What's the deal with DVD?

[JRDelirious]

Priceguy – a relatively recent article on DVD recording:

http://hometheater.about.com/library/weekly/aadvdrecfaqa.htm

[Space_Vampire]

*Originally posted by Max Torque *
**I believe what he’s saying here is that while a DVD is fast-forwarding, subtitles won’t display, so he can’t do the “watching a subtitled film in half the time” trick that you can do with a videotape. **

Yes. Also, at least on all the players I’ve used, the scanning ahead or backwards does NOT work like on a VCR. It’s skipping ahead a certain amount of space on the disc, not playing the tape really fast, so it’s easy to overshoot. Of course, usually there’s not that much reason to do this on a DVD player anyway.

I disagree that better picture quality is a “manufactured” need. Better is better, whether you were dissatisfied in the first place or not. Those of us who aren’t in high-tech industries don’t feel a need for a lot of things that we later wouldn’t give up for anything. I sure didn’t sit around going “man, I wish they would hurry up and invent some kind of inter-web-thing.”

[Zebra]

When I first got my DVD player and some disks I’ll admit that I wasn’t all that impressed. Yes I liked the special features and the ‘jump to any scene’ thing but it seemd just good. I did have several tapes die on me either from general wear and tear and from being eaten by the deck or I ruined one scene by watching it frame by frame and slow mo several times and when I watched it normal speed later that bit was damaged.

But then I got a digital sound system with five channels and a powered sub woofer.

Wow!

First off the dedicated center channel really cleared up the dialogue track. I had many disks (Silverado is one) that before were difficult to watch because I had to adjust the volume all the time as the music track was too loud but the speaking parts couldn’t be heard. This was all solved by a good surround sound system.

So DVD plus Surround Sound makes a great home viewing expierence.

[Mangetout]

The degradation of videotapes is not just a possibility, it is an inevitability; the tape is physically in contact with the spinning read/write head (and all the pinch wheels etc) - physical wear is inevitable, magnetic degradation is also petty likely, if not inevitable.

[elfoldo]

I like DVDs for the picture quality, durability, and bonus features. I’m also a member of NetFlix so I really like the fact that they can be easily mailed.

One great thing about kids DVDs is the ability to start the movie X minutes from the end. Like, you have 20 minutes before you have to leave but your daughter wants to watch Cinderella? No problem. Just skip ahead until there’s 20 minutes left in the movie.

But one problem with DVDs is they are much less durable if people don’t take care of them. I think I only ever rented 1 bad VHS tape, but I’ve rented a lot of bad DVDs. Things like the picture getting blocky, getting stuck in the middle, refusing to play, etc. The nature of the medium I guess. One defect can render the disk useless.

[Dunderman]

*Originally posted by troub *
Priceguy, I understand that for you it’s not necessarily about having to buy a new player, as you’ve already proposed changes to the VHS standard that would require new equipment anyway (and new tapes, too, but you seem to ignore that).

I might need new tapes for new movies, but I could keep watching my old ones, that I’m perfectly happy with. I may be wrong.

Your problem is that you have lots and lots and lots of movies on VHS already. I’d say that’s your problem. Unless you do nothing else with your life, I’d say most of those movies you haven’t watched in years anyway. I used to “collect” VHS’s in the same way, and finally realized the futility of it. Tons of tapes that never get watched, and god forbid you should get one too close to a speaker or the TV set, and it gets wiped (admittedly doesn’t happen very often, but any magnetic source will destroy your VHS tape). Now, I only buy movies that I really really love. . .no buying movies just to be buying movies.

This problem is exactly the same whether you use VHS or DVD, and so has nothing to do with the discussion. About tapes getting wiped, I’ve stored tapes on top of my TV for months at a time and never experienced a single wipe.

Oh, and also, I won’t hesitate to point out that in your comparison of prices, Priceguy, the VHS’s are largely only that price now because of the existence of DVDs. I distinctly remember new VHS tapes costing $20-$25. Now DVDs cost $20-$25, and VHS cost $9-$15. If not for DVD, I can almost guarantee you that those same tapes would still cost $20–so your argument that VHS is cheaper is fallacious. Of course, one could go on a rant about how overpriced all of this stuff is in comparison with how much the tapes/discs actually cost to produce, but that’s a different thread.

The point was not to say that VHS is cheap, but to disprove Space Vampire’s claim that DVD is cheaper than VHS. It simply isn’t.

*Originally posted by Space Vampire *
Don’t worry though, something is coming down the pipe that might even piss off DVD collectors.

And this would make me happy how, exactly? It’s not like I’ve got something personal against DVD, I just think it’s a next-to-useless invention. Blu-Ray sounds just as bad.

** I disagree that better picture quality is a “manufactured” need. Better is better, whether you were dissatisfied in the first place or not. Those of us who aren’t in high-tech industries don’t feel a need for a lot of things that we later wouldn’t give up for anything. I sure didn’t sit around going “man, I wish they would hurry up and invent some kind of inter-web-thing.”**

Nor did I, but it does fulfill functions that weren’t fulfilled before and gives us new opportunities we hadn’t before. Meaningful functions. Exciting opportunities. DVD, by contrast, lets us watch movies.

