will.

>> No wonder VLC gets touted as the best thing since sliced bread. It can play
>> almost anything without needing codec kung-fu.
>
> Even though I don't like it myself (it used to have problems with
> embedded subs used in a lot of anime), it is what I recommend to
> everybody else.
>
I agree that embedded subs will slow VLC down way too much. Yet SRT's and dvd's 
play fine. So it's fine for 99.99% of users. And it doesn't mess with your sound 
settings like Microsoft's media player does.

-- 
Danny.

DG is a mighty pirate...

>> Ha! You are mixing up container formats with video and audio formats
>> here! A .flv file can contain video encoded with h.264 and audio with
>> mp3 for example. So your player needs to be able to 1) know how to
>> handle the container format, and 2) be able to decode both the video
>> and audio the file contains.
>
> Wasn't it originally or even predominantly used with a codec those flash guys 
> bought from somewhere? Wikipedia also mentions this as a h.263 like codec.

Yes, first they used a codec from Sorensen and afterwards from On2. 
Since H.264 is also supported these days, more and more websites 
offering video use that. Now if only online video playback as proposed 
in HTML5 would take off, we could do without Flash altogether. I would 
cherish that day, because I hate Flash with all my heart.

>> Container formats like mp4 offer nice additions though, such as
>> multiple audio tracks in different languages, chapters or subtitles.
>
> At any rate, try and find a standalone DVD player that will play all those 
> weirdo formats. You won't. Only a HTPC will.

You'd have to be either a weirdo or a noob to buy a standalone DVD 
player these days!

>> Even though I don't like it myself (it used to have problems with
>> embedded subs used in a lot of anime), it is what I recommend to
>> everybody else.
>>
> I agree that embedded subs will slow VLC down way too much. Yet SRT's and dvd's 
> play fine. So it's fine for 99.99% of users. And it doesn't mess with your sound 
> settings like Microsoft's media player does.

Quite a coincidence that I actually saw somebody using VLC to play a 
.mkv file with embedded SSA subs earlier this morning. After opening 
the file VLC said it was busy building the fontcache. When that was 
done however, everything worked perfectly. Quite a difference from the 
VLC Player a few years ago that would show the letters all over the 
screen in random order.

It's still beyond me why people would use any MS product!

-- 

Op 1-1-2010 6:29, ervaqre schreef:
>>> Ha! You are mixing up container formats with video and audio formats
>>> here! A .flv file can contain video encoded with h.264 and audio with
>>> mp3 for example. So your player needs to be able to 1) know how to
>>> handle the container format, and 2) be able to decode both the video
>>> and audio the file contains.
>>
>> Wasn't it originally or even predominantly used with a codec those flash guys
>> bought from somewhere? Wikipedia also mentions this as a h.263 like codec.
>
> Yes, first they used a codec from Sorensen and afterwards from On2.
> Since H.264 is also supported these days, more and more websites
> offering video use that. Now if only online video playback as proposed
> in HTML5 would take off, we could do without Flash altogether. I would
> cherish that day, because I hate Flash with all my heart.

Since you're the computer expert that knows such a lot about streaming codex, do 
you know a way to play silverlight without installing silverlight on a Windows 
box? I'd like to play stuff from nederland24.nl without having to put another 
plugin in my Firefox. Flash is quite enough, thank you. Putting Moonlight on a 
Ubuntu machine is a bit too much work, unless I'm really going the HTPC route.

The nederland24.nl website mentions you can play the content in an alternative 
media player. It neglects to say how or what media player though, not to mention 
where to get it. Or what link to put in to VLC, that would be nice too.

>>> Container formats like mp4 offer nice additions though, such as
>>> multiple audio tracks in different languages, chapters or subtitles.
>>
>> At any rate, try and find a standalone DVD player that will play all those
>> weirdo formats. You won't. Only a HTPC will.
>
> You'd have to be either a weirdo or a noob to buy a standalone DVD
> player these days!

Or on a tight budget. I've seen the first sub 100 euro Blu Ray player in the 
Belgian Kruidvat. It's just a tad over 100 in the Netherlands.

>>> Even though I don't like it myself (it used to have problems with
>>> embedded subs used in a lot of anime), it is what I recommend to
>>> everybody else.
>>>
>> I agree that embedded subs will slow VLC down way too much. Yet SRT's and dvd's
>> play fine. So it's fine for 99.99% of users. And it doesn't mess with your sound
>> settings like Microsoft's media player does.
>
> Quite a coincidence that I actually saw somebody using VLC to play a
> ..mkv file with embedded SSA subs earlier this morning. After opening
> the file VLC said it was busy building the fontcache. When that was
> done however, everything worked perfectly. Quite a difference from the
> VLC Player a few years ago that would show the letters all over the
> screen in random order.
>
> It's still beyond me why people would use any MS product!
>
VLC used to make a piece of interactive art of MKV subs. Cool.
MS is the standard. It is actually hard to convince people to use another 
player. Even when they run into trouble with it. They just think the file is 
broken, not the player. It's actually easier to install VLC as quick as you can 
on a fresh system. Real noobs won't even know the difference when it handles all 
media files.

-- 

DG is a mighty pirate...

>> Yes, first they used a codec from Sorensen and afterwards from On2.
>> Since H.264 is also supported these days, more and more websites
>> offering video use that. Now if only online video playback as proposed
>> in HTML5 would take off, we could do without Flash altogether. I would
>> cherish that day, because I hate Flash with all my heart.
>
> Since you're the computer expert that knows such a lot about streaming codex, do 
> you know a way to play silverlight without installing silverlight on a Windows 
> box? I'd like to play stuff from nederland24.nl without having to put another 
> plugin in my Firefox. Flash is quite enough, thank you. Putting Moonlight on a 
> Ubuntu machine is a bit too much work, unless I'm really going the HTPC route.

Don't use Ubuntu if you want to play this Silvercrap Microsoft crap 
though! If I go to the MS website it doesn't show the "Click here to 
install" button the text says should show up for Linux users. But 
maybe they assume I use Firefox which I don't.

I then installed Firefox to try it with the Moonlight plugin, which 
works. But then you have the same as when you use the Silverlight 
plugin for Firefox in Windows. Fail to see the advantages it has over 
Flash though. And it uses a lot of memory. Why does MS not just 
support the <video> thing in HTML5 for their future browsers?

> The nederland24.nl website mentions you can play the content in an alternative 
> media player. It neglects to say how or what media player though, not to mention 
> where to get it. Or what link to put in to VLC, that would be nice too.

I think what they mean is that you can play it with the Windows Media 
or Quicktime plugins. If, without using Moonlight or Firefox, I click 
on one of the channels and go to Instellingen, I can choose from those 
two players. It then goes on stating that I don't have those plugins 
however. If I look in the source code of the page I don't see a direct 
link to the video file either. But maybe it serves me a different page 
since I don't have any of the plugins. If you do, maybe the server 
will send you one? You can try it by selecting the Windows Media 
format, provided you have that plugin, and then search for an .asf 
file in the source of the page. If there is one, you should be able to 
copy and paste it into VLC.

>> You'd have to be either a weirdo or a noob to buy a standalone DVD
>> player these days!
>
> Or on a tight budget. I've seen the first sub 100 euro Blu Ray player in the 
> Belgian Kruidvat. It's just a tad over 100 in the Netherlands.

Are these HTPC boxes so expensive then? They seem ideal to me and in 
the end they'd work out cheaper because you can just use them to 
download the movies rather than buying the expensive Blue Ray discs. I 
believe they even have a built in torrent application. And many of 
them use mplayer, which is awesome because it has ASCII-output!

>> It's still beyond me why people would use any MS product!
>>
> VLC used to make a piece of interactive art of MKV subs. Cool.
> MS is the standard. It is actually hard to convince people to use another 
> player. Even when they run into trouble with it. They just think the file is 
> broken, not the player. It's actually easier to install VLC as quick as you can 
> on a fresh system. Real noobs won't even know the difference when it handles all 
> media files.

Well, it is my secret master plan to convert people to good 
and easy programs that are available on both Windows and Linux or Mac. 
So Firefox, Thunderbird, VLC, Pidgin, etc. Then one day in the future I 
can convince them to use Ubuntu or MacOS after which they should stop 
bothering me whenever they have a virus.

