In other words, it's not free. It's just that streaming media is so much cheaper for Netflix than keeping inventory of physical DVDs and shipping them that they can build the cost into the membership fee and still come out ahead on average.
I have admittedly not kept up 100% with Blu-Ray, but I recall one of the early issues being that its DRM is not like the iTunes DRM, which is software only and goes away when you burn a .m4p song to a CD. Blu-Ray insists (insisted?) on a dedicated hardware path for the fully encrypted video and audio to travel through any computer to the HDMI cable, where it would continue, fully encrypted, until it reached the terminus of the HDTV, where it was finally decrypted and presented. Blu-Ray is utterly paranoid. If you're trying to implement it on an authoring platform, it's a nightmare. Unless there have been radical changes to Blu-Ray--which I doubt because they would require radical changes in the studios' attitudes toward their customers--I am not surprised that Apple has not adopted it quickly. It's not like DVD DRM, and it's not like iTunes DRM. It's source-to-display tunneling so that the movie executives can keep their precious content safe from the scary pirates and the occasional phantom editor. The PS3 is a closed content presentation machine, so implementing Blu-Ray in the PS3 is a no-brainer. Implementing it on a platform with a broadband hookup and a full suite of internet apps and a full library of content ripping, encoding and authoring software, some of which ships with every machine (along with the free development IDE)? That's a whole different ball of wax.
As for the iMac: It's a sweet update. I was wrong about the display format, but right about Apple going with a custom screen. I note that the 27"'s resolution is precisely 4 times the resolution of 720p, which is actually the best case for scaling on an LCD display, as every logical pixel maps to precisely 4 physical pixels. If anything, 720p should look better on the big iMac than on the little one.
Video in is awesome. It's the one thing I miss on my 24" iMac.
I am completely unsurprised that Apple is offering i5s and i7s. I am more surprised that people actually thought that Apple would leave its most prominent desktop offering with a last generation chipset for any longer than absolutely necessary. They crammed a G5 in that box, once, and those things ran hot. I did predict that the higher end machine would be the one that got the new high performance chips.
I am surprised that Apple is offering 4 slots and 4GB standard on a single DIMM. They really are expanding the iMac into the pro space. I am not surprised that Apple is still charging outrageous amounts for BTO RAM, which is why I have never, ever, taken them up on the offer.
I am surprised, pleasantly, that Apple extended the nice screen to the smaller model.
The gloss of my 24" iMac has never been an issue. Reflections are almost invisible unless the screen is mostly black, and that doesn't happen often given that window backgrounds tend to be white. Even when the screen is black the reflections are dim. I can't understand how this is maddening. It's like my lovely old Radius CRT except bigger and brighter and flatter. As for those people insisting that the complaints on the forums indicate that a majority of users want matte screens, I'd direct you to the archives. Back when Apple was only shipping matte screens there were whole long threads dedicated to griping about all the sales Apple was losing to PCs with bright, shiny screens.
Finally, somebody gets it. Best post in this entire thread. THANK YOU!!
The charge is for disc rentals. The streaming is free.
Weird in my world its exactly the opposite. I have received 1 disc "The Pianist" that I have had since the very first day I started my Netflix subscription, which incidentally is the same day the Roku player went on sale. Yet my family has streamed well over 1,000 movies and TV shows. I guess thats one hell of expensive DVD I rented.
When the Apple Store was taken down a few days ago, everyone went wild with the rumours. When it happened again today it all started again, people were posting like crazy, speculating what was happening and what would be released. One small post from Mr. X got it just about spot on! But that's not the point. As a recent purchaser of an iMac I revelled in the furore of anticipation of new products, the posts that were happening here and elsewhere were fantastic and the debates that started after the new lineup was announced has been most entertaining. But most of all, the best part of today was...I don't care too much for the new lineup, I have a Mac, and that my friends is better than saying I have a PC...
I don't doubt that Blu-ray is currently outstripping other forms for purchase-- it just makes sense. However, I don't think that's were the money is, when it comes to video. Most people aren't going to want to watch most movies more than once, and fans buying up blockbuster boxed sets are a big enough segment to drive all over profits.
You're applying a VHS-era assumption to the current home video market. That assumption might come back at some point, but it's not current.
