blu ray dvds- a big FU from the studios

[sonnylarue]

hats off to those who've made the conversion, but frankly i resent the move by warner bros to not include the batman tech and unmasked docus on the regular 2 disc dvd.

doesn't make want to convert sooner, just made me avoid buying the dvd altogether.

i think this trend will continue in future bluray vs dvd releases.

before anyone throws the vhs vs dvd era argument , sorry, but i don't buy it.

there's all ready the film only dvd versions for people who don't care...

but fuck them if their going to futher alienate consumers willing to buy the extra features, especially in this economy.

pisses me off.

this will all be immaterial when they perfect the digital download, so quit gouging film buffs

[Thomas Mauer]

hats off to those who've made the conversion, but frankly i resent the move by warner bros to not include the batman tech and unmasked docus on the regular 2 disc dvd.

doesn't make want to convert sooner, just made me avoid buying the dvd altogether.

i think this trend will continue in future bluray vs dvd releases.

before anyone throws the vhs vs dvd era argument , sorry, but i don't buy it.

there's all ready the film only dvd versions for people who don't care...

but fuck them if their going to futher alienate consumers willing to buy the extra features, especially in this economy.

pisses me off.

this will all be immaterial when they perfect the digital download, so quit gouging film buffs
Here's a possible reverse situation.

The extras specs for the special edition DVD of Babylon AD list the prequel (animated) comic Beranek, Calero and I did with Comflix. The BluRay version doesn't.

It's possible that they simply didn't want to repeat things that are on the BD as well which had just been listed, but it still pisses me off.

[sonnylarue]

Here's a possible reverse situation.

The extras specs for the special edition DVD of Babylon AD list the prequel (animated) comic Beranek, Calero and I did with Comflix. The BluRay version doesn't.

It's possible that they simply didn't want to repeat things that are on the BD as well which had just been listed, but it still pisses me off.

that makes no sense either, given there's room on the blu ray. idiots.

[leafinsectman]

hats off to those who've made the conversion, but frankly i resent the move by warner bros to not include the batman tech and unmasked docus on the regular 2 disc dvd.

I'm watching Batman Tech right now and I've also got Unmasked on my blu ray although on the cover it says "2 disc special edition" so is there a 2 disc regular edition? WTF?

But yeah, some blu rays have less special features than their dvd counterparts and I think that's total bullshit.

EDIT: Oh wait, you're talking about the dvd. Nevermind. That sucks then :( I thought the trend was to include more special features on dvds than on blu rays.

[Toshio]

i chucked on my special features dvd disc of batman last night and was dissapointed in the amount of material on there considering the scale of the movie. Makes sense now, damn blu ray.

[sonnylarue]

i did see the unmasked and tech docus on either the history or discovery channels,
but still ...

[leafinsectman]

Yeah I've already seen Unmasked but not Tech. I thought the focus points on the first disc was really interesting though, I hope that's included in the dvd too.

[noble]

Yeah there's a lot of Blu ray movies that don't have shit for special features when the DVD has a crap ton.

Some of them only have the movie and trailers, maybe a commentary or two.

My only thought behind this would be that maybe the special features are in standard def and the people making the blu ray want to keep it HD features only.

But again that's just a guess on my part, because it sure as hell can't be the space issue.

[leafinsectman]

My only thought behind this would be that maybe the special features are in standard def and the people making the blu ray want to keep it HD features only.

Disc 2 can be a dvd for all I care, I just want the special features.

[noble]

Disc 2 can be a dvd for all I care, I just want the special features.

Oh I fully agree, and don't mind if it's standard def or what have you as long as I get at least what is on the dvd releases.

That was the only possible reason I could come up with that made sense, but when has Hollywood ever done that?

[Simpson]

I think you'll be really annoyed when you find out there was over an hour's worth of other material on the first disc of the Blu-ray. There are several "Focus Points" that you can elect to watch as the film plays, or separately on their own, each of which focuses on a specific scene, part of production, or element of the film. Very interesting stuff, sort of a substitute for a standard "Making Of" featurette.

[Simpson]

Yeah there's a lot of Blu ray movies that don't have shit for special features when the DVD has a crap ton.

There's a number of great films I've refused to upgrade for that very reason. I have no intention of rebuying a film on Blu-ray, only to have to keep the regular DVD around for the commentary or other special features.

I'm particularly annoyed that the Spider-Man trilogy was so embarrassingly barebones. The first film had THREE different releases (2-Disc DVD, 1-Disc Superbit (with a new commentary) and a later 3-Disc DVD) while SPIDER-MAN 2 had two different 2-disc releases.