-- 

Op 5-1-2010 7:16, ervaqre schreef:
> DG is a mighty pirate...
>
>>> Yes, first they used a codec from Sorensen and afterwards from On2.
>>> Since H.264 is also supported these days, more and more websites
>>> offering video use that. Now if only online video playback as proposed
>>> in HTML5 would take off, we could do without Flash altogether. I would
>>> cherish that day, because I hate Flash with all my heart.
>>
>> Since you're the computer expert that knows such a lot about streaming codex, do
>> you know a way to play silverlight without installing silverlight on a Windows
>> box? I'd like to play stuff from nederland24.nl without having to put another
>> plugin in my Firefox. Flash is quite enough, thank you. Putting Moonlight on a
>> Ubuntu machine is a bit too much work, unless I'm really going the HTPC route.
>
> Don't use Ubuntu if you want to play this Silvercrap Microsoft crap
> though! If I go to the MS website it doesn't show the "Click here to
> install" button the text says should show up for Linux users. But
> maybe they assume I use Firefox which I don't.
>
> I then installed Firefox to try it with the Moonlight plugin, which
> works. But then you have the same as when you use the Silverlight
> plugin for Firefox in Windows. Fail to see the advantages it has over
> Flash though. And it uses a lot of memory. Why does MS not just
> support the<video>  thing in HTML5 for their future browsers?

My conclusion: no Silverlight crap on my PC for now. And probably not ever even.

>> The nederland24.nl website mentions you can play the content in an alternative
>> media player. It neglects to say how or what media player though, not to mention
>> where to get it. Or what link to put in to VLC, that would be nice too.
>
> I think what they mean is that you can play it with the Windows Media
> or Quicktime plugins. If, without using Moonlight or Firefox, I click
> on one of the channels and go to Instellingen, I can choose from those
> two players. It then goes on stating that I don't have those plugins
> however. If I look in the source code of the page I don't see a direct
> link to the video file either. But maybe it serves me a different page
> since I don't have any of the plugins. If you do, maybe the server
> will send you one? You can try it by selecting the Windows Media
> format, provided you have that plugin, and then search for an .asf
> file in the source of the page. If there is one, you should be able to
> copy and paste it into VLC.

Weird. Journaal24 works straight in Firefox with the Windows Media Player link. 
There's an asx link, http://www.omroep.nl/live/thema/nos_journaal24-bb.asx 
Quality isn't all that great, but it works. Not every channel has a play in WMP 
link. As a matter of fact not every link to the same channel ends up with a WMP 
option. So far I've only located news and politics. The culture network doesn't 
even seem to have that Silverlight stuff.

>>> You'd have to be either a weirdo or a noob to buy a standalone DVD
>>> player these days!
>>
>> Or on a tight budget. I've seen the first sub 100 euro Blu Ray player in the
>> Belgian Kruidvat. It's just a tad over 100 in the Netherlands.
>
> Are these HTPC boxes so expensive then? They seem ideal to me and in
> the end they'd work out cheaper because you can just use them to
> download the movies rather than buying the expensive Blue Ray discs. I
> believe they even have a built in torrent application. And many of
> them use mplayer, which is awesome because it has ASCII-output!

A lot of those cheap HTPC boxes don't have Blu Ray or equivalent quality going 
on. As a matter of fact anything over 720p would stutter. Going with lower 
quality would look rather silly on an expensive big screen TV. I've seen 1080p 
upscaling media player boxes that could run stuff off any USB drive. It even had 
LAN, bun not wireless, for around 70 - 80 euro's. Now if it did have wireless, 
I'd know a few people who'd be interested. But lugging around drives or even 
USB-keys with their media or a wired LAN looks like too cumbersome for most people.

The fact that most don't play blu-ray also means they're not quite future-proof. 
They may not have the money for expensive blu-ray now, but that may change. 
Blu-ray discs already are getting cheaper (I've seen some for 10 euro's). 
Besides, somewhere along the line home burned blu-ray will become as abundant as 
DVD's. Unless it gets overtaken by USB, SD, flashcard or even cloud storage.

>>> It's still beyond me why people would use any MS product!
>>>
>> VLC used to make a piece of interactive art of MKV subs. Cool.
>> MS is the standard. It is actually hard to convince people to use another
>> player. Even when they run into trouble with it. They just think the file is
>> broken, not the player. It's actually easier to install VLC as quick as you can
>> on a fresh system. Real noobs won't even know the difference when it handles all
>> media files.
>
> Well, it is my secret master plan to convert people to good
> and easy programs that are available on both Windows and Linux or Mac.
> So Firefox, Thunderbird, VLC, Pidgin, etc. Then one day in the future I
> can convince them to use Ubuntu or MacOS after which they should stop
> bothering me whenever they have a virus.
>
MacOS is something I don't recommend. For one you're not supposed to make a 
Hackintosh and buying straight from Apple is just way too expensive. Second, a 
lot of stuff - mainly games - just don't work on Apple. It can be very 
frustrating to find a PC game under the Christmas tree that does just what it 
promises: it runs on a PC. Not a Mac. And then you have to explain a Apple is a 
computer, but not a personal computer. Also a lot of school stuff has the same 
problem. It'll work on a PC, but not an Apple.

Oddly it is easier to explain to people that Linux, though it runs on a PC, is 
NOT Windows compatible. Switching from Linux to Windows than from Apple to 
Windows also seems to have a lower threshold. Which is logical. If you've spent 
2000 euro's on an Apple, you don't want to spend another 100 or more to put 
Windows on it. If you buy a 300 euro Linux box, 'upgrading' to Windows doesn't 
seem like such a disaster.

-- 
Danny.

DG is a mighty pirate...

>> I then installed Firefox to try it with the Moonlight plugin, which
>> works. But then you have the same as when you use the Silverlight
>> plugin for Firefox in Windows. Fail to see the advantages it has over
>> Flash though. And it uses a lot of memory. Why does MS not just
>> support the<video>  thing in HTML5 for their future browsers?
>
> My conclusion: no Silverlight crap on my PC for now. And probably not ever even.

Well, can't you just watch all of that stuff on Dutch television?

>> I think what they mean is that you can play it with the Windows Media
>> or Quicktime plugins. If, without using Moonlight or Firefox, I click
>> on one of the channels and go to Instellingen, I can choose from those
>> two players. It then goes on stating that I don't have those plugins
>> however. If I look in the source code of the page I don't see a direct
>> link to the video file either. But maybe it serves me a different page
>> since I don't have any of the plugins. If you do, maybe the server
>> will send you one? You can try it by selecting the Windows Media
>> format, provided you have that plugin, and then search for an .asf
>> file in the source of the page. If there is one, you should be able to
>> copy and paste it into VLC.
>
> Weird. Journaal24 works straight in Firefox with the Windows Media Player link. 
> There's an asx link, http://www.omroep.nl/live/thema/nos_journaal24-bb.asx 
> Quality isn't all that great, but it works. Not every channel has a play in WMP 
> link. As a matter of fact not every link to the same channel ends up with a WMP 
> option. So far I've only located news and politics. The culture network doesn't 
> even seem to have that Silverlight stuff.

What about a Real link then? Or do they not provide an option at all?

> A lot of those cheap HTPC boxes don't have Blu Ray or equivalent quality going 
> on. As a matter of fact anything over 720p would stutter. Going with lower 
> quality would look rather silly on an expensive big screen TV. I've seen 1080p 
> upscaling media player boxes that could run stuff off any USB drive. It even had 
> LAN, bun not wireless, for around 70 - 80 euro's. Now if it did have wireless, 
> I'd know a few people who'd be interested. But lugging around drives or even 
> USB-keys with their media or a wired LAN looks like too cumbersome for most people.
>
> The fact that most don't play blu-ray also means they're not quite future-proof. 
> They may not have the money for expensive blu-ray now, but that may change. 
> Blu-ray discs already are getting cheaper (I've seen some for 10 euro's). 
> Besides, somewhere along the line home burned blu-ray will become as abundant as 
> DVD's. Unless it gets overtaken by USB, SD, flashcard or even cloud storage.

What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never 
even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a 
HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.

> MacOS is something I don't recommend. For one you're not supposed to make a 
> Hackintosh and buying straight from Apple is just way too expensive. Second, a 
> lot of stuff - mainly games - just don't work on Apple. It can be very 
> frustrating to find a PC game under the Christmas tree that does just what it 
> promises: it runs on a PC. Not a Mac. And then you have to explain a Apple is a 
> computer, but not a personal computer. Also a lot of school stuff has the same 
> problem. It'll work on a PC, but not an Apple.

People should stop celebrating Christmas then! Or stop playing PC 
games! I believe there are Nintendo's and Xboxes for games.

> Oddly it is easier to explain to people that Linux, though it runs on a PC, is 
> NOT Windows compatible. Switching from Linux to Windows than from Apple to 
> Windows also seems to have a lower threshold. Which is logical. If you've spent 
> 2000 euro's on an Apple, you don't want to spend another 100 or more to put 
> Windows on it. If you buy a 300 euro Linux box, 'upgrading' to Windows doesn't 
> seem like such a disaster.

Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!

-- 
ervaqre is teh wicked

Op 16-1-2010 20:58, ervaqre schreef:
>>> I then installed Firefox to try it with the Moonlight plugin, which
>>> works. But then you have the same as when you use the Silverlight
>>> plugin for Firefox in Windows. Fail to see the advantages it has over
>>> Flash though. And it uses a lot of memory. Why does MS not just
>>> support the<video>   thing in HTML5 for their future browsers?
>>
>> My conclusion: no Silverlight crap on my PC for now. And probably not ever even.
>
> Well, can't you just watch all of that stuff on Dutch television?

I don't think so. Certainly not 24/7. If there's nothing on 1, 2 or 3, I'd like 
to see what's on the dozen or so online channels. It's true they do a lot of 
reruns, but sometimes I'd rather watch that some of the lame new stuff. Now you 
could watch them via digital cable, but that means paying extra. For content 
I've already payed for with taxes *and* is free online (sadly that requires 
Silverlight in most cases). Paying twice just rubs me the wrong way.

>>> I think what they mean is that you can play it with the Windows Media
>>> or Quicktime plugins. If, without using Moonlight or Firefox, I click
>>> on one of the channels and go to Instellingen, I can choose from those
>>> two players. It then goes on stating that I don't have those plugins
>>> however. If I look in the source code of the page I don't see a direct
>>> link to the video file either. But maybe it serves me a different page
>>> since I don't have any of the plugins. If you do, maybe the server
>>> will send you one? You can try it by selecting the Windows Media
>>> format, provided you have that plugin, and then search for an .asf
>>> file in the source of the page. If there is one, you should be able to
>>> copy and paste it into VLC.
>>
>> Weird. Journaal24 works straight in Firefox with the Windows Media Player link.
>> There's an asx link, http://www.omroep.nl/live/thema/nos_journaal24-bb.asx
>> Quality isn't all that great, but it works. Not every channel has a play in WMP
>> link. As a matter of fact not every link to the same channel ends up with a WMP
>> option. So far I've only located news and politics. The culture network doesn't
>> even seem to have that Silverlight stuff.
>
> What about a Real link then? Or do they not provide an option at all?

They used to have that, I think. But real was crappy anyway.

>> A lot of those cheap HTPC boxes don't have Blu Ray or equivalent quality going
>> on. As a matter of fact anything over 720p would stutter. Going with lower
>> quality would look rather silly on an expensive big screen TV. I've seen 1080p
>> upscaling media player boxes that could run stuff off any USB drive. It even had
>> LAN, bun not wireless, for around 70 - 80 euro's. Now if it did have wireless,
>> I'd know a few people who'd be interested. But lugging around drives or even
>> USB-keys with their media or a wired LAN looks like too cumbersome for most people.
>>
>> The fact that most don't play blu-ray also means they're not quite future-proof.
>> They may not have the money for expensive blu-ray now, but that may change.
>> Blu-ray discs already are getting cheaper (I've seen some for 10 euro's).
>> Besides, somewhere along the line home burned blu-ray will become as abundant as
>> DVD's. Unless it gets overtaken by USB, SD, flashcard or even cloud storage.
>
> What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never
> even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a
> HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.

There's plenty to be found here. I've even seen bargain bins at Aldi, Kruidvat 
and the likes. Most people understand buying a disk and putting it in something 
that basically looks like a CD or DVD player. For a low enough price, people 
will make the switch, especially if the perception is that they'll get better 
quality.

Having said that, if companies start an easy way to offer cheap HD downloadable 
or streaming content and get mind-share and market-share, Blu Ray is bust. I 
just don't see that happening yet. Blu Ray has got the jump on that market that 
still needs to be developped. I don't know of any Dutch Netflix.

>> MacOS is something I don't recommend. For one you're not supposed to make a
>> Hackintosh and buying straight from Apple is just way too expensive. Second, a
>> lot of stuff - mainly games - just don't work on Apple. It can be very
>> frustrating to find a PC game under the Christmas tree that does just what it
>> promises: it runs on a PC. Not a Mac. And then you have to explain a Apple is a
>> computer, but not a personal computer. Also a lot of school stuff has the same
>> problem. It'll work on a PC, but not an Apple.
>
> People should stop celebrating Christmas then! Or stop playing PC
> games! I believe there are Nintendo's and Xboxes for games.

You forgot Playstation. The problem lies with Apple though. They want to set 
themselves apart. Have control over a computer they consider theirs, not yours. 
A PC basically a separation between hardware, OS and software. This causes a lot 
of problems, but allows a lot more flexibility. Game consoles are even more 
closed than Apple. But then again they are much more single purpose, though 
they're becoming media/entertainment centers for the living room.

>> Oddly it is easier to explain to people that Linux, though it runs on a PC, is
>> NOT Windows compatible. Switching from Linux to Windows than from Apple to
>> Windows also seems to have a lower threshold. Which is logical. If you've spent
>> 2000 euro's on an Apple, you don't want to spend another 100 or more to put
>> Windows on it. If you buy a 300 euro Linux box, 'upgrading' to Windows doesn't
>> seem like such a disaster.
>
> Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!
>
Because you just bought 100 euros worth of PC software that turns out only to 
work with Windows, which some people don't know isn't the same as Linux or PC.

-- 
Danny.

"ervaqre" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message 
news:hit5p0$7er$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> DG is a mighty pirate...
>> The fact that most don't play blu-ray also means they're not quite 
>> future-proof.
>> They may not have the money for expensive blu-ray now, but that may 
>> change.
>> Blu-ray discs already are getting cheaper (I've seen some for 10 euro's).
>> Besides, somewhere along the line home burned blu-ray will become as 
>> abundant as
>> DVD's. Unless it gets overtaken by USB, SD, flashcard or even cloud 
>> storage.
>
> What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never
> even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a
> HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.

I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray.  It will go the way of the BetaMax.

>
>> MacOS is something I don't recommend. For one you're not supposed to make 
>> a
>> Hackintosh and buying straight from Apple is just way too expensive. 
>> Second, a
>> lot of stuff - mainly games - just don't work on Apple. It can be very
>> frustrating to find a PC game under the Christmas tree that does just 
>> what it
>> promises: it runs on a PC. Not a Mac. And then you have to explain a 
>> Apple is a
>> computer, but not a personal computer. Also a lot of school stuff has the 
>> same
>> problem. It'll work on a PC, but not an Apple.
>
> People should stop celebrating Christmas then! Or stop playing PC
> games! I believe there are Nintendo's and Xboxes for games.

I never used MacOS, or Apple anything.  The closest I came to Apple was an 
iPod Nano for my middle child.  Screw iPhones too - refuse to get one.  I'm 
not exactly thrilled with MS, but I'd rather stick with them until something 
else mainstream dazzles me enough to bother with it.  And I am still a 
console gamer.  =)

>
>> Oddly it is easier to explain to people that Linux, though it runs on a 
>> PC, is
>> NOT Windows compatible. Switching from Linux to Windows than from Apple 
>> to
>> Windows also seems to have a lower threshold. Which is logical. If you've 
>> spent
>> 2000 euro's on an Apple, you don't want to spend another 100 or more to 
>> put
>> Windows on it. If you buy a 300 euro Linux box, 'upgrading' to Windows 
>> doesn't
>> seem like such a disaster.
>
> Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!

My daughter's OS crashed and burned - XP home ed.  My (first) ex-husband put 
Linux on there to fix it (I thought he was going to put Windows back - I 
wasn't home, but *shrug*)....I had to explain to her about Linux and 
Windows.  It was almost like a birds and the bees chat. 

Op 20-1-2010 17:36, neppie schreef:
>>> The fact that most don't play blu-ray also means they're not quite
>>> future-proof.
>>> They may not have the money for expensive blu-ray now, but that may
>>> change.
>>> Blu-ray discs already are getting cheaper (I've seen some for 10
>>> euro's).
>>> Besides, somewhere along the line home burned blu-ray will become as
>>> abundant as
>>> DVD's. Unless it gets overtaken by USB, SD, flashcard or even cloud
>>> storage.
>>
>> What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never
>> even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a
>> HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.
>
> I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray. It will go the way of the BetaMax.

BetaMax was defeated by VHS. What's going to make Blu-Ray go the way of the 
dodo? Blu-Ray already beat out HD-DVD and other formats (Holographic Versatile 
Disc for one) haven't even made to stores in Europe or the USA. CBHD's 
reportedly are available in China or other Asian countries.

