I don't think it cost a lot more to make one of those screens based on what I've seen (I could be wrong). I think the main thing keeping the cost high right now is lack of demand, and the fact that the only people using them right now are large companies (they know they can charge an arm and a leg and get away with it).Onix said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is the Blu-ray format dying?
- Thread starter Guybrush Threepwood
- Start date
- Status
Onix said:
We could argue over personal definitions of "expensive" all night and day, but the reality is without good quality audio reproduction, the difference in compressed DTS and lossless is isn't recognizable. Average speakers will muddy the sound enough that it won't make a difference. The average consumer will not be able to tell the difference, and the average consumer is the key here; not audiophiles.
As for your other point on the CD/MP3 comparison, I will simply say I disagree. There is no technical limitation that would cause a CD to sound worse than any other means of stereo sound reproduction. It is uncompressed 2 channel audio. That was the comparison I was using against MP3, and as I said early, the average consumer still can't even be bothered to notice a difference between that and an MP3.
Seth C said:
You can get good sounding receivers ~$400 or less that support it.
I disagree, though I suppose it matters what you mean by average.
The fact its using 16-bit samples at 44.1Khz makes it sound worse. Uncompressed != uncompressed when talking about different bit-depths and sample frequency.
BoboBrazil
Member
As far as the 3d thing, The Polar Express 3-D blu-ray was released this week. It comes with 4 pairs of 3d glasses too. So 3-d blu-ray is a reality...
BoboBrazil
Member
Onix said:
Yeah I know, but it is out there for people who want it...
polyh3dron
Banned
Holy Chicken Little Batman.
Mr. Durden
Banned
It doesn't even require such a big screen. Even on my 26"tv I use as a monitor 720p looks way better than a DVD.polyh3dron said:
And on the 40" screen downstairs... well even the thought of comparing a DVD to a 1080p blu-ray is absurd.
As for the blu-ray players themselves, there are still some issues. While the prices drop very fast, around 200-220 these days, they all still kinda suck. They're really slow for starters, and are really sensitive.
Woo-Fu
Banned
Did you say blu-ray? for some reason I heard "laser-disc".
The format is not dying, it is just a matter of the industry... and perhaps more importantly the early-adopters realizing that blu-ray is never going to be mass-market, never going to replace the $50 dvd player and $15 movies the masses currently enjoy.
It is the same mistake once again, the mistake of not offering enough to make wholesale conversion worthwhile. VHS to DVD was a massive upgrade, both in quality and durability, blu-ray/HD-DVD are a) relatively minor upgrades and b) the best of the new format(s) cannot be experienced without significant outlay for hardware.
Honestly, this has just been a wild goose chase fomented by the motion picture industry in an effort to give you(us) a reason to repurchase the library of content we already own.
IMHO, the best thing that will come out of it is the blu-ray coating that is near-impervious to scratches. Put that on DVD, charge royalties for it and whomever came up with it will reap untold rewards.
The format is not dying, it is just a matter of the industry... and perhaps more importantly the early-adopters realizing that blu-ray is never going to be mass-market, never going to replace the $50 dvd player and $15 movies the masses currently enjoy.
It is the same mistake once again, the mistake of not offering enough to make wholesale conversion worthwhile. VHS to DVD was a massive upgrade, both in quality and durability, blu-ray/HD-DVD are a) relatively minor upgrades and b) the best of the new format(s) cannot be experienced without significant outlay for hardware.
Honestly, this has just been a wild goose chase fomented by the motion picture industry in an effort to give you(us) a reason to repurchase the library of content we already own.
IMHO, the best thing that will come out of it is the blu-ray coating that is near-impervious to scratches. Put that on DVD, charge royalties for it and whomever came up with it will reap untold rewards.
Ash Sparrow
Banned
Unwanted, unneeded we've always been mistreated
I agree that Blu-Ray isn't going to die. The main problem is that not only is the player too expensive, but movies as well. $30 for one disc is a lot of money, especially when you can get 3 dvds for that price. Lower it to $20 and disc sales will improve.
The biggest advantage Blu-Ray has is that it has the optimal video and sound capabilities. 1080P won't be exceeded, because for most set sizes that people buy, anything beyond it is irrelevant. A lot of people don't even have 5.1 set-ups, so 7.1 is overkill.
