lol- Remember iSteve told us Blu-ray was a bag of hurt yet the consumer did the exact opposite of his recommendation and Blu-ray has sold thru the roof this past holiday season.
while I agree with you on some points that you raise here, Blu-Ray was and/is still a world of hurt.
I have been an audiophile/HT type for close to 30 years. I used to visit the major HT forums, and this whole Flash/Apple debate is like Sunday tea between sisters compared to the whole Blu-Ray / HD DVD fiasco.
while I agree with you on some points that you raise here, Blu-Ray was and/is still a world of hurt.
I have been an audiophile/HT type for close to 30 years. I used to visit the major HT forums, and this whole Flash/Apple debate is like Sunday tea between sisters compared to the whole Blu-Ray / HD DVD fiasco.
As an audiofile- you don't like Blu-ray??? It has by far the best sound since Laser disc- better than CD and leap years beyond DVD.
If Adobe has released the swf format as open source then developers should be able to come up with their own players for it, should they not?
In much the same way as alternatives now exist to Adobes Acrobat Reader application for PDF files.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'm not following. In what regard? I already stated one possible use for Adobe to keep making money by selling complete web development kits with a fall back dependancy on Flash.
Okay, whether or not Flash is evil isn't the case here. Comparing the need for Flash to that of the iPhone is not the case here.
Steve Jobs said himself that the iPad would not succeed unless it was the best device at certain things. Internet, email, photos, whatever. The iPhone gets away with having no Flash because people don't expect that their phone is the ideal way to browse the internet. When I hit a link to a site that requires Flash, I just "Instapaper" it and make a note to browse it later on my laptop. But if I'm on the iPad, browsing the internet, expecting it to be the ultimate way to experience the internet, how am I going to feel if I'm running into sites that won't run on the iPad. Well, that's not the ultimate internet if I can't view a bunch of sites, is it?
The iPad will not be the best browsing experience if it doesn't have Flash support. And according to Steve, if it doesn't do the internet better than a phone and better than a laptop, it won't succeed.
Okay, whether or not Flash is evil isn't the case here. Comparing the need for Flash to that of the iPhone is not the case here.
Steve Jobs said himself that the iPad would not succeed unless it was the best device at certain things. Internet, email, photos, whatever. The iPhone gets away with having no Flash because people don't expect that their phone is the ideal way to browse the internet. When I hit a link to a site that requires Flash, I just "Instapaper" it and make a note to browse it later on my laptop. But if I'm on the iPad, browsing the internet, expecting it to be the ultimate way to experience the internet, how am I going to feel if I'm running into sites that won't run on the iPad. Well, that's not the ultimate internet if I can't view a bunch of sites, is it?
The iPad will not be the best browsing experience if it doesn't have Flash support. And according to Steve, if it doesn't do the internet better than a phone and better than a laptop, it won't succeed.
Exactly right. Steve has gambled this iPad's success on exactly what you wrote and if it fails it's failure rests squarely on those claims.
yes, for movies Blu-Ray is better than DVD, but I am not convinced it was better than HD DVD which lost that format war.
Sometimes HD-DVDs didn't have lossless audio when the Blu-Ray counterpart did. It would seem that audio quality differences like that would be important to an audiophile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Well movies get released on Blu-ray, they don't in HD-DVD, so that would make Blu-ray automatically better.
In the end, yes, but HD-DVD did have some advantages. It didn't have as many potentially onerous copy protections, and you could press a small run of discs without having to pay a $3000 fee for the encryption key. The fee is less now, but it's still required.
It is amazing what a small investment will do to the sound. The DACs and Power Supplies in either computers or iPods stink. So, if you really like music and use a lossless format, a headphone amp or something like the total bithead will improve sound. I do not know if USB dacs are more common.
That is a sweet looking piece. I used to have a Cary tube amp for my music system. However, when I built my speakers a few years ago, I did not like the sound of the combo and switched to Naim, and it is much better sounding.