>>
>>> MacOS is something I don't recommend. For one you're not supposed to
>>> make a
>>> Hackintosh and buying straight from Apple is just way too expensive.
>>> Second, a
>>> lot of stuff - mainly games - just don't work on Apple. It can be very
>>> frustrating to find a PC game under the Christmas tree that does just
>>> what it
>>> promises: it runs on a PC. Not a Mac. And then you have to explain a
>>> Apple is a
>>> computer, but not a personal computer. Also a lot of school stuff has
>>> the same
>>> problem. It'll work on a PC, but not an Apple.
>>
>> People should stop celebrating Christmas then! Or stop playing PC
>> games! I believe there are Nintendo's and Xboxes for games.
>
> I never used MacOS, or Apple anything. The closest I came to Apple was
> an iPod Nano for my middle child. Screw iPhones too - refuse to get one.
> I'm not exactly thrilled with MS, but I'd rather stick with them until
> something else mainstream dazzles me enough to bother with it. And I am
> still a console gamer. =)

Chrome OS or Android anyone? Certainly Android for phones could do some damage 
to the iPhone. It is much more open, one of the main gripes about the iPhone.

Now if Google would do something in the console/media-center market.

>>> Oddly it is easier to explain to people that Linux, though it runs on
>>> a PC, is
>>> NOT Windows compatible. Switching from Linux to Windows than from
>>> Apple to
>>> Windows also seems to have a lower threshold. Which is logical. If
>>> you've spent
>>> 2000 euro's on an Apple, you don't want to spend another 100 or more
>>> to put
>>> Windows on it. If you buy a 300 euro Linux box, 'upgrading' to
>>> Windows doesn't
>>> seem like such a disaster.
>>
>> Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!
>
> My daughter's OS crashed and burned - XP home ed. My (first) ex-husband
> put Linux on there to fix it (I thought he was going to put Windows back
> - I wasn't home, but *shrug*)....I had to explain to her about Linux and
> Windows. It was almost like a birds and the bees chat.

When a computer and an OS love each other very much...

-- 
Danny.

"DG" <dammygerritsen@censored.zzn.com> wrote in message 
news:hj7d0d$3tg$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Op 20-1-2010 17:36, neppie schreef:

>>> What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never
>>> even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a
>>> HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.
>>
>> I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray. It will go the way of the BetaMax.
>
> BetaMax was defeated by VHS. What's going to make Blu-Ray go the way of 
> the dodo? Blu-Ray already beat out HD-DVD and other formats (Holographic 
> Versatile Disc for one) haven't even made to stores in Europe or the USA. 
> CBHD's reportedly are available in China or other Asian countries.

Something better is going to sweep the market eventually - maybe HVD, maybe 
not?  HD-DVD naturally went bye bye because people silly enough to buy 
Blu-Ray DID.
People in this economy are sticking with good old DVD players and $5 movie 
bins.  By the time the market picks up, Blu-Ray will be something people 
will be looking up on wikipedia.

>> I never used MacOS, or Apple anything. The closest I came to Apple was
>> an iPod Nano for my middle child. Screw iPhones too - refuse to get one.
>> I'm not exactly thrilled with MS, but I'd rather stick with them until
>> something else mainstream dazzles me enough to bother with it. And I am
>> still a console gamer. =)
>
> Chrome OS or Android anyone? Certainly Android for phones could do some 
> damage to the iPhone. It is much more open, one of the main gripes about 
> the iPhone.

noted!

>>> Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!
>>
>> My daughter's OS crashed and burned - XP home ed. My (first) ex-husband
>> put Linux on there to fix it (I thought he was going to put Windows back
>> - I wasn't home, but *shrug*)....I had to explain to her about Linux and
>> Windows. It was almost like a birds and the bees chat.
>
> When a computer and an OS love each other very much...

Hahaha...more like this works this way and this WON'T work this way. 

Op 20-1-2010 18:30, neppie schreef:
>>>> What makes you think blu-ray will become popular though? I have never
>>>> even seen a blu-ray disk in my entire life. These days you can get a
>>>> HD quality movie on the internet in just a few hours.
>>>
>>> I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray. It will go the way of the BetaMax.
>>
>> BetaMax was defeated by VHS. What's going to make Blu-Ray go the way
>> of the dodo? Blu-Ray already beat out HD-DVD and other formats
>> (Holographic Versatile Disc for one) haven't even made to stores in
>> Europe or the USA. CBHD's reportedly are available in China or other
>> Asian countries.
>
> Something better is going to sweep the market eventually - maybe HVD,
> maybe not? HD-DVD naturally went bye bye because people silly enough to
> buy Blu-Ray DID.

That one fries my brain. There's something illogical about it. The demise of 
HD-DVD was caused by the silly people that bought BR??? Surely it's because of 
the people that bought neither, keeping the market too small.

> People in this economy are sticking with good old DVD players and $5
> movie bins. By the time the market picks up, Blu-Ray will be something
> people will be looking up on wikipedia.

The only problem is that Blu-Ray is in the PS3 and every big movie release is on 
Blu-Ray. Often with added features. So hardcore movie fans will go for Blu-Ray. 
Especially since you get to hold the movie in your hands. A definite plus over 
streaming options.

>>> I never used MacOS, or Apple anything. The closest I came to Apple was
>>> an iPod Nano for my middle child. Screw iPhones too - refuse to get one.
>>> I'm not exactly thrilled with MS, but I'd rather stick with them until
>>> something else mainstream dazzles me enough to bother with it. And I am
>>> still a console gamer. =)
>>
>> Chrome OS or Android anyone? Certainly Android for phones could do
>> some damage to the iPhone. It is much more open, one of the main
>> gripes about the iPhone.
>
> noted!

There's an app for that.

>>>> Why would you want to switch to Windows from Linux? It is insanity!!!!
>>>
>>> My daughter's OS crashed and burned - XP home ed. My (first) ex-husband
>>> put Linux on there to fix it (I thought he was going to put Windows back
>>> - I wasn't home, but *shrug*)....I had to explain to her about Linux and
>>> Windows. It was almost like a birds and the bees chat.
>>
>> When a computer and an OS love each other very much...
>
> Hahaha...more like this works this way and this WON'T work this way.

Now that remark is ripe with innuendo as it is, so I'll pass.

When a computer and an OS love each other very much...
...they make lots of little blue screens/screams.

-- 
Danny.

"DG" <dammygerritsen@censored.zzn.com> wrote in message 
news:hj7nlh$krh$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Op 20-1-2010 18:30, neppie schreef:

>>>> I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray. It will go the way of the BetaMax.
>>>
>>> BetaMax was defeated by VHS. What's going to make Blu-Ray go the way
>>> of the dodo? Blu-Ray already beat out HD-DVD and other formats
>>> (Holographic Versatile Disc for one) haven't even made to stores in
>>> Europe or the USA. CBHD's reportedly are available in China or other
>>> Asian countries.
>>
>> Something better is going to sweep the market eventually - maybe HVD,
>> maybe not? HD-DVD naturally went bye bye because people silly enough to
>> buy Blu-Ray DID.
>
> That one fries my brain. There's something illogical about it. The demise 
> of HD-DVD was caused by the silly people that bought BR??? Surely it's 
> because of the people that bought neither, keeping the market too small.

DVD is cheap, and people bought more of those than anything (naturally).  BR 
and HD were more costly and required better equipment to play them.  The 
people that could afford newer technology and more pricey movies opted for 
BR - don't ask me, they just did!  I think BR was/is more trendy and more of 
a status thing.  Ohh, look at my Blu-Ray collection, aren't I cool?  Sort of 
thing.

>> People in this economy are sticking with good old DVD players and $5
>> movie bins. By the time the market picks up, Blu-Ray will be something
>> people will be looking up on wikipedia.
>
> The only problem is that Blu-Ray is in the PS3 and every big movie release 
> is on Blu-Ray. Often with added features. So hardcore movie fans will go 
> for Blu-Ray. Especially since you get to hold the movie in your hands. A 
> definite plus over streaming options.

I have a collection of movies (purchased, not pirated) of over 700 titles. 
I'd say that makes me a hardcore fan.  Add to that my Netflix membership.  I 
am not about to run out and buy a PS3 (more on that later) or any other type 
of player just to watch a movie.  Any new release for BR is also released in 
DVD format, with most, if not all, of the same extras.  The added features 
are usually extraneous BS.  Furthermore, any new releases on DVD wind up on 
sale, and then in the next month are usually in a $5 bin at Wal-Mart or sold 
for 3 or 4 dollars at bargain outlets - not seeing that with BR of course. 
Until they stop releasing DVD altogether, I don't see BR taking over, just 
for the fact that a movie junkie will take the cheapest fix when possible, 
and realizes that not ALL movies have to have a bunch of jazz.  There are 
VERY FEW that I will buy on or around the release date.  That's my 
rationale, anyway.  =)

And, I am not buying a PS3 until they make it completely backwards 
compatible with ALL of my titles, damn it.  I still have my original PS (and 
my yummy gameshark for it) and a PS2 - neither of which I purchased 
immediately either.  AAMOF, I returned my first PS and bought a Sega 
Genesis/32X instead.  The guy at the store thought I was nuts, but it was 
slow as molasses in January!  Then they fixed them, so I bought a new one.
 