[Doomtrain]

Nobody’s mentioned TV shows? So many great shows are released on DVD that wouldn’t even be considered for VHS. Also, I LIKE the special features. I find commentaries and “making-ofs” interesting (most of the time, anyway).

[Surreal]

I agree with the OP 100%.

In a few years, I’m sure they’ll come out with some other format that’s a little bit smaller than the DVD’s, and maybe these will have some other additional features, like maybe some more boring crap about how the movie was made.

Then the people who are now praising DVD’s will have to go out and repurchase everything they bought on DVD, only to have to replace it all once again when the next format comes out.

These so-called ‘improvements’ are so insignificant I don’t see how repurchasing everything is justified.

[MrMyth]

I give. Uncle, says I.

No matter what is said here, Priceguy, you have no intention of changing your mind. You asked for opinions for which you never intended to give any weight to. Just seems like what you are proposing, on a board that dedicates itself to fighting ignorance no less, is willfull ignorance. The mindset of ‘if I don’t know its better, then it isn’t better’. That’s dumber than a fireproof match.
What kind of responses did you think you were going to get? Were you resistant to PC’s too, or did you find a way to hook your typewriter up to the 'Net?

[Space_Vampire]

*Originally posted by Priceguy *
**
Nor did I, but it does fulfill functions that weren’t fulfilled before and gives us new opportunities we hadn’t before. Meaningful functions. Exciting opportunities. DVD, by contrast, lets us watch movies. **

…
So we should never make advances in consumer goods unless they’re absolutely necessary? We should’ve stuck with silent movies, IBM PCs, black and white TV and vinyl records because any further developments are just “trivial” improvements on media that already exist? Nobody’s forcing you to buy anything you don’t want, but you don’t have to rain on everybody else’s parade, Grumpy McStoneage.

Let me guess, Surreal. YOU DON’T OWN A DVD PLAYER, DO YOU? Even if you never touch the special features, the improvements are vast, even if you refuse to admit it. If the impovements weren’t significant, the format would never have gotten a foothold. Remember laserdisc? If the next best thing offers something that’s worth the cost to a lot of people, then yeah, we’ll move up. If not, it’ll flop.

[John_Harrison]

The mindset of ‘if I don’t know its better, then it isn’t better’. That’s dumber than a fireproof match.

This can apply to almost any tech advance, since they usually take small steps forward.

I did want to comment on this, though.

I’m a person who opposes pointless progress. I think inventions and new technology should be created out of a genuine need. Inventions and technology created for other reasons must have a hell of a good application, or they’re useless.

There wasn’t a need for a VCR, either, so by definition it was pointless progress. How did you know what you were missing if you didn’t have anything to compare it to?

[merge]

*Originally posted by Surreal *
**I agree with the OP 100%.

In a few years, I’m sure they’ll come out with some other format that’s a little bit smaller than the DVD’s, and maybe these will have some other additional features, like maybe some more boring crap about how the movie was made.

Then the people who are now praising DVD’s will have to go out and repurchase everything they bought on DVD, only to have to replace it all once again when the next format comes out.

These so-called ‘improvements’ are so insignificant I don’t see how repurchasing everything is justified. **

Sooo… how is your 8-Track doing? or maybe your 45?:rolleyes:

[Cheesesteak]

Surreal, people could have said the same thing about CDs, they’ve been out for over 20 years and are going strong. The only technology on the horizon is D-VHS, which can record in full HDTV quality (DVD can’t). Until HDTV gets really big, it won’t stand a chance, and DVD type technology may catch up by then.

[MrMyth]

It already has,Cheesesteak. Blu-Ray is damn close to what D-VHS can do, and it still has all the DVD specific features like chapter skips, optical format, etc.
D-VHS is still a tape - it still needs to be rewound, it still scrapes against a head when it plays, it can still break in the machine, and three-year-olds will still want to stuff PB&J sandwiches down the players’ throats.
From what I understand, D-VHS tapes hold the equivalent of 75 gigs of info. One-sided Blu-Ray discs hold 27 gigs, with plans for a 50 gig disc in the works. One D-VHS tape can hold about 3.5 hours of hi-def(1080i) video. Standard Blu-ray can hold 2 hours.

For reference, the biggest DVDs we have now are the double-sided, double-layered DVD-18’s. These can hold 18 gigs of info.

[Cervaise]

The definitive argument for DVD over VHS:

Plug in the Dangerous Liaisons disc, and with judicious use of the Zoom and A>B Repeat buttons, you can watch the four seconds of Uma Thurman taking off her blouse all day long, without that icky John Malkovich even being visible. And if you switch your stereo system’s input to the CD player, you can even provide your own bow-chicka-bow soundtrack.

QED.