In the end, yes, but HD-DVD did have some advantages. It didn't have as many potentially onerous copy protections, and you could press discs without having to pay a $3000 fee for the encryption key.
That $3,000 fee though never meant much to a consumer especially now that Blu-ray discs can be had for as low as $9.99. HD DVD had the advantage of having discs pressed with HD DVD on on side and DVD on the other. But now Blu-ray has finally gone that route as well.
I can't believe people are actually still talking about HD DVD - that bridge has been passed a long time ago- 2 years now.
That's going to be the next shot in the flash/html5 conflict. Not disable flash completely but build in ClickToFlash as a Safari option and default it to on.
Sorry, all dropping Flash support from Safari to do is lower Safari's already low user total. Nor would Apple make users do something as complex as click on a spot to make something that should work by default actually work. Apple won't even provide the option to decide whether attempts to open new windows should be converted to new tabs instead (yes, I hate that Safari doesn't give such a useful option). The "complexity" that ClickToFlash would create are far beyond Safari's "Web Browser for Idiots" design mantra.
Quote:
It's a dramatic improvement in the browsing experience with no loss of functionality.
That's your opinion. I've been to sites that are completely inaccessible without Flash. Maybe that's just poor web design,but that's a different point.
People try to extrapolate from the iPhone's popularity and lack of Flash. With it's larger screen, the iPad comes closest to replicating the desktop browsing experience. Users have different expectations for desktop browsing than they do for mobile devices which has traditionally been a pretty lousy experience. If people equate the iPad to a desktop experience, the fact that the web doesn't work right because of all those missing spots where some Flash element should be, it's not going to be well appreciated.
The article points what is probably the real reason that Apple doesn't want Flash on it's mobile devices: Flash competes directly with the App Store. It gives developers an alternative method of creating apps that do nothing to promote the App Store infrastructure.
Sometimes HD-DVDs didn't have lossless audio when the Blu-Ray counterpart did. It would seem that audio quality differences like that would be important to an audiophile.
Blu-Ray was better if you had really really good equipment. For my HT I have Rotel separates and Totem Acoustics Speakers. I could barely tell the difference with the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks for movies, and most people could not tell the difference between the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks on normal equipment. So, for the average person, I did not think that Blu-Ray was worth the extra money.
That $3,000 fee though never meant much to a consumer especially now that Blu-ray discs can be had for as low as $9.99. HD DVD had the advantage of having discs pressed with HD DVD on on side and DVD on the other. But now Blu-ray has finally gone that route as well.
I can't believe people are actually still talking about HD DVD - that bridge has been passed a long time ago- 2 years now.
Yes it is passed. I brought it up though because the nastiness of the debate way back when there were 2 formats was far far far far far worse than what you see here.
Also, way back when, Blu-Ray discs were more expensive than HD-DVDs
Comments
lol- Remember iSteve told us Blu-ray was a bag of hurt yet the consumer did the exact opposite of his recommendation and Blu-ray has sold thru the roof this past holiday season.
while I agree with you on some points that you raise here, Blu-Ray was and/is still a world of hurt.
I have been an audiophile/HT type for close to 30 years. I used to visit the major HT forums, and this whole Flash/Apple debate is like Sunday tea between sisters compared to the whole Blu-Ray / HD DVD fiasco.
? Where are your stats?
? How do Blu-ray movie sales compare to Blu-ray movie sales?
? What is the growth of, say, Netflix streaming?
? How many of those Blu-ray players were sold in computers?
? How much do 9.5mm ultra-slim slot-loading Blu-ray writers cost, anyway?
? Who's making them?
? You've never gotten away with counting Blu-ray appliances for home entertainment systems in you foolish claims so why do you think you will now?
PS: It's great that you can never have a well reasoned argument. At least I know something in this world isn't changing.
.[/I]
Someone needs a vacation- FAST.
while I agree with you on some points that you raise here, Blu-Ray was and/is still a world of hurt.
I have been an audiophile/HT type for close to 30 years. I used to visit the major HT forums, and this whole Flash/Apple debate is like Sunday tea between sisters compared to the whole Blu-Ray / HD DVD fiasco.