And yet both of those were on single Blu-rays, not a special feature to be found on either (save for a branching feature for SPIDER-MAN 2.1), and crummy transfers from what I read. Spider-Man has been Sony's cash cow, one would think it deserves (and justifies) a better release.

[Thomas Mauer]

Oh yeah, little update. Apparently FOX wants to remove our credits because "The Genesis of Aurora" is "promotional material." I spent about 3 hours retooling that damn font. :mad:

[powerbomb1411]

As much as I love Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, I still don't own the dvd's for that. Hell, when Transformers came out, for that very reason, I bought a 360, the HD ad on, an HD tv and the HD dvd.

All to find out that I didn't notice any real change of quality and then a few months later HD dies.

So in time I do plan on getting Iron Man and Hulk on Blue-Ray, but with problems like the ones being mentioned, I have no urge to buy a DVD knowing full well it will be re-released with more special features to promote the sequel, so I definitely won't jump the shark for a Blue-Ray version that will do the same.

[noble]

You didn't notice any change between standard def and Hi def movies?

Are you sure everything is set up properly?

I'm not trying to question your reasoning, but I've noticed a HUGE difference between standard def DVD's and Hi-def Blu-ray/HDDVD's.

[Taxman]

hats off to those who've made the conversion, but frankly i resent the move by warner bros to not include the batman tech and unmasked docus on the regular 2 disc dvd.

doesn't make want to convert sooner, just made me avoid buying the dvd altogether.

i think this trend will continue in future bluray vs dvd releases.

before anyone throws the vhs vs dvd era argument , sorry, but i don't buy it.

there's all ready the film only dvd versions for people who don't care...

but fuck them if their going to futher alienate consumers willing to buy the extra features, especially in this economy.

pisses me off.

this will all be immaterial when they perfect the digital download, so quit gouging film buffsI think this sort of thing is really nothing compared with the speed with which they dispensed with the laserdisc.

[sonnylarue]

I think this sort of thing is really nothing compared with the speed with which they dispensed with the laserdisc.

maybe, but laser discs were more expensive than the dvds

[Armored Dildo]

maybe, but laser discs were more expensive than the dvds

Truth is, BluRay is going to be the dominant format for at least a decade and the fact that some fanboy didn't get some shitty extra with their Dark Knight release (Sorry John, I have to call it like it comes across here and not what I otherwise think of you) or that the industry doesn't know how to package special features for either format will not change that (yes, granted, the same extras should appear in both even if that means the standard DVDs have to be packaged with one extra disc and therefore be more expensive). I'm a little surprised people care that much about those extras, since so many of them are promotional material used in the pre-release campaign (i.e., cost-free). Did I miss the part where the Dark Knight is being released by Criterion, who actually produce good extra material? I could be wrong though: That Blade Runner boxset was literally perfect (an exception that I think proves the rule, though). In fact, I often wish that every DVD manufacturer should pull a David Lynch and package only the film because that is the only thing that matters.

[Armored Dildo]

a

[Taxman]

Truth is, BluRay is going to be the dominant format for at least a decade and the fact that some fanboy didn't get some shitty extra with their Dark Knight release (Sorry John, I have to call it like it comes across here and not what I otherwise think of you) or that the industry doesn't know how to package special features for either format will not change that (yes, granted, the same extras should appear in both even if that means the standard DVDs have to be packaged with one extra disc and therefore be more expensive). I'm a little surprised people care that much about those extras, since so many of them are promotional material used in the pre-release campaign (i.e., cost-free). Did I miss the part where the Dark Knight is being released by Criterion, who actually produce good extra material? I could be wrong though: That Blade Runner boxset was literally perfect (an exception that I think proves the rule, though). In fact, I often wish that every DVD manufacturer should pull a David Lynch and package only the film because that is the only thing that matters.I do not believe that BluRay will become the dominant format.

[Armored Dildo]

I do not believe that BluRay will become the dominant format.

I'm sorry but you either know something way down the tech pipeline that I don't because:

1. What will become the dominant format, since what else is there? People are replacing their DVD players in droves.
2. You do realize that most BluRay players can play standard DVDs, making DVD players an anachronism?
3. According to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/blu-ray-hd-dvd-combo,6721.html), they have invented a hybrid disc that can play on both DVD and BluRay players using the same surface/side of the disc. So once the markup attached to the hybrid goes down (once they perfect the process and it becomes the industry standard; no sooner than two years is my guess), it won't matter what player you have: You will be buying a BluRay no matter what.