Sell-through commands the lion's share of home video revenue, and that market shift was completely driven by the DVD. Prior to the arrival of the DVD, home video was a rental-driven market in which VHS tapes had a "rental pricing" window where the list prices would be $80-$100 per copy. Only after titles had been on the market for a few months did the prices drop down to "sell through" pricing.
The DVD turned the market completely upside down by using sell-through pricing on the date of release. Although studios initially resisted eliminating the rental-pricing window, they quickly found that DVDs could generate much more revenue through sheer volume on new releases.
You can assume that people will only want to watch a movie once, but the DVD was priced low enough that it cost less than a night out at the movies. Plus, you could watch it at your leisure (no 24-hour viewing windows), trade with friends, and most DVDs came with bonus features that viewers could also peruse at their leisure. This was all new with DVD (disregarding the niche market for Laserdisc, which also used sell-through pricing), and consumers obviously embraced it.
The DVD format created a generation of video collectors, and fundamentally changed the mindset of the market. The rental market went into a decline after the advent of the DVD, and that market is only growing now because the economy has tightened people's budgets.
Despite the current decline, sell-through IS where the money is (sales revenue is about twice that of rentals, and the studios keep more of the revenues from sales than from rentals). That's why the industry is pushing Blu-ray so hard. They get far more per transaction from optical media than other forms of distribution.
At some point, digital distribution might reach a critical mass and create a change in mindset similar to what accompanied the DVD. But, it will take a much larger base of consumers than the industry currently attracts in order generate a similar amount of revenue. In the meantime, digital download/streaming growth will erode the rental revenues, so that revenue stream will need to be made up somewhere.
Heh. Good catch. You're right. I remember all that. Bitch fights about the lack of Glossy and how Apple was losing out to gorgeous sony displays etc, etc.
I concur with your post. I never have a problem with the reflections on my iMac. I have to concentrate to see any at all!
*Shrugs. It's glossy all the way for me. I hate matte plastic displays with no glass. Plastic that scratches? No thanks. Feels real cheap too. 'Oh look, I can press the screen and make swirling colours...' Real crap in schools as children like to play ice skating with plastic screens. I hate HDTVs for this. Big plastic displays. Real cheap looking. Put glass in them. Glass is just sand. Plenty of sand on the planet...not so much oil knocking about...
Heh. The lack of glass in an iMac stopped me buying the white plastic ones. I'm glad Apple went with glass in the alu iMac.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Well said. The glossy screen is simply gorgeous to look at. The whiners don't even own one so they are talking out of their hat. How did the whiners ever survive with all those glass CRT monitors not so long ago? They never complained about Apple using a Sony Trinitron tube for the sharpest picture quality, compared to the shitty VGA displays used by PC vendors. I see better with the glossy screen than I ever did with the grainy matte screen. The glossy screen brings back the sharpness of the Trinitron days. My LC 575 with its Trinitron display has better picture quality than a matte LCD, and that is 15 years old!
My cousin just bought an iMac last week. Does Apple have a 14-day window where he could bring
back the iMac he bought for a new one?
probably been answered a million times, but yes they do. All products have a 14 day return policy. In the case of new products, they will likely offer to reduce the price paid to the end of life price or exchange it for the new one.
Apparently the "case" includes LED backlit IPS monitors, slot loading drives, backlit keyboards, multitouch trackpads (and now mice lol), ambient light sensors, custom designed motherboards, hard drive drop sensors, etc. There are many components that add to the cost of a mac that don't show up on a comparison sheet.
I wasn't arguing the point myself, I was merely stating what other people on here argue about when comparing PC prices to Apple prices. BUT, I am sure in a month or so when these panels hit the streets by other manufacturers, there will be a side by side comparison showing the 27" i7 iMac at atleast $500+ more than the comparable PC version. Just as there has been the comparisons done on all previous models.
Lol wut? Have you bothered to browse Netflix' HD streaming selection? It's not much of a selection and 99% of it is nothing anyone's ever heard of. Yes, who needs Blu-Ray when we can stream "Elf Bowling" any time of the day with Netflix?
Sorry these iMac are awesome without Blu-ray. Blu-ray is not the future for movies - Netflix HD downloads are. SD is great for rewriteable operations where Blu-ray is not. SD will long outlive Blu-ray.