Op 21-1-2010 13:49, neppie schreef:
>>>>> I refuse to purchase Blu-Ray. It will go the way of the BetaMax.
>>>>
>>>> BetaMax was defeated by VHS. What's going to make Blu-Ray go the way
>>>> of the dodo? Blu-Ray already beat out HD-DVD and other formats
>>>> (Holographic Versatile Disc for one) haven't even made to stores in
>>>> Europe or the USA. CBHD's reportedly are available in China or other
>>>> Asian countries.
>>>
>>> Something better is going to sweep the market eventually - maybe HVD,
>>> maybe not? HD-DVD naturally went bye bye because people silly enough to
>>> buy Blu-Ray DID.
>>
>> That one fries my brain. There's something illogical about it. The
>> demise of HD-DVD was caused by the silly people that bought BR???
>> Surely it's because of the people that bought neither, keeping the
>> market too small.
>
> DVD is cheap, and people bought more of those than anything (naturally).
> BR and HD were more costly and required better equipment to play them.
> The people that could afford newer technology and more pricey movies
> opted for BR - don't ask me, they just did! I think BR was/is more
> trendy and more of a status thing. Ohh, look at my Blu-Ray collection,
> aren't I cool? Sort of thing.

You can see the difference on a 55 inch plasma flatscreen. You can even feel it, 
in you pocket. Still, you can often also see that a lot of people don't get the 
best out of their setup. They've spent all that money and they connect up their 
Blu-Ray with a analogue connection instead of HDMI. If they do buy an HDMI 
cable, they end up paying 10 to even a 100 times what they should.

Same thing with computers. End up spending thousands on a gaming rig and within 
two years it's "obsolete". It's too slow. Never mind the 20 toolbars and other 
crapware.

>>> People in this economy are sticking with good old DVD players and $5
>>> movie bins. By the time the market picks up, Blu-Ray will be something
>>> people will be looking up on wikipedia.
>>
>> The only problem is that Blu-Ray is in the PS3 and every big movie
>> release is on Blu-Ray. Often with added features. So hardcore movie
>> fans will go for Blu-Ray. Especially since you get to hold the movie
>> in your hands. A definite plus over streaming options.
>
> I have a collection of movies (purchased, not pirated) of over 700
> titles. I'd say that makes me a hardcore fan. Add to that my Netflix
> membership. I am not about to run out and buy a PS3 (more on that later)
> or any other type of player just to watch a movie. Any new release for
> BR is also released in DVD format, with most, if not all, of the same
> extras. The added features are usually extraneous BS. Furthermore, any
> new releases on DVD wind up on sale, and then in the next month are
> usually in a $5 bin at Wal-Mart or sold for 3 or 4 dollars at bargain
> outlets - not seeing that with BR of course. Until they stop releasing
> DVD altogether, I don't see BR taking over, just for the fact that a
> movie junkie will take the cheapest fix when possible, and realizes that
> not ALL movies have to have a bunch of jazz. There are VERY FEW that I
> will buy on or around the release date. That's my rationale, anyway. =)

I've seen Blu-Rays as cheap as 10 euros, just a few months after release, not 
many though. Most DVD bargain bin stuff should go straight to the regular bin. 
There does seem to be a market for fans that want all that extra stuff. Why 
would people otherwise buy those collector's editions or two disc sets? Though 
I've seen people buy the two disc set Nemo and wonder why the cartoon is only on 
disc one.

It'll be a while before BR surpasses DVD. But I'm pretty sure it will happen, 
unless streaming/digital downloads or something along those lines really takes 
off. In the USA Netflix does seem a threat to Blu-Ray. Over here I don't see 
that happening.

For now BR is only for hardcore fans that want every extra, people that want the 
highest quality and people that have money to burn. That's not a majority. But 
it took DVD and CD years to get on top. As a matter of fact, I think the 
possibility of copying discs was what put those format on top. The moment people 
at home have blu-ray burners in their PC's and can copy those discs that market 
may actually take off.

> And, I am not buying a PS3 until they make it completely backwards
> compatible with ALL of my titles, damn it. I still have my original PS
> (and my yummy gameshark for it) and a PS2 - neither of which I purchased
> immediately either. AAMOF, I returned my first PS and bought a Sega
> Genesis/32X instead. The guy at the store thought I was nuts, but it was
> slow as molasses in January! Then they fixed them, so I bought a new one.
>
>
Never be on the bleeding edge, I agree. At least let it sit in the market for a 
year. If nothing weird (like 360's red ring of death) happens, you could go for 
it. PC parts the same thing. The kinks still aren't out of solid state drives. 
And they're still to expensive for the amount of data they can hold.

Still, the PS3 was a good choice if you wanted a Blu-Ray player and liked the 
idea of playing BR movies (Netflix also, I think). But now you've got BR players 
at a third of the price.

I wonder when the next generation of consoles is announced...

-- 
Danny.

"DG" <dammygerritsen@censored.zzn.com> wrote in message 
news:hjajdi$56c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Op 21-1-2010 13:49, neppie schreef:

>> DVD is cheap, and people bought more of those than anything (naturally).
>> BR and HD were more costly and required better equipment to play them.
>> The people that could afford newer technology and more pricey movies
>> opted for BR - don't ask me, they just did! I think BR was/is more
>> trendy and more of a status thing. Ohh, look at my Blu-Ray collection,
>> aren't I cool? Sort of thing.
>
> You can see the difference on a 55 inch plasma flatscreen. You can even 
> feel it, in you pocket. Still, you can often also see that a lot of people 
> don't get the best out of their setup. They've spent all that money and 
> they connect up their Blu-Ray with a analogue connection instead of HDMI. 
> If they do buy an HDMI cable, they end up paying 10 to even a 100 times 
> what they should.

I'm not keen on the plasma thing either.  Refuse to buy one.  I used to sell 
electronics, and the plasmas are crapola - nice picture, but no longevity 
and SO many problems - not to mention you don't wanna have one if you have 
young children in the house.  I have a 46" rear projection TV, which is 
nice - I will keep it til it dies.  Bought that a little before the mass 
hysteria over the LCD flat panels and the Plasma craze, but I would have 
went for an LCD if I had bought a TV later.  I have a nice little 22" LCD 
for my desktop, which was a free upgrade.  My other TVs are ancient, but at 
least they don't have a dial and rabbit ears with UHF and VHF....

The people that buy that crap and don't use the right cables are idiots. 
And yes, the prices at some places are way astronomical!  People don't 
compare prices or quality - drives me nuts.  I could never rip anyone off 
like that when I sold that junk.  BUT, I had a lot of repeat business 
because they trusted me!

> Same thing with computers. End up spending thousands on a gaming rig and 
> within two years it's "obsolete". It's too slow. Never mind the 20 
> toolbars and other crapware.

Same same.  Everyone calls me to fix their issues when the computer slows 
down or stops working, and it amazes me the junk people put on their 
computers!

>> I have a collection of movies (purchased, not pirated) of over 700
>> titles. I'd say that makes me a hardcore fan. Add to that my Netflix
>> membership. I am not about to run out and buy a PS3 (more on that later)
>> or any other type of player just to watch a movie. Any new release for
>> BR is also released in DVD format, with most, if not all, of the same
>> extras. The added features are usually extraneous BS. Furthermore, any
>> new releases on DVD wind up on sale, and then in the next month are
>> usually in a $5 bin at Wal-Mart or sold for 3 or 4 dollars at bargain
>> outlets - not seeing that with BR of course. Until they stop releasing
>> DVD altogether, I don't see BR taking over, just for the fact that a
>> movie junkie will take the cheapest fix when possible, and realizes that
>> not ALL movies have to have a bunch of jazz. There are VERY FEW that I
>> will buy on or around the release date. That's my rationale, anyway. =)
>
> I've seen Blu-Rays as cheap as 10 euros, just a few months after release, 
> not many though. Most DVD bargain bin stuff should go straight to the 
> regular bin. There does seem to be a market for fans that want all that 
> extra stuff. Why would people otherwise buy those collector's editions or 
> two disc sets? Though I've seen people buy the two disc set Nemo and 
> wonder why the cartoon is only on disc one.

I got a 2 disc special edition of Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the 
Black Pearl for $4.  Bwahahaha.  But that's just an example.  I'm sure you 
are getting the idea that I am quite a cheapskate.
Yeah, my Mother gets confused over 2 discs - even more so the ones with flip 
sides.