When people finally start stepping up and buying HD tvs, they are going to eventually want to start feeding it HD content. They will have two choices. Either the web, or disc... And Blu-Ray is the established disc format.
I think Digital distribution and Blu-Ray can coexist, but DD has too many of its own problems to completely serve the HD video market.
1. Bandwidth. ISPs are starting to cap bandwidth, so downloading tons of HD movies or streaming them isn't feasible.
2. Portability. It's simply much more convenient if you want to take your movies anywhere.
3. Hard drives. Some people have over a thousand movies, so imagine trying to dael with stuffing that many HD movies on a hard drive. It'll be a problem.
4. Purchasing in bunches. If you want to buy several movies at once, it is much more convenient to go to the store and pick up several discs as opposed to waiting for all those movies to download.
I actually believe they are complementing technologies as opposed to having a situation where one MUST dominate.
The biggest advantage Blu-Ray has is that it has the optimal video and sound capabilities. 1080P won't be exceeded, because for most set sizes that people buy, anything beyond it is irrelevant. A lot of people don't even have 5.1 set-ups, so 7.1 is overkill.
When people finally start stepping up and buying HD tvs, they are going to eventually want to start feeding it HD content. They will have two choices. Either the web, or disc... And Blu-Ray is the established disc format.
I think Digital distribution and Blu-Ray can coexist, but DD has too many of its own problems to completely serve the HD video market.
1. Bandwidth. ISPs are starting to cap bandwidth, so downloading tons of HD movies or streaming them isn't feasible.
2. Portability. It's simply much more convenient if you want to take your movies anywhere.
3. Hard drives. Some people have over a thousand movies, so imagine trying to dael with stuffing that many HD movies on a hard drive. It'll be a problem.
4. Purchasing in bunches. If you want to buy several movies at once, it is much more convenient to go to the store and pick up several discs as opposed to waiting for all those movies to download.
I actually believe they are complementing technologies as opposed to having a situation where one MUST dominate.
TerryLee81
Member
Blu-Ray movies cost about twice as much as the same movie on DVD (at least in Europe), I think that's the main problem.
dk_ said:
I don't think blu-ray is that mindblowing at all. Upscaled dvds looks almost good as BDs to me. Of course bad dvd releases looks like crap when upscaled but bad BD releases don't look too good either.
I got sucked in to the BD hype but after many movies I just don't see such a big difference between BD and DVD. If I freez frame the picture then I notice new details and such but normally I don't notice any of these details while watching movies.
I buy BD movies if get them cheap but DVD is again my main format for movies.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
MidiSurf said:
Hate to use an oft used cliche, but you're doing it wrong.
If blu-ray to you looks similar to an upscaled DVD... similar to the point it doesn't matter, then you may need a better HT (which understandably not everyone can afford, nor is everyone's priority), or better eyes, or better ears, or simply less hyperbole and more objectivity.
Because the objective differences are there and they are large. But your condition will certainly vary upon a number of factors that have caused you to percieve less of a difference then there should be.
TheHeretic
Banned
Crayon Shinchan said:
How much better a Blu Ray disc looks to an upscaled dvd depends on a number of factors, including the movie, the television quality, the television size, the viewing distance and so on.
Its a perfectly valid perception for that person to not experience much of a difference, and that only highlights the biggest problem with the format. Telling people they are "doing it wrong" isn't doing anyone any favours, because as consumers their opinion is as valid as yours.
Bluray seems to have a bad timing curse. Competes with HD-DVD, wins, and then the economy tanks and the movies on demand technology is improved. To watch a recent high definition movie one time costs $5-$7 on cable and $25-$30 if you buy the bluray disk. Unless you just want to keep it and watch it several more times, majority of folks are going to want to save the $20.
I never really saw the difference too well from 720p. I read that that isnt uncommon
I guess I'd really have to sit down and spend some time with a Blu Ray movie to be sure, but I dont care. Diminishing returns and such just make it seem trivial to me. The differences seem minor in my experience, but apparently my 20/20 vision is wrong.
I'm more concerned with getting a TV that features better picture than a TV and movie player that will bump up my resolution one more notch.
I'm downloading and streaming over half of what I watch now between netflix, xbox and various network websites.