[The Funketeer]

I'm sorry but you either know something way down the tech pipeline that I don't because:

1. What will become the dominant format, since what else is there? People are replacing their DVD players in droves.

Digital download. Studios and cable companies are already experimenting with HD on demand. Hard drive keep getting bigger and cheaper and there are already a number of devices that will link your tv to your computer. I'd say in 5 years or less, physical media will be on the way out.

Also keep in mind that most of America still doesn't own an HDTV and probably can't afford to. That's not going to change much in the near future, even with prices expected to drop another 20% this year.

[Armored Dildo]

Digital download. Studios and cable companies are already experimenting with HD on demand. Hard drive keep getting bigger and cheaper and there are already a number of devices that will link your tv to your computer. I'd say in 5 years or less, physical media will be on the way out.

Also keep in mind that most of America still doesn't own an HDTV and probably can't afford to. That's not going to change much in the near future, even with prices expected to drop another 20% this year.

Except that you are not considering the rest of the world, where most people typically do not download hundreds of gigs of content a month due to slower connection speed, expensive ISPs.

Sure, direct download might be great in NA (I myself do not own a TV) and some European countries (even a place like Argentina) but movies make their money back on worldwide sales and that crucial rest of the world market is still attached to media players. Also, you don't technically need an HDTV to use a BluRay player (sure it looks shit) but in any case, with the hybrid layer disc it's a completely moot point anyway.

[sonnylarue]

I'm sorry but you either know something way down the tech pipeline that I don't because:

1. What will become the dominant format, since what else is there? People are replacing their DVD players in droves.
2. You do realize that most BluRay players can play standard DVDs, making DVD players an anachronism?
3. According to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/blu-ray-hd-dvd-combo,6721.html), they have invented a hybrid disc that can play on both DVD and BluRay players using the same surface/side of the disc. So once the markup attached to the hybrid goes down (once they perfect the process and it becomes the industry standard; no sooner than two years is my guess), it won't matter what player you have: You will be buying a BluRay no matter what.


i understand sales are up dramatically compared to last year, but 3 million blu ray player sales world wide is very good, but not yet format changing.

they're about where dvds were in 2000. and unlike the vhs to dvd conversion, there wasn't competing innovations hapening then, like downloading via tivo, netflix, etc., are happening now.


the blu ray players are still too expensive for average consumers , and this economy might be the wrong time to expect droves to upgrade.

i'm sure the video industry will do all they can to make cosumers switch, but dvd sales in general are way down...

i also think expecting this innovation to last a decade is a bit too optimistic.

downloads of films will get faster and the file size will get smaller during this same decade.

maybe i'm wrong, but i think it's still too early in the game to tell.

[Taxman]

I'm sorry but you either know something way down the tech pipeline that I don't because:

1. What will become the dominant format, since what else is there? People are replacing their DVD players in droves.
2. You do realize that most BluRay players can play standard DVDs, making DVD players an anachronism?
3. According to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/blu-ray-hd-dvd-combo,6721.html), they have invented a hybrid disc that can play on both DVD and BluRay players using the same surface/side of the disc. So once the markup attached to the hybrid goes down (once they perfect the process and it becomes the industry standard; no sooner than two years is my guess), it won't matter what player you have: You will be buying a BluRay no matter what.There just simply is not enough upside to Blu Ray for the average consumer to have any incentive to upgrade. There are still large numbers of people who do not even know what the hell Blu Ray is.

People who are tech savy imagine that everyone else is just like them, they simply are not. The digital TV switchover in a few weeks is looking like it might create a major crisis. The majority of people are happy watching DVDs on their TVs, and play the damn things through their TV's speakers.

I think it took DVDs a good seven or eight years to finally dominate VHS, and the format offered numerous advantages. Blu Ray simple adds very little for the vast majority of consumers. And their time is short to gain the market advantage. Affordable digital delivery of movies by the cable companies is probably only a few years away. Lucky Goldstar is introducing a television which connects directly to the internet and Netflix this year.

[sonnylarue]

There just simply is not enough upside to Blu Ray for the average consumer to have any incentive to upgrade. There are still large numbers of people who do not even know what the hell Blu Ray is.

People who are tech savy imagine that everyone else is just like them, they simply are not. The digital TV switchover in a few weeks is looking like it might create a major crisis. The majority of people are happy watching DVDs on their TVs, and play the damn things through their TV's speakers.