As an audiofile- you don't like Blu-ray??? It has by far the best sound since Laser disc- better than CD and leap years beyond DVD.
In much the same way as alternatives now exist to Adobes Acrobat Reader application for PDF files.
I'm not following. In what regard? I already stated one possible use for Adobe to keep making money by selling complete web development kits with a fall back dependancy on Flash.
As an audiofile- you don't like Blu-ray??? It has by far the best sound since Laser disc- better than CD and leap years beyond DVD.
Well, for my music system at home, I listen to either vinyl or SACD.
For my computer system, I have everything ripped as WAV or Apple Lossless, and I run it through Headroom's Total Bithead.
http://www.headphone.com/headphone-a...al-bithead.php
to some Grado Headphones.
So, Blu-Ray is irrelevant for music for me.
Well, for my music system at home, I listen to either vinyl or SACD.
For my computer system, I have everything ripped as WAV or Apple Lossless, and I run it through Headroom's Total Bithead.
http://www.headphone.com/headphone-a...al-bithead.php
to some Grado Headphones.
So, Blu-Ray is irrelevant for music for me.
OK- I hear you- but for the combo of audio/video, it can't be beat. Nothing else comes close.
OK- I hear you- but for the combo of audio/video, it can't be beat. Nothing else comes close.
yes, for movies Blu-Ray is better than DVD, but I am not convinced it was better than HD DVD which lost that format war.
Someone needs a vacation- FAST.
So when you take yours, be sure not to write.
yes, for movies Blu-Ray is better than DVD, but I am not convinced it was better than HD DVD which lost that format war.
Well movies get released on Blu-ray, they don't in HD-DVD, so that would make Blu-ray automatically better.
For my computer system, I have everything ripped as WAV or Apple Lossless, and I run it through Headroom's Total Bithead.
http://www.headphone.com/headphone-a...al-bithead.php
That looks very cool. Are external, USB-connected DACs getting more common? This tube amp has one, and supposedly sounds good:
http://www.neuhauslabs.com/
Steve Jobs said himself that the iPad would not succeed unless it was the best device at certain things. Internet, email, photos, whatever. The iPhone gets away with having no Flash because people don't expect that their phone is the ideal way to browse the internet. When I hit a link to a site that requires Flash, I just "Instapaper" it and make a note to browse it later on my laptop. But if I'm on the iPad, browsing the internet, expecting it to be the ultimate way to experience the internet, how am I going to feel if I'm running into sites that won't run on the iPad. Well, that's not the ultimate internet if I can't view a bunch of sites, is it?
The iPad will not be the best browsing experience if it doesn't have Flash support. And according to Steve, if it doesn't do the internet better than a phone and better than a laptop, it won't succeed.
Okay, whether or not Flash is evil isn't the case here. Comparing the need for Flash to that of the iPhone is not the case here.
Steve Jobs said himself that the iPad would not succeed unless it was the best device at certain things. Internet, email, photos, whatever. The iPhone gets away with having no Flash because people don't expect that their phone is the ideal way to browse the internet. When I hit a link to a site that requires Flash, I just "Instapaper" it and make a note to browse it later on my laptop. But if I'm on the iPad, browsing the internet, expecting it to be the ultimate way to experience the internet, how am I going to feel if I'm running into sites that won't run on the iPad. Well, that's not the ultimate internet if I can't view a bunch of sites, is it?
The iPad will not be the best browsing experience if it doesn't have Flash support. And according to Steve, if it doesn't do the internet better than a phone and better than a laptop, it won't succeed.
Exactly right. Steve has gambled this iPad's success on exactly what you wrote and if it fails it's failure rests squarely on those claims.
So when you take yours, be sure not to write.
Hmm, not quite sure why if one's going on vacation one must forego AI that is unless it's incarceration we're really talking about.
Well movies get released on Blu-ray, they don't in HD-DVD, so that would make Blu-ray automatically better.