>> And, I am not buying a PS3 until they make it completely backwards
>> compatible with ALL of my titles, damn it. I still have my original PS
>> (and my yummy gameshark for it) and a PS2 - neither of which I purchased
>> immediately either. AAMOF, I returned my first PS and bought a Sega
>> Genesis/32X instead. The guy at the store thought I was nuts, but it was
>> slow as molasses in January! Then they fixed them, so I bought a new one.
>>
>>
> Never be on the bleeding edge, I agree. At least let it sit in the market 
> for a year. If nothing weird (like 360's red ring of death) happens, you 
> could go for it. PC parts the same thing. The kinks still aren't out of 
> solid state drives. And they're still to expensive for the amount of data 
> they can hold.

The baby got a 360 for Christmas (from his Dad).  So far, so good, but that 
was another craptastic idea.  Not a huge improvement over the old xbox - the 
old one works ok, but there's an issue on occasion.  My nephew has two 
doorstops however (both of his aren't working), so his GF bought him a 360 
for Christmas.
I'm just not a fan because of the game selection.  First person shooters and 
war games aren't quite my cup of tea.

> Still, the PS3 was a good choice if you wanted a Blu-Ray player and liked 
> the idea of playing BR movies (Netflix also, I think). But now you've got 
> BR players at a third of the price.

If I *were* to buy one, it would def be a gaming system (like PS3)  so I 
could get more out of it than just play movies.  They have to come down in 
price even more though.  ^_~
I can watch NF on the 360 too.  I hear they are starting NF for the Wii 
also - I will have to see what that looks like.  The Wii is such a little 
piece of junk, but the games are much more fun.  =)

>
> I wonder when the next generation of consoles is announced...

They are getting too crazy with consoles.  I think I am content for quite a 
while with what I have.  I still play my SNES. 

Op 22-1-2010 2:28, neppie schreef:
>>> DVD is cheap, and people bought more of those than anything (naturally).
>>> BR and HD were more costly and required better equipment to play them.
>>> The people that could afford newer technology and more pricey movies
>>> opted for BR - don't ask me, they just did! I think BR was/is more
>>> trendy and more of a status thing. Ohh, look at my Blu-Ray collection,
>>> aren't I cool? Sort of thing.
>>
>> You can see the difference on a 55 inch plasma flatscreen. You can
>> even feel it, in you pocket. Still, you can often also see that a lot
>> of people don't get the best out of their setup. They've spent all
>> that money and they connect up their Blu-Ray with a analogue
>> connection instead of HDMI. If they do buy an HDMI cable, they end up
>> paying 10 to even a 100 times what they should.
>
> I'm not keen on the plasma thing either. Refuse to buy one. I used to
> sell electronics, and the plasmas are crapola - nice picture, but no
> longevity and SO many problems - not to mention you don't wanna have one
> if you have young children in the house. I have a 46" rear projection
> TV, which is nice - I will keep it til it dies. Bought that a little
> before the mass hysteria over the LCD flat panels and the Plasma craze,
> but I would have went for an LCD if I had bought a TV later. I have a
> nice little 22" LCD for my desktop, which was a free upgrade. My other
> TVs are ancient, but at least they don't have a dial and rabbit ears
> with UHF and VHF....

Rear projection never took off here. Unless you mean mooning. I've hardly ever 
seen them. If they are around they're often rentals for bars and at special, 
local events.

LCD's are actually worse in image quality compared to plasma. Plasma's also have 
a much improved longevity compared to earlier models. Big bad is energy 
consumption. A LCD-LED is much more energy efficient than any plasma. Though 
even there plasma has improved a lot.

My TV is an 10 year old CRT, 55cm diagonal. I don't even use the digital cable 
box because it is crappy.

Why not have a plasma in the house if you've got rugrats?

> The people that buy that crap and don't use the right cables are idiots.
> And yes, the prices at some places are way astronomical! People don't
> compare prices or quality - drives me nuts. I could never rip anyone off
> like that when I sold that junk. BUT, I had a lot of repeat business
> because they trusted me!

Yes, but most people go buy a TV each year. Besides finding the same salesperson 
twice in a big box electronics store is quite a feat. With changing schedules 
and a high personnel turnover chances are customers won't find ya. Unless you 
know them personally.

Oh, and then there is the tiny matter of product knowledge. Sometimes 
salespersons don't even have to lie to get you to buy, they have to lie to cover 
up their lack of knowledge.

>> Same thing with computers. End up spending thousands on a gaming rig
>> and within two years it's "obsolete". It's too slow. Never mind the 20
>> toolbars and other crapware.
>
> Same same. Everyone calls me to fix their issues when the computer slows
> down or stops working, and it amazes me the junk people put on their
> computers!

And of course the Norton/Mcafee/Symantec stuff you get pre-installed and for 
which you need to download a special tool, otherwise it won't be properly removed.

>>> I have a collection of movies (purchased, not pirated) of over 700
>>> titles. I'd say that makes me a hardcore fan. Add to that my Netflix
>>> membership. I am not about to run out and buy a PS3 (more on that later)
>>> or any other type of player just to watch a movie. Any new release for
>>> BR is also released in DVD format, with most, if not all, of the same
>>> extras. The added features are usually extraneous BS. Furthermore, any
>>> new releases on DVD wind up on sale, and then in the next month are
>>> usually in a $5 bin at Wal-Mart or sold for 3 or 4 dollars at bargain
>>> outlets - not seeing that with BR of course. Until they stop releasing
>>> DVD altogether, I don't see BR taking over, just for the fact that a
>>> movie junkie will take the cheapest fix when possible, and realizes that
>>> not ALL movies have to have a bunch of jazz. There are VERY FEW that I
>>> will buy on or around the release date. That's my rationale, anyway. =)
>>
>> I've seen Blu-Rays as cheap as 10 euros, just a few months after
>> release, not many though. Most DVD bargain bin stuff should go
>> straight to the regular bin. There does seem to be a market for fans
>> that want all that extra stuff. Why would people otherwise buy those
>> collector's editions or two disc sets? Though I've seen people buy the
>> two disc set Nemo and wonder why the cartoon is only on disc one.
>
> I got a 2 disc special edition of Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the
> Black Pearl for $4. Bwahahaha. But that's just an example. I'm sure you
> are getting the idea that I am quite a cheapskate.
> Yeah, my Mother gets confused over 2 discs - even more so the ones with
> flip sides.

How the heck? Special editions? Someone must have made some boo boo when 
ordering 10.000 discs too many.

>>> And, I am not buying a PS3 until they make it completely backwards
>>> compatible with ALL of my titles, damn it. I still have my original PS
>>> (and my yummy gameshark for it) and a PS2 - neither of which I purchased
>>> immediately either. AAMOF, I returned my first PS and bought a Sega
>>> Genesis/32X instead. The guy at the store thought I was nuts, but it was
>>> slow as molasses in January! Then they fixed them, so I bought a new
>>> one.
>>>
>>>
>> Never be on the bleeding edge, I agree. At least let it sit in the
>> market for a year. If nothing weird (like 360's red ring of death)
>> happens, you could go for it. PC parts the same thing. The kinks still
>> aren't out of solid state drives. And they're still to expensive for
>> the amount of data they can hold.
>
> The baby got a 360 for Christmas (from his Dad). So far, so good, but
> that was another craptastic idea. Not a huge improvement over the old
> xbox - the old one works ok, but there's an issue on occasion. My nephew
> has two doorstops however (both of his aren't working), so his GF bought
> him a 360 for Christmas.
> I'm just not a fan because of the game selection. First person shooters
> and war games aren't quite my cup of tea.

I've never even considered a X-box. Certainly not the 360. Game selection, price 
and all kind of problems the thing seems to have. Also, I just don't get on-line 
gaming.

>> Still, the PS3 was a good choice if you wanted a Blu-Ray player and
>> liked the idea of playing BR movies (Netflix also, I think). But now
>> you've got BR players at a third of the price.
>
> If I *were* to buy one, it would def be a gaming system (like PS3) so I
> could get more out of it than just play movies. They have to come down
> in price even more though. ^_~
> I can watch NF on the 360 too. I hear they are starting NF for the Wii
> also - I will have to see what that looks like. The Wii is such a little
> piece of junk, but the games are much more fun. =)

I didn't understand why they all wanted that little inferior thing. Until I saw 
grannies and grandchildren enjoy themselves and look quite silly. It's the same 
idea as flash games. Keep it simple, stupid.

>>
>> I wonder when the next generation of consoles is announced...
>
> They are getting too crazy with consoles. I think I am content for quite
> a while with what I have. I still play my SNES.