I think it took DVDs a good seven or eight years to finally dominate VHS, and the format offered numerous advantages. Blu Ray simple adds very little for the vast majority of consumers. And their time is short to gain the market advantage. Affordable digital delivery of movies by the cable companies is probably only a few years away. Lucky Goldstar is introducing a television which connects directly to the internet and Netflix this year.

i was waiting for someone to challenge apple tv.

[sonnylarue]

or there's the ny times pov

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/technology/05bluray.html?_r=1&em=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1231303882-j9ysFS/Rdg9Qs6tlfIYHSQ

This year will be crucial for the new format. Heavy holiday discounting and the natural decline in electronics prices over time have pushed prices for some Blu-ray players under $200, a drop of well more than half in the last few years — and into the realm of affordability for many. At the same time, Blu-ray’s backers, including Sony and the Walt Disney Company, face a growing chorus of skeptics that says the window for a high-definition disc format may be closing fast.

One reason is that discs of all kinds may become obsolete as a new wave of digital media services starts to flow into the living room. On Monday, for example, the Korean television maker LG Electronics plans to announce a new line of high-definition televisions that connect directly to the Internet with no set-top box required. The televisions will be able to play movies and television shows from online video-on-demand services, including Netflix.

“The Blu-ray format is in jeopardy simply because the advent of downloadable HD movies is so close,” said Roger L. Kay, president of Endpoint Technologies Associates. a research and consulting company. “Streaming video from the Internet and other means of direct digital delivery are going to put optical formats out of business entirely over the next few years.”

Blu-ray’s supporters have another view. They say the technology had a breakout year, crowned by the holiday success of “The Dark Knight,” which sold 600,000 Blu-ray copies in one day. They also say that Blu-ray players are selling faster than DVD players did at a comparable time in their emergence.

“What we saw in 2008 was increasing adoption of Blu-ray along with decreasing hardware prices,” said Reed Hastings, the chief executive of Netflix, which has persuaded more than half a million members to pay an extra dollar a month to rent Blu-ray discs. “The window of opportunity for DVD and Blu-ray discs is longer than most people think. But it’s not going to last forever.”

[Taxman]

i was waiting for someone to challenge apple tv.It is hard for me to see how apple tv can compete with Xbox 360 and PS3.

[Taxman]

or there's the ny times pov

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/technology/05bluray.html?_r=1&em=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1231303882-j9ysFS/Rdg9Qs6tlfIYHSQThe whole article was posted Bednis side. I didn't get to finish it.

http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=168672

[powerbomb1411]

You didn't notice any change between standard def and Hi def movies?

Are you sure everything is set up properly?

I'm not trying to question your reasoning, but I've noticed a HUGE difference between standard def DVD's and Hi-def Blu-ray/HDDVD's.

I might just be picky. Everything is set up correct. It might just be the size of the tv. But the only time I notice any difference is when the signal going to the TV is not HD.

And it's the same way at work. We have HD tv's and an HD signal, but I really don't see any difference. And my Dad thought the same thing on his tv as well.

Now it's even more confusing for me when I constantly hear about quality so good you can see the dog hairs on the couch in I am Legend (That one is from a person I know), and see little blemishes on stars faces or even sweat on sport stars.

Yet, I never see any of that.

And yet I recall, confusing enough, years ago when VHS was the dominant format, the place we went to get the HCR fixed had a pretty big tv and I couldn't stop looking at it because the picture was so clear that it almost looked like I was really at the hockey game that was playing on the tv.

[sonnylarue]

It is hard for me to see how apple tv can compete with Xbox 360 and PS3.

i didn't say or mean that...

you're missing the point...

why would a non gamer buy a game console to watch dvd movies that they'd have to buy or rent seperatley , when they can buy a tv that can receive downloaded hd films/ tv shows from the net directly?

but to address your question, what happens when the tv can play games directly, without a game console too?

that is the direction tv tech is going, one machine does it all.

i believe this tech will surpass buying discs, just like itunes has to cds

[noble]

I believe it will as well.

Eventually anyway.

I think it will take longer than the conversion from CD's to MP3/itunes, as music is a much smaller download than movies, and then you get into it taking longer if you want the hi-def version, and so on.

It will happen, just not as quickly.

[sonnylarue]

I believe it will as well.

Eventually anyway.

I think it will take longer than the conversion from CD's to MP3/itunes, as music is a much smaller download than movies, and then you get into it taking longer if you want the hi-def version, and so on.