I guess I'd really have to sit down and spend some time with a Blu Ray movie to be sure, but I dont care. Diminishing returns and such just make it seem trivial to me. The differences seem minor in my experience, but apparently my 20/20 vision is wrong.
I'm more concerned with getting a TV that features better picture than a TV and movie player that will bump up my resolution one more notch.
I'm downloading and streaming over half of what I watch now between netflix, xbox and various network websites.
Crayon Shinchan
Aquafina Fanboy
TheHeretic said:
We both have similar points; yes, the ability to percieve the differences between the two formats does depend on those factors you've listed and a few others.
I'm quite cognizant of the fact that the barrier to entry for a good viewing of Blu-ray remains high, and it's one of the factors that will slow its adoption relative to DVD from VHS.
I am however saying that, objectively speaking, with decent equipment, you should be able to percieve a pretty large difference between BD and upscaled DVD. The only problem then becomes one of report; whether or not the individual that sees the difference reports to himself that its a large or a small difference. But that's another discussion entirely.
For me, on a personal level... I've convinced myself of buying Blu-rays, simply because I believe it to be the definitive home version of a film once released (ignoring special editions), which means once bought on Blu-ray, doesn't need to be rebought in another format.
Of course, the high prices still stop me from buying too many!
But buying the DVD now for half the BD price would irk me, as when the BD version is half the price of what it is now... I'll feel inclined to pick it up then... and in the end, I'll have spent as much as I have buying 2 copies of one movie, as I would have buying the BD back then.
It would just mean extra space and materials wasted.
Mr. Durden
Banned
It doesn't even matter how big your TV is. You're either just full of shit, or are in serious need for an eye check. The differences not only rely on sharper images, but on better colours, better sound, better everything. Just watch one movie in DVD, and Blu-ray, side by side, the difference is huge. Of course, if you've got a big screen, the comparison is not needed, cuz you should see it right away.MidiSurf said:
dk_ said:
Doesn't matter. This is the problem. People don't have tv sets to see the difference.
Don't you guys think there is a problem when people think that Blu-Ray is not that much better than upscaled-dvd's (barf)?
I refuse to even watch normal tv shows in SD. The rare times I do watch tv I stay within the HD cable block.
Woo-Fu
Banned
kevm3 said:
Yes, it did, it even had decent pricing for the intelligent shopper.
I agree with what you're saying, just don't see it solving the br adoption problem short term.
By the time the problems you've presented are fixed I think that direct distribtution---view on demand---wil be there for a very significant portion of the market.
Physical media is DEAD. Not now, but within our lifetimes, it is just a matter of time.
...and hey, i love having a bd disc to put im my pocket that won't scratch and can be played everywhere, but I'm not a movie/music mogul who wants to license his product ad infinitum.
We are slowly, but surely re-transitioning to central-server-based computing. The CS/IT geeks in the group will understand what I'm saying. The days of "ownership" are over, the days of licensing that much stronger.
Adapt and thrive, or deny and die.
Mr. Durden
Banned
Dude I'm even using a 26" screen and I see the difference right away, are you being serious?suffah said:
Woo-Fu
Banned
...and hey, the resolution differences are obvious, they cannot be denied.
Thing is, in terms of a cinematic experience is the resolution increase really that important? I don't think so.
I'll still rank Pulp Fiction in SD over From Dusk Till Dawn in HD.
In the obvious argument of of PF in SD versus HD? HD is somewhat better but the meat, the heart, the passion of the movie comes through in SD, HD... hell it would come through in CGA if somebody bothered to downconvert.
Thing is, in terms of a cinematic experience is the resolution increase really that important? I don't think so.
I'll still rank Pulp Fiction in SD over From Dusk Till Dawn in HD.
In the obvious argument of of PF in SD versus HD? HD is somewhat better but the meat, the heart, the passion of the movie comes through in SD, HD... hell it would come through in CGA if somebody bothered to downconvert.
Dirtyshubb
Member
I will be honest, i have yet to buy a BD but have gone to befor e (been out of stock whenever i have ) but i have got a lot of downloaded tv shows/films in 720/1080p and even from a download it looks so much better than DVD. The most noticable thing for me is the colour, when i first watched a hd film/show it really hit me how much more vibrant the colours were and how sharp the picture is. I am going over the top by saying this but it was almost as much as a jump as black and white to colour was, thats how much it stood out.I dont have a surround sound system anymore but do hope to get one soon and im sure its only going to make it that much more impressive.