I'm sorry but we have to live in the present. The new iMacs are awesome without Blu-ray, but they would be even better with the option. What do SD cards have to do with Blu-ray? Last I checked a DVD superdrive was occupying the slot where the Blu-ray drive would go. SD and Blu-ray could coexist on the same computer. Similarly, streaming and optical media will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future.
Hmm. Amorph's post was a good one. Kinda puts one or two or three etc. things in perspective.
This is the best iMac yet. But the quad core options are unnecessarily expensive to me.
But I'm still critical of the lack of i5s in the bottom tier and the i7s as standard in the top tier. And the 4850 should be in the 'low end' 27 incher with something a little more powerful to push the resolution of the 27inch on the high end iMac.
Still, with an interim(?) update in 6 months...this line up could look just about right.
As for Blue Ray, be nice to have a 'super' blue burner as standard but can't these be added? Are they cheap? Do they work with Snow Leopard? *Shrugs. I think I can live without it for now. But in the future...I may look closer at Blue Ray. DVDs seem big enough for now to me. And with SD cards and portable HDs being dirt cheap...Blue Ray gets the squeeze for me as a priority.
I'm sorry but we have to live in the present. The new iMacs are awesome without Blu-ray, but they would be even better with the option. What do SD cards have to do with Blu-ray? Last I checked a DVD superdrive was occupying the slot where the Blu-ray drive would go. SD and Blu-ray could coexist on the same computer. Similarly, streaming and optical media will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future.
I wasn't arguing the point myself, I was merely stating what other people on here argue about when comparing PC prices to Apple prices. BUT, I am sure in a month or so when these panels hit the streets by other manufacturers, there will be a side by side comparison showing the 27" i7 iMac at atleast $500+ more than the comparable PC version. Just as there has been the comparisons done on all previous models.
Those "side by side" comparisons are never accurate beyond having the same basic specs. Apple products do get less competitive over time though.
How many times did they reiterate their belief about ADC over DVI? DisplayPort is effectively dead in the water and going it alone on display has never ended well. Plus I think the customer can afford an extra nickel.
Plus digital downloads dish out their own share of pain.
That is the question. Obviously its going to happen some day, buy right now neither Apple, the movie/television studios, or anyone else is making it real enticing. They had a good example of how it should be done with digital music, but everyone's let greed cloud everything.
Displayport is being included on many new graphics cards. Just go and look at the new ones coming out.
I can't believe most of the posts have been whining about the lack of a BluRay drive. Just because the technology exists, doesn't mean a computer actually needs it. If you really want one, go buy an external drive and STFU. They have been around for years.
If the iMac had one, all of you would bitch and complain about the price increase over previous models, and then bitch about the high price of blank media, and bitch how slow it is to back up data.
How many of you actually crowd around the computer to watch a movie? My guess is NONE. You watch them on your big screen TV.
The iMac upgrades are a great improvement over the previous models. All models now have a fantastic display (the inferior 20" is finally gone). 4 GB RAM across the board, dedicated graphics on 3 out of the 4 models, big hard drives, SD card slot, wireless keyboard and a new kick-ass mouse all standard. They are a great upgrade from either an iMac G5 or early iMac Intel.
My PS3 BluRay died after a firmware update, won't read any disk. PS3 works and does the Folding@home now but that's it.
Had to buy another PS3, so now I got two nice heaters.
Sony is being sued because of the bricking of so many PS3 BluRays, something I'm sure had to do with copy protection/HDMI being broken. Perhaps serials being copied/stolen or something. So mine got hit.
Blu-RAY IS A BAG OF HURT!!
The iMac is a pain as it is with nothing being user accessible, much less a malfunctioning Blu-Ray and firmware updates coming from (of DRM/Rookit fame) Sony Inc. to protect the copy protection.
You need BluRay? Get a external device. It's not ready for the mainstream and perhaps never will be.
The MIAA (which Sony is part of) really doesn't want BluRay movies on computers, unless they can control the DRM and playblack so it can't be copied. Apple won't go for that naturally, all that evil Sony code in OS X.
Apple is trending towards less mechanical, less laborious, more all on the logicboard type devices anyway.
That's all ridiculous! B-R is great. A FEW PS3's got bricked. Mine didn't.
The iMac doesn't have to be an open machine to be good. That's pretty clear. If you don't want one, then don't buy one.
And you're allowed to make one copy. It's in the specs.