[John_Harrison]

Sweet! Now if I only had Dangerous Liaisons…

[handy]

I got a DVD Recorder. Took out my vcr & put this in. This dvd recorder can use double sided dvdram (these have twice the data rate of a dvd-r disk) disks which can be recorded on 100,000 times. That’s quite a bit more than a VHS cassette…

Plus: no rewind & you can see all the programs in a list so no need to search around the cassette for them. Fun.

[World_Eater]

Go watch a movie on a freshly windexed wide screen tv with 5.1 surround and then we’ll talk.

Isn’t is possible to buy a DVD player *and * to keep your VHS for watching older movies?

You can even transfer VHS to DVD if you so desire.

[Dunderman]

*Originally posted by MrMyth *
No matter what is said here, Priceguy, you have no intention of changing your mind. You asked for opinions for which you never intended to give any weight to.

Never said I did. That’s not what this was about. I wanted to know what justification people could give for something I see as completely useless. This is not a debate. It wasn’t intended to change anybody’s mind.

Just seems like what you are proposing, on a board that dedicates itself to fighting ignorance no less, is willfull ignorance.

So if I don’t agree with your opinion, that means I’m ignorant? Sometimes I wished I didn’t hate smileys quite as much as I do; it’s time for a rolleyes one now.

**The mindset of ‘if I don’t know its better, then it isn’t better’. **

No. ‘If I don’t know it’s better, then I don’t think it’s better’. I’ve never claimed to offer anything but my opinion. Why are you taking it so personally?

What kind of responses did you think you were going to get?

Exactly the kind I got. What, have I seemed disappointed?

**Were you resistant to PC’s too, or did you find a way to hook your typewriter up to the 'Net? **

Correction 1: The Internet existed before PCs. Correction 2: PCs are for a lot more than accessing the Internet. Correction 3: I’m against DVD because it offers nothing new, in my opinion. Computers offer a lot more than typewriters do.

*Originally posted by Space Vampire *
So we should never make advances in consumer goods unless they’re absolutely necessary? We should’ve stuck with silent movies, IBM PCs, black and white TV and vinyl records because any further developments are just “trivial” improvements on media that already exist?

Sound and colour in movies are obvious improvements to make. I wasn’t alive at the time, but I’m pretty sure that more than a few missed sound and colour. I don’t have an opinion on vinyl records since I didn’t own any music prior to having a computer with an MP3 player. What has surpassed, and made obsolete, IBM PCs?

Nobody’s forcing you to buy anything you don’t want, but you don’t have to rain on everybody else’s parade, Grumpy McStoneage.

God, this is pathetic. Why are you all taking this so personally? Since when have I rained on anybody’s parade? I have my opinions on DVD, I wanted other people’s opinions. That’s it. If you have a problem with that, don’t read the thread, mmm’kay?

*Originally posted by World Eater *
Isn’t is possible to buy a DVD player and to keep your VHS for watching older movies?

Sure it is. But I don’t want to buy a DVD player.

You can even transfer VHS to DVD if you so desire.

So I’ve learned, and things are looking up. In fact, as it turns out, I already own a DVD player (it came with the computer) and my graphics card has a TV out, so apparently I can watch DVDs. I shall have to give it a try.

[John_Harrison]

*Originally posted by Priceguy *
God, this is pathetic. Why are you all taking this so personally? Since when have I rained on anybody’s parade? I have my opinions on DVD, I wanted other people’s opinions. That’s it. If you have a problem with that, don’t read the thread, mmm’kay?

Your original post sort of dismissed us movie/home theater enthusiasts. Let me elaborate:

What does DVD give us that we didn’t have already?

Ok. Not a bad start. You do answer your own question, however:

Usually, the answer is picture and sound quality.

This is a fact. Better resolution. 5.1 - 7.1 channel surround sound. Larger information storage. Longer life. I can actually get a movie in the original aspect ratio, which was almost impossible with VHS despite your claims to the contrary.

don’t think anybody sat in front of their TV and said “God I wish the picture had better resolution”.

I’ve heard this particular comment from others for years before DVD came around, but whatever. Most movie buffs I know have been dying to see movies that haven’t been butchered by pan & scam and shitty sound, and now we finally have it.

Now it gets a bit irritating:

Because people fall for this and so happily pump their money into other people’s pockets for the privilege of being able to do something they could already do much cheaper, I am going to have to get a DVD player sooner or later and buy a bunch of DVD movies just to be able to see the movies I already own. One day my VCR will crash and there will be no more VCRs to buy and no-one to repair my old one, and there goes my film library. I’m pissed.

So now it is something that we have “fallen” for. Something that isn’t worth the money we pay. Lord knows the above mentioned benefits aren’t actually worth anything, so they must be falling for some sort of scam. :rolleyes:

We get a bit snippy because we don’t feel we should be expected to bow to the lowest common denominator because some don’t “get” it. Apparently enough people have “fallen” for the DVD format, and eventually you will probably have to as well if you wish to see movies at home. And it is cheaper than VHS was before DVDs came around. (as explained by troub and experienced by anyone that was around when VHS was in its first few years)

DVD is better in all aspects except for recording ability.