It will happen, just not as quickly.

agreed. i just think it will happen sooner than 10 years. look how fast the leap was from wav to mp3. i think tech folk are trying to make smaller files all the time, plus hard drive space keeps getting cheaper too.

when you combine what's happened with tivo, you tube, etc, i don't see blu ray lasting 10 years, the way standard dvds have

[Taxman]

i didn't say or mean that...

you're missing the point...

why would a non gamer buy a game console to watch dvd movies that they'd have to buy or rent seperatley , when they can buy a tv that can receive downloaded hd films/ tv shows from the net directly?Okay, I haven't really paid enough attention to Apple TV to know how much of a "success" it is supposed to be. I just felt it was a poor product at launch because a large segment of the potential customer base already had a machine in their home which could accomplish the same thing.

[sonnylarue]

Okay, I haven't really paid enough attention to Apple TV to know how much of a "success" it is supposed to be. I just felt it was a poor product at launch because a large segment of the potential customer base already had a machine in their home which could accomplish the same thing.

the apple tv itself is only a first step towards what is coming.

this reminds me of when i talk to people who say "why would I want to watch Tv shows, or hear mp3 music on my cellphone?

the tech/software is what matters, not the current product that is using it.

these are all first generation products.

[Armored Dildo]

Again though, I think the Apple TV tech (i.e., direct download monitors) will only be viable in places like NA where home internet connections are widely available, relatively affordable and used primarily for entertainment purposes. For most of the rest of the world, hybrid video discs will be the only solution that I can imagine.

Another challenge is national broadcasters: Take the BBC as an example, won't it have to throw away its licensing model? (maybe it already has) As a Canadian, I would object to have to pay my ISP to broadcast our national broadcaster (CBC), which is otherwise a free channel paid for by our tax dollars.

[sonnylarue]

Again though, I think the Apple TV tech (i.e., direct download monitors) will only be viable in places like NA where home internet connections are widely available, relatively affordable and used primarily for entertainment purposes. For most of the rest of the world, hybrid video discs will be the only solution that I can imagine.

i'm sure vhs still does healthy biz in the 3rd world today too, but most of the pacific asian countries, also china, australia, and europe, all have broadband capability.

also, just as cell phones have penetrated the 3rd world, the advanced media tech will follow . likely carried on those same cell phones.

do you think impovershed countries will make the conversion to blu ray, instead?


Another challenge is national broadcasters: Take the BBC as an example, won't it have to throw away its licensing model? (maybe it already has) As a Canadian, I would object to have to pay my ISP to broadcast our national broadcaster (CBC), which is otherwise a free channel paid for by our tax dollars.

the beeb only streams their shows in their own country, but slingboxes, and other tech already exists to circumvent these blocks...

again, just like the music biz, i think all media companies are adjusting how they distribute their product, and this will continue to change.

blu ray dvds do not exist in a media vaccum

[Armored Dildo]

i'm sure vhs still does healthy biz in the 3rd world today too, but most of the pacific asian countries, also china, australia, and europe, all have broadband capability.

also, just as cell phones have penetrated the 3rd world, the advanced media tech will follow . likely carried on those same cell phones.

do you think impovershed countries will make the conversion to blu ray, instead?



the beeb only streams their shows in their own country, but slingboxes, and other tech already exists to circumvent these blocks...

again, just like the music biz, i think all media companies are adjusting how they distribute their product, and this will continue to change.

blu ray dvds do not exist in a media vaccum

I had a long-winded reply involving Japan and the Gulf states (with their weird internet connection issues) but I guess the change in media delivery is so fluid and dynamic that even for a guy like me in his late 20s is a bit frustrated by the lack of stability and that's what I'm railing against, and not any of anyone's points here.

It bugs me, because it's analogous to the philosophy of building cars and appliances only so well, just enough that they work for a time before requiring to be repaired or replaced: The cruelest logic of consumer capitalism was the realization that you can charge people several times for the same thing, if they need or want it bad enough.

I also work in a media archive and I PROMISE you that at this point, there is no stable medium on which to preserve audio/visual material created in the last five years. There is no guarantee that in fifty or a hundred years anything that we watch today will EVER be accessible again. Even video discs oxidize. Frankly, celluloid is/was the best format (under ideal conditions a master print lasts eighty years). It's actually an extremely serious problem that I guarantee you Hollywood is utterly deaf to. Because why would the human race plan for anything fifty years from now?

[Thomas Mauer]

I had a long-winded reply involving Japan and the Gulf states (with their weird internet connection issues) but I guess the change in media delivery is so fluid and dynamic that even for a guy like me in his late 20s is a bit frustrated by the lack of stability and that's what I'm railing against, and not any of anyone's points here.