Comments
In other words, it's not free. It's just that streaming media is so much cheaper for Netflix than keeping inventory of physical DVDs and shipping them that they can build the cost into the membership fee and still come out ahead on average.
I have admittedly not kept up 100% with Blu-Ray, but I recall one of the early issues being that its DRM is not like the iTunes DRM, which is software only and goes away when you burn a .m4p song to a CD. Blu-Ray insists (insisted?) on a dedicated hardware path for the fully encrypted video and audio to travel through any computer to the HDMI cable, where it would continue, fully encrypted, until it reached the terminus of the HDTV, where it was finally decrypted and presented. Blu-Ray is utterly paranoid. If you're trying to implement it on an authoring platform, it's a nightmare. Unless there have been radical changes to Blu-Ray--which I doubt because they would require radical changes in the studios' attitudes toward their customers--I am not surprised that Apple has not adopted it quickly. It's not like DVD DRM, and it's not like iTunes DRM. It's source-to-display tunneling so that the movie executives can keep their precious content safe from the scary pirates and the occasional phantom editor. The PS3 is a closed content presentation machine, so implementing Blu-Ray in the PS3 is a no-brainer. Implementing it on a platform with a broadband hookup and a full suite of internet apps and a full library of content ripping, encoding and authoring software, some of which ships with every machine (along with the free development IDE)? That's a whole different ball of wax.
As for the iMac: It's a sweet update. I was wrong about the display format, but right about Apple going with a custom screen. I note that the 27"'s resolution is precisely 4 times the resolution of 720p, which is actually the best case for scaling on an LCD display, as every logical pixel maps to precisely 4 physical pixels. If anything, 720p should look better on the big iMac than on the little one.
Video in is awesome. It's the one thing I miss on my 24" iMac.
I am completely unsurprised that Apple is offering i5s and i7s. I am more surprised that people actually thought that Apple would leave its most prominent desktop offering with a last generation chipset for any longer than absolutely necessary. They crammed a G5 in that box, once, and those things ran hot. I did predict that the higher end machine would be the one that got the new high performance chips.
I am surprised that Apple is offering 4 slots and 4GB standard on a single DIMM. They really are expanding the iMac into the pro space. I am not surprised that Apple is still charging outrageous amounts for BTO RAM, which is why I have never, ever, taken them up on the offer.
I am surprised, pleasantly, that Apple extended the nice screen to the smaller model.
The gloss of my 24" iMac has never been an issue. Reflections are almost invisible unless the screen is mostly black, and that doesn't happen often given that window backgrounds tend to be white. Even when the screen is black the reflections are dim. I can't understand how this is maddening. It's like my lovely old Radius CRT except bigger and brighter and flatter. As for those people insisting that the complaints on the forums indicate that a majority of users want matte screens, I'd direct you to the archives. Back when Apple was only shipping matte screens there were whole long threads dedicated to griping about all the sales Apple was losing to PCs with bright, shiny screens.
Finally, somebody gets it. Best post in this entire thread. THANK YOU!!
Blu-ray is not the future for movies - Netflix HD downloads are.
Well if that is true, I feel sorry for all the people that don't live in the US
The charge is for disc rentals. The streaming is free.
Weird in my world its exactly the opposite. I have received 1 disc "The Pianist" that I have had since the very first day I started my Netflix subscription, which incidentally is the same day the Roku player went on sale. Yet my family has streamed well over 1,000 movies and TV shows. I guess thats one hell of expensive DVD I rented.
I don't doubt that Blu-ray is currently outstripping other forms for purchase-- it just makes sense. However, I don't think that's were the money is, when it comes to video. Most people aren't going to want to watch most movies more than once, and fans buying up blockbuster boxed sets are a big enough segment to drive all over profits.
You're applying a VHS-era assumption to the current home video market. That assumption might come back at some point, but it's not current.
Sell-through commands the lion's share of home video revenue, and that market shift was completely driven by the DVD. Prior to the arrival of the DVD, home video was a rental-driven market in which VHS tapes had a "rental pricing" window where the list prices would be $80-$100 per copy. Only after titles had been on the market for a few months did the prices drop down to "sell through" pricing.
The DVD turned the market completely upside down by using sell-through pricing on the date of release. Although studios initially resisted eliminating the rental-pricing window, they quickly found that DVDs could generate much more revenue through sheer volume on new releases.