On a final note i personally think that we should just wait to see how The Dark Knight does when it comes out on BD as over here in the uk it is going on sale on day 1 for £15!!! Now that is cheaper than some dvd's are when they first come out. I really think it is going to sell like made on Blu Ray and could actually kick start a price reduction on the rest of new releases once the companies see how well it can sell if the price is right.
) but i have got a lot of downloaded tv shows/films in 720/1080p and even from a download it looks so much better than DVD. The most noticable thing for me is the colour, when i first watched a hd film/show it really hit me how much more vibrant the colours were and how sharp the picture is. I am going over the top by saying this but it was almost as much as a jump as black and white to colour was, thats how much it stood out.I dont have a surround sound system anymore but do hope to get one soon and im sure its only going to make it that much more impressive.On a final note i personally think that we should just wait to see how The Dark Knight does when it comes out on BD as over here in the uk it is going on sale on day 1 for £15!!! Now that is cheaper than some dvd's are when they first come out. I really think it is going to sell like made on Blu Ray and could actually kick start a price reduction on the rest of new releases once the companies see how well it can sell if the price is right.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
But who other than Superman is watching TV 18 feet from the screen?suffah said:
Outcast2004
Banned
Not any time soon.Staccat0 said:
There's still a TON of people who don't even have the most basic of internet connections. So you'd be shutting out a huge segment of your previous customer base.
There will and forever be, a market/need for physical media.
Unless they have a garbage tv, a tiny screen or are playing Blu-Rays/HD movies through composite, I fail to see how people can't see a difference between Blu-Ray and DVD. The difference is monumental, especially on Planet Earth. On a per-pixel basis, 1080P has 6x as many pixels compared to SD. Does it mean the picture will look 6 times as better? No, but it means that it will look a whole lot sharper and detailed.
Just by browsing some of the pictures here with your computer monitor, you can tell a difference from what is typically displayed on an SDTV.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=778604&page=60
Just by browsing some of the pictures here with your computer monitor, you can tell a difference from what is typically displayed on an SDTV.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=778604&page=60
Fallout-NL
Member
25/35 euros for a blu-ray movie is fucking ridiculous.
Until that comes down they can suck it.
Until that comes down they can suck it.
gollumsluvslave
Member
It isn't dying so much as it was still-born from the start.
What they miss is that people today care more about CONVENIENCE than quality.
DVD killed VHS far more because of convenience than quality.
MP3 is killing CD for the same reason.
Most people I know don't even watch their DVD's these days - they are ripping them to cheap external hard disks and using XBMC or similar applications to watch them.
Once you have that kind of convenience, it's hard to go back.
I think the point you miss is, yes, some people don't really see the difference in the same way as others do - I can't understand how some people think that a 192 MP3 sounds much the same as a 24 bit 96khz WAV, but they do, or whatever differences they do hear or see ar not sufficient enough for them to care ENOUGH.
DVD is good ENOUGH for average joe six pack, so is MP3. I'm not saying that is how it should, be but it's how it IS.
Also, average joe six pack probably doesn't have a space big enough to have the 50in screen where the differences really start to be obvious.
What they miss is that people today care more about CONVENIENCE than quality.
DVD killed VHS far more because of convenience than quality.
MP3 is killing CD for the same reason.
Most people I know don't even watch their DVD's these days - they are ripping them to cheap external hard disks and using XBMC or similar applications to watch them.
Once you have that kind of convenience, it's hard to go back.
I think the point you miss is, yes, some people don't really see the difference in the same way as others do - I can't understand how some people think that a 192 MP3 sounds much the same as a 24 bit 96khz WAV, but they do, or whatever differences they do hear or see ar not sufficient enough for them to care ENOUGH.
DVD is good ENOUGH for average joe six pack, so is MP3. I'm not saying that is how it should, be but it's how it IS.
Also, average joe six pack probably doesn't have a space big enough to have the 50in screen where the differences really start to be obvious.