It bugs me, because it's analogous to the philosophy of building cars and appliances only so well, just enough that they work for a time before requiring to be repaired or replaced: The cruelest logic of consumer capitalism was the realization that you can charge people several times for the same thing, if they need or want it bad enough.

I also work in a media archive and I PROMISE you that at this point, there is no stable medium on which to preserve audio/visual material created in the last five years. There is no guarantee that in fifty or a hundred years anything that we watch today will EVER be accessible again. Even video discs oxidize. Frankly, celluloid is/was the best format (under ideal conditions a master print lasts eighty years). It's actually an extremely serious problem that I guarantee you Hollywood is utterly deaf to. Because why would the human race plan for anything fifty years from now?
This is exactly why we need the leaps and bounds in technology so BluRay can be skipped quickly and we get more quickly to a crystal-based storage solution. While Babylon 5 was just doing a scifi thing using data crystals back in 1992, this tech has been in development for a few years now. Longevity of data would be much higher than even celluloid offers.

[noble]

I had a long-winded reply involving Japan and the Gulf states (with their weird internet connection issues) but I guess the change in media delivery is so fluid and dynamic that even for a guy like me in his late 20s is a bit frustrated by the lack of stability and that's what I'm railing against, and not any of anyone's points here.

It bugs me, because it's analogous to the philosophy of building cars and appliances only so well, just enough that they work for a time before requiring to be repaired or replaced: The cruelest logic of consumer capitalism was the realization that you can charge people several times for the same thing, if they need or want it bad enough.

I also work in a media archive and I PROMISE you that at this point, there is no stable medium on which to preserve audio/visual material created in the last five years. There is no guarantee that in fifty or a hundred years anything that we watch today will EVER be accessible again. Even video discs oxidize. Frankly, celluloid is/was the best format (under ideal conditions a master print lasts eighty years). It's actually an extremely serious problem that I guarantee you Hollywood is utterly deaf to. Because why would the human race plan for anything fifty years from now?

I think with our rapidly growing 'high' tech society, and the toys and gadgets we live with, it's only a natural occurance, that as our ability to create new and more demanding technologies increases, that our standard everyday products are going to become obsolete faster.

Look at a cellphone from just five years ago and compare it to todays model.

You might not think they've changed that much, but even in this simple little device a lot has evolved in the services it offers, and the different functions it can perform.

I think the days of a product lasting twenty or thirty years without the need for an upgrade(I'm talking about the standard color TV), are long gone.

Even the new HDTV's that were rolled out in the last three years(the 1080p models) are becoming outdated as newer (the 120Hz) models are rolling out.

We demand bigger, better, and faster, and this is an unfortunate byproduct of that.

[Thomas Mauer]

I think with our rapidly growing 'high' tech society, and the toys and gadgets we live with, it's only a natural occurance, that as our ability to create new and more demanding technologies increases, that our standard everyday products are going to become obsolete faster.

Look at a cellphone from just five years ago and compare it to todays model.

You might not think they've changed that much, but even in this simple little device a lot has evolved in the services it offers, and the different functions it can perform.

I think the days of a product lasting twenty or thirty years without the need for an upgrade(I'm talking about the standard color TV), are long gone.

Even the new HDTV's that were rolled out in the last three years(the 1080p models) are becoming outdated as newer (the 120Hz) models are rolling out.

We demand bigger, better, and faster, and this is an unfortunate byproduct of that.

He's talking about the content. Archivists around the world are ringing the alarm bell that if we don't find a good archiving solution for all our digital files, there'll be an information Dark Age in the future that will start around the year 2000.

[DaveCummings]

He's talking about the content. Archivists around the world are ringing the alarm bell that if we don't find a good archiving solution for all our digital files, there'll be an information Dark Age in the future that will start around the year 2000.


The year 2000!?!?! Oh god, it's started already!!!!

[Thomas Mauer]

The year 2000!?!?! Oh god, it's started already!!!!

Why don't you roll your eyes a little harder?

This is going to be a real issue in roughly 50 to 75 years if no viable solution is found. People will still be able to read millennia-old papyri, cloth-based & acid free paper as well as parchment books and scrolls.

Whatever we're producing that's primarily stored digitally like video games, all email communication, or digital art that's never seeing print is in danger of being lost to future generations.

You might laugh about the email example because there are so many, but historians thrive on communication in letters. It's the height of irony that our mass communication civilization might end up leaving as little evidence for future generations as Greek Dark Age or late Antiquity/early Medieval European societies.

[Armored Dildo]

Why don't you roll your eyes a little harder?