You can assume that people will only want to watch a movie once, but the DVD was priced low enough that it cost less than a night out at the movies. Plus, you could watch it at your leisure (no 24-hour viewing windows), trade with friends, and most DVDs came with bonus features that viewers could also peruse at their leisure. This was all new with DVD (disregarding the niche market for Laserdisc, which also used sell-through pricing), and consumers obviously embraced it.
The DVD format created a generation of video collectors, and fundamentally changed the mindset of the market. The rental market went into a decline after the advent of the DVD, and that market is only growing now because the economy has tightened people's budgets.
Despite the current decline, sell-through IS where the money is (sales revenue is about twice that of rentals, and the studios keep more of the revenues from sales than from rentals). That's why the industry is pushing Blu-ray so hard. They get far more per transaction from optical media than other forms of distribution.
At some point, digital distribution might reach a critical mass and create a change in mindset similar to what accompanied the DVD. But, it will take a much larger base of consumers than the industry currently attracts in order generate a similar amount of revenue. In the meantime, digital download/streaming growth will erode the rental revenues, so that revenue stream will need to be made up somewhere.
Heh. Good catch. You're right. I remember all that. Bitch fights about the lack of Glossy and how Apple was losing out to gorgeous sony displays etc, etc.
I concur with your post. I never have a problem with the reflections on my iMac. I have to concentrate to see any at all!
*Shrugs. It's glossy all the way for me. I hate matte plastic displays with no glass. Plastic that scratches? No thanks. Feels real cheap too. 'Oh look, I can press the screen and make swirling colours...' Real crap in schools as children like to play ice skating with plastic screens. I hate HDTVs for this. Big plastic displays. Real cheap looking. Put glass in them. Glass is just sand. Plenty of sand on the planet...not so much oil knocking about...
Heh. The lack of glass in an iMac stopped me buying the white plastic ones. I'm glad Apple went with glass in the alu iMac.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Well said. The glossy screen is simply gorgeous to look at. The whiners don't even own one so they are talking out of their hat. How did the whiners ever survive with all those glass CRT monitors not so long ago? They never complained about Apple using a Sony Trinitron tube for the sharpest picture quality, compared to the shitty VGA displays used by PC vendors. I see better with the glossy screen than I ever did with the grainy matte screen. The glossy screen brings back the sharpness of the Trinitron days. My LC 575 with its Trinitron display has better picture quality than a matte LCD, and that is 15 years old!
Lemon Bon Bon.
My cousin just bought an iMac last week. Does Apple have a 14-day window where he could bring
back the iMac he bought for a new one?
probably been answered a million times, but yes they do. All products have a 14 day return policy. In the case of new products, they will likely offer to reduce the price paid to the end of life price or exchange it for the new one.
Apparently the "case" includes LED backlit IPS monitors, slot loading drives, backlit keyboards, multitouch trackpads (and now mice lol), ambient light sensors, custom designed motherboards, hard drive drop sensors, etc. There are many components that add to the cost of a mac that don't show up on a comparison sheet.
I wasn't arguing the point myself, I was merely stating what other people on here argue about when comparing PC prices to Apple prices. BUT, I am sure in a month or so when these panels hit the streets by other manufacturers, there will be a side by side comparison showing the 27" i7 iMac at atleast $500+ more than the comparable PC version. Just as there has been the comparisons done on all previous models.
BluRay is not coming to Mac's.
Who needs it anyway when you got this device?
http://www.roku.com/default.aspx
Lol wut? Have you bothered to browse Netflix' HD streaming selection? It's not much of a selection and 99% of it is nothing anyone's ever heard of. Yes, who needs Blu-Ray when we can stream "Elf Bowling" any time of the day with Netflix?
Long term use of glossy screens lead to blindness and cancer?
Sounds like research from the Teckstudion Institute.
Sorry these iMac are awesome without Blu-ray. Blu-ray is not the future for movies - Netflix HD downloads are. SD is great for rewriteable operations where Blu-ray is not. SD will long outlive Blu-ray.
I'm sorry but we have to live in the present. The new iMacs are awesome without Blu-ray, but they would be even better with the option. What do SD cards have to do with Blu-ray? Last I checked a DVD superdrive was occupying the slot where the Blu-ray drive would go. SD and Blu-ray could coexist on the same computer. Similarly, streaming and optical media will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future.