I haven't revisited my Atari 2600 for quite a while. 10 years easily.

-- 
Danny.

"DG" <dammygerritsen@censored.zzn.com> wrote in message 
news:hjc39o$i90$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Op 22-1-2010 2:28, neppie schreef:

>> I'm not keen on the plasma thing either. Refuse to buy one. I used to
>> sell electronics, and the plasmas are crapola - nice picture, but no
>> longevity and SO many problems - not to mention you don't wanna have one
>> if you have young children in the house. I have a 46" rear projection
>> TV, which is nice - I will keep it til it dies. Bought that a little
>> before the mass hysteria over the LCD flat panels and the Plasma craze,
>> but I would have went for an LCD if I had bought a TV later. I have a
>> nice little 22" LCD for my desktop, which was a free upgrade. My other
>> TVs are ancient, but at least they don't have a dial and rabbit ears
>> with UHF and VHF....
>
> Rear projection never took off here. Unless you mean mooning. I've hardly 
> ever seen them. If they are around they're often rentals for bars and at 
> special, local events.

The front projection TVs never took off here.  I remember seeing them in 
stores when I was younger and thinking how strange they were.  Rear 
projection had quite a bit of popularity.
We had a rather elaborate TV in a Victorian style "cabinet" at my Mother's. 
It was a Zenith, back when Zenith made decent TVs, and lasted forever.

>
> LCD's are actually worse in image quality compared to plasma. Plasma's 
> also have a much improved longevity compared to earlier models. Big bad is 
> energy consumption. A LCD-LED is much more energy efficient than any 
> plasma. Though even there plasma has improved a lot.

Plasmas do have a better picture, but they are still not a good buy for the 
money.  Actually, they sort of failed around here.  The earlier ones were so 
bad AND pricey that it turned people off on them altogether, and the LCD 
sales just took off.  If you were to walk into a major store here, you would 
see a huge variety of LCD and only a few plasma - and they are usually the 
very small ones for trendy people to have in their bathrooms.

>
> My TV is an 10 year old CRT, 55cm diagonal. I don't even use the digital 
> cable box because it is crappy.

Side story:  My mother was doing a crossword puzzle and asked me "what is a 
3 letter TV part", and she had three of the letters!!  This was yesterday.

>
> Why not have a plasma in the house if you've got rugrats?

With kids, accidents happen!

I came across this:

http://www.plasmafix.com/plasma.php
If you look at the first problem - the broken screen....yeah...kids did that 
I bet!  Or some rageaholic like my ex.
My ex husband smashed the screen on my rear projection TV, clean through, 
and I ordered the parts and repaired it myself.  A plasma wouldn't have 
lasted 2 seconds with him, either.

> Yes, but most people go buy a TV each year. Besides finding the same 
> salesperson twice in a big box electronics store is quite a feat. With 
> changing schedules and a high personnel turnover chances are customers 
> won't find ya. Unless you know them personally.

What planet do you live in that people can afford a new TV each year?  =) 
I'd say about 5 - 10 years!  Three if they are geeks who have to have new 
technology!
I'm not sure how sales are done where you are, but I assume they are pretty 
much the same everywhere?  The salesperson gets to know the people they sell 
to, and the people come back and ask for particular salespeople.  Especially 
if sales are commission based - then you take your customer's personal 
information and actually call them and mail things to them.  Customer 
retention.  So, in a way one does get to know most of them personally.  If 
they come in for a TV, then they will come back for many other things if the 
experience was pleasant - and I've never had any complaints.  ^_~


>
> Oh, and then there is the tiny matter of product knowledge. Sometimes 
> salespersons don't even have to lie to get you to buy, they have to lie to 
> cover up their lack of knowledge.

I've seen both, actually, and it sickens me.  When the HD stuff started 
rearing its head, in particular.  I SAW and HEARD my co workers lying to 
people just to make sales - "yes, this TV is HD ready" (oh, that blatant lie 
really stuck with me, and still irks me to this day), and others who would 
just fudge things because they were completely inept.  The sad thing is, 
that people who bought those TVs had NO CLUE they were lied to because HD 
hadn't really become a "thing" yet, and by the time everything was becoming 
HD, it was too late to make a return, or even bother with it.  I could go on 
for days about things I have seen.  Commission is cut throat, needless to 
say.

>> Same same. Everyone calls me to fix their issues when the computer slows
>> down or stops working, and it amazes me the junk people put on their
>> computers!
>
> And of course the Norton/Mcafee/Symantec stuff you get pre-installed and 
> for which you need to download a special tool, otherwise it won't be 
> properly removed.

My laptop has McAfee on it from the manufacturer, and I just haven't felt 
like dealing with removing it.  Call me lazy.  I have no need for such 
things, but there are some people who need things done for them - but I 
digress.  I can see why they are still popular for protection (I use that 
word loosely).
I want to shoot my TV every time I see a commercial for finallyfast.com, 
too!  *bangs head on desk*

>> I got a 2 disc special edition of Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the
>> Black Pearl for $4. Bwahahaha. But that's just an example. I'm sure you
>> are getting the idea that I am quite a cheapskate.
>> Yeah, my Mother gets confused over 2 discs - even more so the ones with
>> flip sides.
>
> How the heck? Special editions? Someone must have made some boo boo when 
> ordering 10.000 discs too many.

w00t!  Yeah!  I find them all the time!  There's a lot of bargain outlets 
here.

>> The baby got a 360 for Christmas (from his Dad). So far, so good, but
>> that was another craptastic idea. Not a huge improvement over the old
>> xbox - the old one works ok, but there's an issue on occasion. My nephew
>> has two doorstops however (both of his aren't working), so his GF bought
>> him a 360 for Christmas.
>> I'm just not a fan because of the game selection. First person shooters
>> and war games aren't quite my cup of tea.
>
> I've never even considered a X-box. Certainly not the 360. Game selection, 
> price and all kind of problems the thing seems to have. Also, I just don't 
> get on-line gaming.
>

Yep yep, agreed.  I don't do the online thingy either.
I did play Animal Crossing for Wii with WiiSpeak, and visit other towns, but 
that was a craptastic experience as well.  Cute, but uneventful, really. 
And kind of a pain.

>> If I *were* to buy one, it would def be a gaming system (like PS3) so I
>> could get more out of it than just play movies. They have to come down
>> in price even more though. ^_~
>> I can watch NF on the 360 too. I hear they are starting NF for the Wii
>> also - I will have to see what that looks like. The Wii is such a little
>> piece of junk, but the games are much more fun. =)
>
> I didn't understand why they all wanted that little inferior thing. Until 
> I saw grannies and grandchildren enjoy themselves and look quite silly. 
> It's the same idea as flash games. Keep it simple, stupid.

So true.
It's funny as hell to watch people on the Wii Fit - hula hooping, 
especially.  I have blackmail videos...mwuahahahahaa.


>>> I wonder when the next generation of consoles is announced...
>>
>> They are getting too crazy with consoles. I think I am content for quite
>> a while with what I have. I still play my SNES.
>
> I haven't revisited my Atari 2600 for quite a while. 10 years easily.

I had a Coleco with the Atari adapter when I was a kid.  I purchased another 
some time ago, and I haven't played it in a while either.  I think I will. 
*going to get my Centipede and Roller Controller* 

Op 22-1-2010 18:28, neppie schreef:
>>> I'm not keen on the plasma thing either. Refuse to buy one. I used to
>>> sell electronics, and the plasmas are crapola - nice picture, but no
>>> longevity and SO many problems - not to mention you don't wanna have one
>>> if you have young children in the house. I have a 46" rear projection
>>> TV, which is nice - I will keep it til it dies. Bought that a little
>>> before the mass hysteria over the LCD flat panels and the Plasma craze,
>>> but I would have went for an LCD if I had bought a TV later. I have a
>>> nice little 22" LCD for my desktop, which was a free upgrade. My other
>>> TVs are ancient, but at least they don't have a dial and rabbit ears
>>> with UHF and VHF....
>>
>> Rear projection never took off here. Unless you mean mooning. I've
>> hardly ever seen them. If they are around they're often rentals for
>> bars and at special, local events.
>
> The front projection TVs never took off here. I remember seeing them in
> stores when I was younger and thinking how strange they were. Rear
> projection had quite a bit of popularity.
> We had a rather elaborate TV in a Victorian style "cabinet" at my
> Mother's. It was a Zenith, back when Zenith made decent TVs, and lasted
> forever.

Beamers, front projection displays, are not too common around here. Usually to 
be found in board rooms, lecture rooms and the likes. Rarely at someone's home.

I haven't seen a cabinet style TV, well ever. Except on TV or in museums. We did 
have one with faux wood paneling. Zenith isn't a common name here. I even think 
I only know about it from American TV. I think I know the logo. It has something 
of a lightning in the Z.

