Your posts are rarely about facts.
no, that is you
Most of the negative stuff about HD DVD comes from you.
no, most of the facts come from me, if they are negative to HD DVD I cannot help that. It just has so little to offer
And most of it is untrue.
show me one thing I posted that is untrue. I can show many of your statements to be untrue
It is a well known fact that Fifth Element was a lousy transfer. Nobody needs to actually watch it to know that
and it was a well known fact that the earth is flat. Just because many believe something does not make it true. I am not defending TFE it was a bad transfer of a bad master, I said that in my previous post but no where near as bad as HD DVD fanboys make it sound and Sony did decide to replace it for free for anyone that bought it. The worst part about this TFE comments from people like you is that there are a few Universal titles that are far worst then it and for some reason you don't seem concerned about it.
BD was designed with that extra storage space BECAUSE it originated as a recording tech before AVC (mpeg4) or VC-1 came along. It was designed for the space/bandwidth hog MPEG2. They also needed the extra storage for the bloated PCM codec.
not at all. first none of those recorders were 1.5x (54mbps) or 50GB (only 25). All the extras are there because distributed movies need them (such as having extras -some in movie so they can't be on a second disk-or multiple audio tracks). The problem with HD DVD is that Toshiba had a patent for .6mm disks and decided to build a format while sticking with that limiting factor.
Sony is all about collecting money for licensing produts,
I thought that was why Toshiba is pushing HD DVD
They would have to pay licencing fees to use VC-1. Same goes for the PCM used on TFE. They would have to pay to use Dolby TrueHD.
well the new version of TFE has DTHD :) you see when I say I bring the facts and you bring the ignorance. Many Sony titles have DTHD on them, some more then one DTHD track. They have used every kind of loss less (PCM, DTS-HD and DTHD). As for VC-1 it is inferior then AVC which is what most studios use, even Paramount which experiment with AVC on BD and was using VC-1 on HD DVD has used AVC on the last few titles (my opinion is that they had an agreement with MS that has ended and decided to go with the better codec)
I personally think PCM is a waste of disc space. Great sound no doubt. But is it necessary? Here is another quote from the same article on Transformers, which got a 5 star rating for AQ:
yes but we all know what your opinion is worth. I don't ask for PCM (even though there are many reasons to do so) DTHD or DTS-HD MA is good enough for me. The reason is even though there is documented proof of a difference (at least for DTHD where there is enough to compare) and any time sensitive decoding can have decompression issues, the savings tend to be worth it. But basically you have a two bit reviewer trying to justify his exaggerated scores.