This is going to be a real issue in roughly 50 to 75 years if no viable solution is found. People will still be able to read millennia-old papyri, cloth-based & acid free paper as well as parchment books and scrolls.

Whatever we're producing that's primarily stored digitally like video games, all email communication, or digital art that's never seeing print is in danger of being lost to future generations.

You might laugh about the email example because there are so many, but historians thrive on communication in letters. It's the height of irony that our mass communication civilization might end up leaving as little evidence for future generations as Greek Dark Age or late Antiquity/early Medieval European societies.

By comparison, the destruction of the Library of Alexandria will seem like a thrown-away receipt.

[Armored Dildo]

This is exactly why we need the leaps and bounds in technology so BluRay can be skipped quickly and we get more quickly to a crystal-based storage solution. While Babylon 5 was just doing a scifi thing using data crystals back in 1992, this tech has been in development for a few years now. Longevity of data would be much higher than even celluloid offers.

Yeah I really hope crystal-based data-storage really does get adopted by media archivists in the future. Not only can it in store practically any type of information (in theory) but it is loss-less (ditto.) and by leaps and bounds the most durable and long-lasting storage medium (although some rare metals might be even better for text - but prohibitively expensive).

Of course, even that storage medium is still vulnerable to the chance that both the devices used to record and play-back the info. itself disappears (in the sense of the knowledge of how to preserve those devices and/or the ability to build them from scratch is lost to future generations) but that eventuality is entirely unpreventable no matter what.

BTW, sorry for getting so OT...

[Taxman]

By comparison, the destruction of the Library of Alexandria will seem like a thrown-away receipt.Hhmmm . . . the way I see it the stuff in Alexandria was mostly one of a kind or of and extremely limited number of copies. Most of the stuff you are worried about saving now has millions of copies running around. I don't know that I see a big need for concern at this point.

[Thomas Mauer]

Hhmmm . . . the way I see it the stuff in Alexandria was mostly one of a kind or of and extremely limited number of copies. Most of the stuff you are worried about saving now has millions of copies running around. I don't know that I see a big need for concern at this point.

And that's where you're wrong. Way more was printed and written than is still preserved, and we're lucky to have so many copies because the monasteries of the western world and the universities of the Orient mass reproduced the books that existed.

Also, what you think is unimportant doesn't have to be from an archival standpoint. All of the commercials from the last few decades for example may have annoyed us to no end, but the vast majority will not survive and thus make it harder to get an idea of how late 20th/early 21st century consumerism worked culturally.

Furthermore, while you may think that your and my emails might be useless for future generations, they won't see it that way. For nearly 4,000 years, the tales of the rulers were considered the most important, and that's almost exclusively what we've got to work with. But that paints a quite different picture than what life really was like, and social, cultural, and psychological history are much more dependent on sources from and about regular people.

That doesn't mean your or my life will be interesting to them per se, but our data could help them understand how our generation ticked.

[Armored Dildo]

Hhmmm . . . the way I see it the stuff in Alexandria was mostly one of a kind or of and extremely limited number of copies. Most of the stuff you are worried about saving now has millions of copies running around. I don't know that I see a big need for concern at this point.

At this point, what you have on your hard drive will last you a decade, max. Do you really have all your emails from the 1990s, or any document dated before this century? If so, good for you (honestly). Do you trust that the email server(s) you use/have used have kept your communications records, or will still do in a hundred years' time?

Are you now able to run any of the software stored on floppy discs (to say nothing of magnetic tapes or punch-cards), especially given that (case in point) Bill Gates wiped away DOS-based software compatibility with Windows XP (it may have even been with 98 or ME) as a business decision?

Most hospitals and emergency services run on antiquated legacy software (most of it DOS-based) because they cannot afford the risk of losing records and databases, but even that is changing.

It is a systemic problem, and it is because the vast majority of the world operates under the logic of global capitalism, which is in turn motivated by only short-term thinking: As an example, name me one human initiative that is projected to take more than a hundred years. I can't.

If there is a single reason why I would believe the human race is doomed, it is because of our sickening, disgusting myopia. We are a billion times better than that.

Wow, this has gone so OT... lol.

[Armored Dildo]

And that's where you're wrong. Way more was printed and written than is still preserved, and we're lucky to have so many copies because the monasteries of the western world and the universities of the Orient mass reproduced the books that existed.

Also, what you think is unimportant doesn't have to be from an archival standpoint. All of the commercials from the last few decades for example may have annoyed us to no end, but the vast majority will not survive and thus make it harder to get an idea of how late 20th/early 21st century consumerism worked culturally.