This is the best iMac yet. But the quad core options are unnecessarily expensive to me.
But I'm still critical of the lack of i5s in the bottom tier and the i7s as standard in the top tier. And the 4850 should be in the 'low end' 27 incher with something a little more powerful to push the resolution of the 27inch on the high end iMac.
Still, with an interim(?) update in 6 months...this line up could look just about right.
As for Blue Ray, be nice to have a 'super' blue burner as standard but can't these be added? Are they cheap? Do they work with Snow Leopard? *Shrugs. I think I can live without it for now. But in the future...I may look closer at Blue Ray. DVDs seem big enough for now to me. And with SD cards and portable HDs being dirt cheap...Blue Ray gets the squeeze for me as a priority.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I'm sorry but we have to live in the present. The new iMacs are awesome without Blu-ray, but they would be even better with the option. What do SD cards have to do with Blu-ray? Last I checked a DVD superdrive was occupying the slot where the Blu-ray drive would go. SD and Blu-ray could coexist on the same computer. Similarly, streaming and optical media will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future.
All good points.
They shut up -that's what they do. Just ask solipsism- he's been missing in action for months ever since the iPhone got MMS, Video and cut and paste.
And FYI- just because you want Blu-ray doesn't make you a Mac Hater nor a complainer. 'Nuff said!
I want B-R.
I wasn't arguing the point myself, I was merely stating what other people on here argue about when comparing PC prices to Apple prices. BUT, I am sure in a month or so when these panels hit the streets by other manufacturers, there will be a side by side comparison showing the 27" i7 iMac at atleast $500+ more than the comparable PC version. Just as there has been the comparisons done on all previous models.
Those "side by side" comparisons are never accurate beyond having the same basic specs. Apple products do get less competitive over time though.
How many times did they reiterate their belief about ADC over DVI? DisplayPort is effectively dead in the water and going it alone on display has never ended well. Plus I think the customer can afford an extra nickel.
Plus digital downloads dish out their own share of pain.
That is the question. Obviously its going to happen some day, buy right now neither Apple, the movie/television studios, or anyone else is making it real enticing. They had a good example of how it should be done with digital music, but everyone's let greed cloud everything.
Displayport is being included on many new graphics cards. Just go and look at the new ones coming out.
If the iMac had one, all of you would bitch and complain about the price increase over previous models, and then bitch about the high price of blank media, and bitch how slow it is to back up data.
How many of you actually crowd around the computer to watch a movie? My guess is NONE. You watch them on your big screen TV.
The iMac upgrades are a great improvement over the previous models. All models now have a fantastic display (the inferior 20" is finally gone). 4 GB RAM across the board, dedicated graphics on 3 out of the 4 models, big hard drives, SD card slot, wireless keyboard and a new kick-ass mouse all standard. They are a great upgrade from either an iMac G5 or early iMac Intel.
And on about Blu-Ray, IT SUCKS!!
My PS3 BluRay died after a firmware update, won't read any disk. PS3 works and does the Folding@home now but that's it.
Had to buy another PS3, so now I got two nice heaters.
Sony is being sued because of the bricking of so many PS3 BluRays, something I'm sure had to do with copy protection/HDMI being broken. Perhaps serials being copied/stolen or something. So mine got hit.
Blu-RAY IS A BAG OF HURT!!
The iMac is a pain as it is with nothing being user accessible, much less a malfunctioning Blu-Ray and firmware updates coming from (of DRM/Rookit fame) Sony Inc. to protect the copy protection.
You need BluRay? Get a external device. It's not ready for the mainstream and perhaps never will be.
The MIAA (which Sony is part of) really doesn't want BluRay movies on computers, unless they can control the DRM and playblack so it can't be copied. Apple won't go for that naturally, all that evil Sony code in OS X.
Apple is trending towards less mechanical, less laborious, more all on the logicboard type devices anyway.
That's all ridiculous! B-R is great. A FEW PS3's got bricked. Mine didn't.
The iMac doesn't have to be an open machine to be good. That's pretty clear. If you don't want one, then don't buy one.
And you're allowed to make one copy. It's in the specs.
27 inches. You know. That's the perfect size for porn. Baybee.
Lemon Bon Bon.
LOL. "Skinemax" now shows all their "Adult" features in 16:9 HD!