>>
>> LCD's are actually worse in image quality compared to plasma. Plasma's
>> also have a much improved longevity compared to earlier models. Big
>> bad is energy consumption. A LCD-LED is much more energy efficient
>> than any plasma. Though even there plasma has improved a lot.
>
> Plasmas do have a better picture, but they are still not a good buy for
> the money. Actually, they sort of failed around here. The earlier ones
> were so bad AND pricey that it turned people off on them altogether, and
> the LCD sales just took off. If you were to walk into a major store
> here, you would see a huge variety of LCD and only a few plasma - and
> they are usually the very small ones for trendy people to have in their
> bathrooms.

Same is true here. The plasma's win on size. If you want to, you can buy a huge 
TV at MediaMarkt for over 50.000 euro. I'm pretty sure that's a plasma.

Recently it turned out that the most popular TV size is 36 inches. It has 
something to do with the furniture and the cabinet. Now that's bigger than most 
oldfashioned CRT's were. Yet the one celling point these things have is size. 
LCD, LCD-LED, plasma or the ones coming up like OLED or laser, all offer the 
promise of huge (and thin) screens.

>> My TV is an 10 year old CRT, 55cm diagonal. I don't even use the
>> digital cable box because it is crappy.
>
> Side story: My mother was doing a crossword puzzle and asked me "what is
> a 3 letter TV part", and she had three of the letters!! This was yesterday.

Did she understand the concept of a cathode ray tube?

>>
>> Why not have a plasma in the house if you've got rugrats?
>
> With kids, accidents happen!
>
> I came across this:
>
> http://www.plasmafix.com/plasma.php
> If you look at the first problem - the broken screen....yeah...kids did
> that I bet! Or some rageaholic like my ex.
> My ex husband smashed the screen on my rear projection TV, clean
> through, and I ordered the parts and repaired it myself. A plasma
> wouldn't have lasted 2 seconds with him, either.

But that problem isn't plasma specific. Higher wall mounting could help, at 
least against kiddy-fingers. Just don't place a climbable cabinet underneath. As 
a baby I used to climb drawers to get to the bananas. Somewhere there are some 
awfully cute black and white photo's of me doing so.

>> Yes, but most people go buy a TV each year. Besides finding the same
>> salesperson twice in a big box electronics store is quite a feat. With
>> changing schedules and a high personnel turnover chances are customers
>> won't find ya. Unless you know them personally.
>
> What planet do you live in that people can afford a new TV each year? =)
> I'd say about 5 - 10 years! Three if they are geeks who have to have new
> technology!

Aaargh!!! Where did the "don't" go??? The point was that people don't often buy 
a TV and probably don't remember or can't find the same person they dealt with 
last time. On top of that they stand a good chance they're shopping at an other 
store with a good deal at that time.

> I'm not sure how sales are done where you are, but I assume they are
> pretty much the same everywhere? The salesperson gets to know the people
> they sell to, and the people come back and ask for particular
> salespeople. Especially if sales are commission based - then you take
> your customer's personal information and actually call them and mail
> things to them. Customer retention. So, in a way one does get to know
> most of them personally. If they come in for a TV, then they will come
> back for many other things if the experience was pleasant - and I've
> never had any complaints. ^_~

Never done that. I've never asked for a certain salesperson and I don't even 
think I know anyone who did that, at least not for TV's and such. Unless it was 
a complaint.

I'm used to the idea that you won't find the same salesperson twice.

>
>>
>> Oh, and then there is the tiny matter of product knowledge. Sometimes
>> salespersons don't even have to lie to get you to buy, they have to
>> lie to cover up their lack of knowledge.
>
> I've seen both, actually, and it sickens me. When the HD stuff started
> rearing its head, in particular. I SAW and HEARD my co workers lying to
> people just to make sales - "yes, this TV is HD ready" (oh, that blatant
> lie really stuck with me, and still irks me to this day), and others who
> would just fudge things because they were completely inept. The sad
> thing is, that people who bought those TVs had NO CLUE they were lied to
> because HD hadn't really become a "thing" yet, and by the time
> everything was becoming HD, it was too late to make a return, or even
> bother with it. I could go on for days about things I have seen.
> Commission is cut throat, needless to say.

I don't think there are a lot of commission sales over here. Maybe a bonus on 
top of your regular wage. Though tipping waitresses is done over here, it 
doesn't seem to be the bulk of the pay. It seems to be the other way around in 
the US from what I've heard.

Sales persons don't tend to swamp you in most electronics stores. The only place 
where I've gotten down right irritated by pushy sales persons were fashion 
boutiques. Being stopped three times to ask if I could be helped before reaching 
the back of the store was my breaking point. It prompted me to turn straight 
around even before getting to the men's section.

>>> Same same. Everyone calls me to fix their issues when the computer slows
>>> down or stops working, and it amazes me the junk people put on their
>>> computers!
>>
>> And of course the Norton/Mcafee/Symantec stuff you get pre-installed
>> and for which you need to download a special tool, otherwise it won't
>> be properly removed.
>
> My laptop has McAfee on it from the manufacturer, and I just haven't
> felt like dealing with removing it. Call me lazy. I have no need for
> such things, but there are some people who need things done for them -
> but I digress. I can see why they are still popular for protection (I
> use that word loosely).
> I want to shoot my TV every time I see a commercial for ,
> too! *bangs head on desk*

Oh, dear. That company looks like one of those "your PC may be infected" pop-ups.

I always tell people to get AVG free antivirus. It's as good and free.
>
>>> I got a 2 disc special edition of Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the
>>> Black Pearl for $4. Bwahahaha. But that's just an example. I'm sure you
>>> are getting the idea that I am quite a cheapskate.
>>> Yeah, my Mother gets confused over 2 discs - even more so the ones with
>>> flip sides.
>>
>> How the heck? Special editions? Someone must have made some boo boo
>> when ordering 10.000 discs too many.
>
> w00t! Yeah! I find them all the time! There's a lot of bargain outlets
> here.

The "someone messed up again so we got it cheap" stores. 99ct stores with 
weirdly named stuff or misprints. I used to live near a horse breeding company 
called "Horses Associated". But that's a bit big for a sign. So it got 
abbreviated to "Horses ass." Seriously. Another one is a bathroom company called 
"Bad Decor". It makes some sense in Dutch: bath decorations. Another one is a 
cereal called "Honey Hitters".

>>> The baby got a 360 for Christmas (from his Dad). So far, so good, but
>>> that was another craptastic idea. Not a huge improvement over the old
>>> xbox - the old one works ok, but there's an issue on occasion. My nephew
>>> has two doorstops however (both of his aren't working), so his GF bought
>>> him a 360 for Christmas.
>>> I'm just not a fan because of the game selection. First person shooters
>>> and war games aren't quite my cup of tea.
>>
>> I've never even considered a X-box. Certainly not the 360. Game
>> selection, price and all kind of problems the thing seems to have.
>> Also, I just don't get on-line gaming.
>>
>
> Yep yep, agreed. I don't do the online thingy either.
> I did play Animal Crossing for Wii with WiiSpeak, and visit other towns,
> but that was a craptastic experience as well. Cute, but uneventful,
> really. And kind of a pain.

I'm just too antisocial.

>>> If I *were* to buy one, it would def be a gaming system (like PS3) so I
>>> could get more out of it than just play movies. They have to come down
>>> in price even more though. ^_~
>>> I can watch NF on the 360 too. I hear they are starting NF for the Wii
>>> also - I will have to see what that looks like. The Wii is such a little
>>> piece of junk, but the games are much more fun. =)
>>
>> I didn't understand why they all wanted that little inferior thing.
>> Until I saw grannies and grandchildren enjoy themselves and look quite
>> silly. It's the same idea as flash games. Keep it simple, stupid.
>
> So true.
> It's funny as hell to watch people on the Wii Fit - hula hooping,
> especially. I have blackmail videos...mwuahahahahaa.

Blackmail videos can come in very handy in a divorce.

>>>> I wonder when the next generation of consoles is announced...
>>>
>>> They are getting too crazy with consoles. I think I am content for quite
>>> a while with what I have. I still play my SNES.
>>
>> I haven't revisited my Atari 2600 for quite a while. 10 years easily.
>
> I had a Coleco with the Atari adapter when I was a kid. I purchased
> another some time ago, and I haven't played it in a while either. I
> think I will. *going to get my Centipede and Roller Controller*

I liked the Coleco, but there were too few games for it, though they looked 
better. There were over a 150 for the Atari. So it was an easy choice then. I 
even got that "Pac-Man Fever" song with it.

-- 
Danny.