Furthermore, while you may think that your and my emails might be useless for future generations, they won't see it that way. For nearly 4,000 years, the tales of the rulers were considered the most important, and that's almost exclusively what we've got to work with. But that paints a quite different picture than what life really was like, and social, cultural, and psychological history are much more dependent on sources from and about regular people.

That doesn't mean your or my life will be interesting to them per se, but our data could help them understand how our generation ticked.

Here's an example: The diary of Samuel Pepys. He was a naval administrator in Britain in the 17th Century and that alone would have ensured him a footnote in history. But he happened to write a very detailed, meticulous diary filled with the most banal observations and he wrote it for a decade. Without it, we wouldn't know half of what we do about the English Restoration (especially the everyday social customs and attitudes - we would know nothing about birthing practices during that time, for example, because it was largely done by women who wouldn't think of, or be allowed to, writing it down) and if Pepys hadn't bound his diary, that utterly invaluable information would almost certainly have been lost to the ages.

[Thomas Mauer]

Here's an example: The diary of Samuel Pepys. He was a naval administrator in Britain in the 17th Century and that alone would have ensured him a footnote in history. But he happened to write a very detailed, meticulous diary filled with the most banal observations and he wrote it for a decade. Without it, we wouldn't know half of what we do about the English Restoration (especially the everyday social customs and attitudes - we would know nothing about birthing practices during that time, for example, because it was largely done by women who wouldn't think of, or be allowed to, writing it down) and if Pepys hadn't bound his diary, that utterly invaluable information would almost certainly have been lost to the ages.

I love that book.

[Simpson]

Uh oh, I hope John wasn't planning on picking up AUSTRALIA:

For you Baz Luhrmann fans, Fox has just announced the release Australia on 3/3. Australia will be available in two versions... a single-disc DVD (SRP $29.98) and a Blu-ray Disc ($39.99). The DVD will include a pair of deleted scenes. The Blu-ray will include those, along with the Australia: The People, The History, The Location documentary and 9 featurettes (Photography, Production Design, Costume Design, Locations, Cinematography, Sound, Editing, Music and Visual Effects).

[JesTr]

I'll go to blue-ray when there are more games for the PS3 and I buy one. Anime blue-ray is going to cost a arm and a leg and I'm not looking forward to that.

[sonnylarue]

tell me again how blu ray is going to be around for a long time... (http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/123584;_ylt=AsWncviMMEqr3T3mEyjCTtGXMJA5)

[The Funketeer]

tell me again how blu ray is going to be around for a long time... (http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/123584;_ylt=AsWncviMMEqr3T3mEyjCTtGXMJA5)

I'm not sure why anyone thought BluRays would go through the roof the way DVD did. They keep touting the falling prices on the players but fail to realize that you need to own a $1000+ television to watch them on.

[Mark4myself]

And that's where you're wrong. Way more was printed and written than is still preserved, and we're lucky to have so many copies because the monasteries of the western world and the universities of the Orient mass reproduced the books that existed.

Also, what you think is unimportant doesn't have to be from an archival standpoint. All of the commercials from the last few decades for example may have annoyed us to no end, but the vast majority will not survive and thus make it harder to get an idea of how late 20th/early 21st century consumerism worked culturally.

Furthermore, while you may think that your and my emails might be useless for future generations, they won't see it that way. For nearly 4,000 years, the tales of the rulers were considered the most important, and that's almost exclusively what we've got to work with. But that paints a quite different picture than what life really was like, and social, cultural, and psychological history are much more dependent on sources from and about regular people.

That doesn't mean your or my life will be interesting to them per se, but our data could help them understand how our generation ticked.


I'm a historian and this is something near and dear to my heart. I have had the pleasure of researching letters written from a soldier in the Civil War back to his family. He was not a significant soldier, the events depicted were not significant, but the insight into the lives and concerns of soldiers was invaluable. The letters were filled with monetary concerns, details about new soldiers coming in, friends dying, and one letter was smudged from tears he had shed writing to his little girl. Shortly after the letters ceased and my research discovered the reason why. He died at the very next battle. I felt a connection to him and actually felt a loss. I had read his personal thoughts, seen the pain he felt for not seeing his children, saw where his tears had fallen, and now I knew he never made it home. We have lost that now. In a day and age of text messages, e-mails, phone calls, etc. the paper trail where we can gain insight into society and culture has come to an end. Instead we are left with magazines and newspapers (for a moment longer) which don't tell the real story of a people. Do you want history to judge us on American Idol, Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, The Hills, etc.? That is our legacy because our voices are not being left for posterity's sake.