Coming from someone who did not support either contestant in the HD vs Blu-Ray format wars, I don't think it's going to die, at least not very soon. The PS3 alone will allow a decent amount of people to own Blu-Ray players, which are getting more affordable with every month. However I do think that the popularity of the format is in question with the state of the economy right now. I have a hard enough time justifying 20 dollar regular DVD purchases since I rarely re-watch most movies, but asking for 35 dollars for a Blu-Ray disc is just too much for the average consumer. If they can get the prices of the actual discs lowered sooner then I can see it being a hit. But most people don't care about quality or HD or whatever you want to call it. I'm pretty sure even today if you asked people if they preferred Fullscreen versus Widescreen there'd be a staggering amount of people who want Fullscreen.
VanMardigan
has calmed down a bit.
MidiSurf said:
I hate calling people liars, but if you're not seeing a noticeable difference on a 50" screen between BD and DVD, and you have no vision problems, then you're a liar. The difference is undeniable.
And it's not just a sharper and more detailed picture. You get more vivid color, lack of obvious compression artifacts, and much better quality on fast moving scenes. Even on good dvd upscaling devices like Ps3, it's obvious. Even my wife can see the difference. We were watching Last Samurai on a 30" CRT when my wife commented how crappy it looked compared to other HD movies. This happened early on in the movie. Sure enough, Netflix had sent us the dvd version rather than the HD DVD version.
Susurrus
Member
Argument: There is no difference between upscaled and Blu Ray.
Counter: I guess this is all depending on your eye sight and TV size, but my 20/15 Lasik'd eyes watching a 50" DLP tell me otherwise.
Argument: Digital Download will take over.
Counter: Not with the way bandwidth is getting capped, and how slowly it is STILL being expanded. Lots of people are STILL stuck on 56k (not me, but I know people). Besides its compressed and doesn't look near as good...
Argument: Its too expensive! I don't want to pay $30 for a disc!
Counter: Players are dropping in price. With my collection of over 50 HD-DVD/BluRay, all bought new, I've not ONCE paid more than $23 for a movie (rarely over $20), including when the formats just took off and buying new releases. Some of you need to get more familiar with online shopping, or just shopping around in general.
Argument: I don't want to rebuy all my movies!
Counter: Then don't. The great thing with BluRay players is they're backwards compatable. Your DVDs WILL work on them.
Also, my family was an early adopter of DVD, and I remember stopping at a Blockbuster, and my father just chit chatting w/ one of the employees and asked "how long do you think before DVDs will overtake VHS?" and he said "never", just like some of y'all are doin. (Just thought I'd throw this in, I now as well as anyone they don't necessarily know what they're talking about.)
Counter: I guess this is all depending on your eye sight and TV size, but my 20/15 Lasik'd eyes watching a 50" DLP tell me otherwise.
Argument: Digital Download will take over.
Counter: Not with the way bandwidth is getting capped, and how slowly it is STILL being expanded. Lots of people are STILL stuck on 56k (not me, but I know people). Besides its compressed and doesn't look near as good...
Argument: Its too expensive! I don't want to pay $30 for a disc!
Counter: Players are dropping in price. With my collection of over 50 HD-DVD/BluRay, all bought new, I've not ONCE paid more than $23 for a movie (rarely over $20), including when the formats just took off and buying new releases. Some of you need to get more familiar with online shopping, or just shopping around in general.
Argument: I don't want to rebuy all my movies!
Counter: Then don't. The great thing with BluRay players is they're backwards compatable. Your DVDs WILL work on them.
Also, my family was an early adopter of DVD, and I remember stopping at a Blockbuster, and my father just chit chatting w/ one of the employees and asked "how long do you think before DVDs will overtake VHS?" and he said "never", just like some of y'all are doin. (Just thought I'd throw this in, I now as well as anyone they don't necessarily know what they're talking about.)
holy shit.... not ONCE is it mentioned that by this time in DVD's life:
DVD only had an install base in the US of 5M units (about where Blu-ray is now).
DVD only just saw its first million seller (Matrix)
VHS supporters were calling for the death of DVD because big releases like The Phantom Menace weren't even being released on the format.
The first major Disney animated features were just now being released to the format in barebones editions.
Just in support alone Blu-ray is WELL beyond where DVD was, and in terms of sales Blu-ray is matching the installed base pound for pound and only slightly behind in market share (which is understandable given the economy).
And the move to digital download? Considering many connections in america are still taking an hour or more to sufficiently buffer an HD movie and that is at 720p, let alone 1080p at a compression ratio that is much lower than what's currently being offered for download.