You are kidding right? The technically better format does not necessarily win the format war, as the whole VHS / Beta Max issue demonstrates.
yes, for movies Blu-Ray is better than DVD, but I am not convinced it was better than HD DVD which lost that format war.
Sometimes HD-DVDs didn't have lossless audio when the Blu-Ray counterpart did. It would seem that audio quality differences like that would be important to an audiophile.
Well movies get released on Blu-ray, they don't in HD-DVD, so that would make Blu-ray automatically better.
In the end, yes, but HD-DVD did have some advantages. It didn't have as many potentially onerous copy protections, and you could press a small run of discs without having to pay a $3000 fee for the encryption key. The fee is less now, but it's still required.
That looks very cool. Are external, USB-connected DACs getting more common? This tube amp has one, and supposedly sounds good:
http://www.neuhauslabs.com/
It is amazing what a small investment will do to the sound. The DACs and Power Supplies in either computers or iPods stink. So, if you really like music and use a lossless format, a headphone amp or something like the total bithead will improve sound. I do not know if USB dacs are more common.
That is a sweet looking piece. I used to have a Cary tube amp for my music system. However, when I built my speakers a few years ago, I did not like the sound of the combo and switched to Naim, and it is much better sounding.
In the end, yes, but HD-DVD did have some advantages. It didn't have as many potentially onerous copy protections, and you could press discs without having to pay a $3000 fee for the encryption key.
That $3,000 fee though never meant much to a consumer especially now that Blu-ray discs can be had for as low as $9.99. HD DVD had the advantage of having discs pressed with HD DVD on on side and DVD on the other. But now Blu-ray has finally gone that route as well.
I can't believe people are actually still talking about HD DVD - that bridge has been passed a long time ago- 2 years now.
That's going to be the next shot in the flash/html5 conflict. Not disable flash completely but build in ClickToFlash as a Safari option and default it to on.
Sorry, all dropping Flash support from Safari to do is lower Safari's already low user total. Nor would Apple make users do something as complex as click on a spot to make something that should work by default actually work. Apple won't even provide the option to decide whether attempts to open new windows should be converted to new tabs instead (yes, I hate that Safari doesn't give such a useful option). The "complexity" that ClickToFlash would create are far beyond Safari's "Web Browser for Idiots" design mantra.
It's a dramatic improvement in the browsing experience with no loss of functionality.
That's your opinion. I've been to sites that are completely inaccessible without Flash. Maybe that's just poor web design,but that's a different point.
People try to extrapolate from the iPhone's popularity and lack of Flash. With it's larger screen, the iPad comes closest to replicating the desktop browsing experience. Users have different expectations for desktop browsing than they do for mobile devices which has traditionally been a pretty lousy experience. If people equate the iPad to a desktop experience, the fact that the web doesn't work right because of all those missing spots where some Flash element should be, it's not going to be well appreciated.
The article points what is probably the real reason that Apple doesn't want Flash on it's mobile devices: Flash competes directly with the App Store. It gives developers an alternative method of creating apps that do nothing to promote the App Store infrastructure.
Sometimes HD-DVDs didn't have lossless audio when the Blu-Ray counterpart did. It would seem that audio quality differences like that would be important to an audiophile.
Blu-Ray was better if you had really really good equipment. For my HT I have Rotel separates and Totem Acoustics Speakers. I could barely tell the difference with the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks for movies, and most people could not tell the difference between the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks on normal equipment. So, for the average person, I did not think that Blu-Ray was worth the extra money.
That $3,000 fee though never meant much to a consumer especially now that Blu-ray discs can be had for as low as $9.99. HD DVD had the advantage of having discs pressed with HD DVD on on side and DVD on the other. But now Blu-ray has finally gone that route as well.
I can't believe people are actually still talking about HD DVD - that bridge has been passed a long time ago- 2 years now.
Yes it is passed. I brought it up though because the nastiness of the debate way back when there were 2 formats was far far far far far worse than what you see here.
Also, way back when, Blu-Ray discs were more expensive than HD-DVDs