Digital downloads will eventually take over, but we are looking at 5 years out minimum, at which time Blu-ray will be 8 years old. Not a bad age for a dead format (DVD just turned 11 this year).
"My VHS tapes look just as good on my 27" TV as DVDs do."
"DVDs are too expensive. Let me know when they come under $20 for new titles."
"I'm not paying $200 for a new DVD player when I can get a VCR for $50."
"Why do I need DVD when my DirecTV/Dish service has 15 channels of PPV at any given time." (The digital download equivalent)
"I can't even get Star Wars or Indiana Jones on DVD."
We've heard all of these exact same arguments before and a massive outcry. People think DVD was some sort of overnight success, but those of us who got in on it in 1997 remember reading dvdtalk and digitalbits and htf and avs waiting on every announcement, waiting to hear when the biggies were making it to the format, and just hoping that our new format didn't turn out like laserdisc... and it worked out just fine. So will this. And while DD will eventually put a ding in Blu-ray, it isn't even close yet. Ask anyone who actually USES DD now and they'll all tell you the same story "Yeah, I bought so and so on my 360/PS3 and started the download for overnight so it will be ready tomorrow." and the streaming services (VUDU, Netflix, etc). They aren't even close in quality to 720p 360/PSN downloads, let alone blu-ray.. those are nothing more than a stop gap to true 1080p streaming, and until that comes along, blu-ray is quite safe.
DVD only had an install base in the US of 5M units (about where Blu-ray is now).
DVD only just saw its first million seller (Matrix)
VHS supporters were calling for the death of DVD because big releases like The Phantom Menace weren't even being released on the format.
The first major Disney animated features were just now being released to the format in barebones editions.
Just in support alone Blu-ray is WELL beyond where DVD was, and in terms of sales Blu-ray is matching the installed base pound for pound and only slightly behind in market share (which is understandable given the economy).
And the move to digital download? Considering many connections in america are still taking an hour or more to sufficiently buffer an HD movie and that is at 720p, let alone 1080p at a compression ratio that is much lower than what's currently being offered for download.
Digital downloads will eventually take over, but we are looking at 5 years out minimum, at which time Blu-ray will be 8 years old. Not a bad age for a dead format (DVD just turned 11 this year).
some, yes. which is absolutely pathetic. But for others, these are the same arguments, complaints, criticisms, and justifications we heard back in the early days of VHS:reilo said:
"My VHS tapes look just as good on my 27" TV as DVDs do."
"DVDs are too expensive. Let me know when they come under $20 for new titles."
"I'm not paying $200 for a new DVD player when I can get a VCR for $50."
"Why do I need DVD when my DirecTV/Dish service has 15 channels of PPV at any given time." (The digital download equivalent)
"I can't even get Star Wars or Indiana Jones on DVD."
We've heard all of these exact same arguments before and a massive outcry. People think DVD was some sort of overnight success, but those of us who got in on it in 1997 remember reading dvdtalk and digitalbits and htf and avs waiting on every announcement, waiting to hear when the biggies were making it to the format, and just hoping that our new format didn't turn out like laserdisc... and it worked out just fine. So will this. And while DD will eventually put a ding in Blu-ray, it isn't even close yet. Ask anyone who actually USES DD now and they'll all tell you the same story "Yeah, I bought so and so on my 360/PS3 and started the download for overnight so it will be ready tomorrow." and the streaming services (VUDU, Netflix, etc). They aren't even close in quality to 720p 360/PSN downloads, let alone blu-ray.. those are nothing more than a stop gap to true 1080p streaming, and until that comes along, blu-ray is quite safe.
this is actually really fucked up and goes to what I am talking about. This same shit happened before, yet you have all of these technology writers acting like DVD busted out at the starting gate... Now if these tech writers were like 21 or something maybe I can understand it, but you have tech journalists in their 30s and 40s who should be able to fucking remember back to 11 years ago and how DVD was doing. The only thing I can think of is a) they weren't apart of the early days of DVD which frankly, if you haven't been interested in home theater technology for even 10 years, I am not going to take your predictions for anything as you don't have enough knowledge of the field to back them up or b) they were spewing this same shit about DVD and VHS in which case, well.... look how that turned out.Susurrus said:
- Status