# Blu-Ray rips played on your....TiVo???



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

Just curious how many people are playing their HD Blu-ray rips on their TiVo or if they are playing (watching) them using some other device.

This thread isn't about nor do I wish to discuss any legality of playing a Blu-ray rip on your TiVo (or any other device for that matter).

Just simply wanting to know how many people do play Blu-ray rips on their TiVo & if not what device they do play them on, if at all.

Me....

If the Blu-ray is MPG2 or h.264 encoded video with a DTS audio track I play it on my LG BD390 networked blu-ray player as it supports 1080p with DTS playback over the network. Even if it using a Dolby audio track (AC3) I will still more than likely play it on my BD390.

If the Blu-ray is using VC-1 encoded video I will play it on my TiVo and use pyTiVo to transfer it to my TiVo HD units. Converting VC-1 HD encoded video to h.264 or MPG2 on my computer just so I can play it on my BD390 is a royal PIA. Therefore to keep things simple and easy I just play it on my TiVo units.

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> This thread isn't about nor do I wish to discuss any legality of playing a Blu-ray rip on your TiVo (or any other device for that matter).


Oh yeah? You really want people to admit on an open board that they rip BluRays, in the face of the DMCA? Perhaps they'll be lucky enough to have their $2M fine downgraded to $20K, but that's still a lot for most folks.

Publically, no one rips BluRays, or they risk being taken to court. I'm frankly surprised to see you openly admit it like you did.

That being said, the Tivo with pyTivo can easily transfer M2TS files using the core DD/DTS tracks, but downgraded to 1080i (from 1080p) and without any HD audio, and taking about 2x real time to do the conversion/transfer. Hardly worth it.

If you're into this sort of thing, you should get a dedicated media player.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Lots of people talk about ripping DVDs hear


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

Tivo only supports AC3 audio so it isn't worth the effort for me to use it as a media server. It's great with DVD's where you always have a DD track but many Blu-Ray titles are DTS.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

moxie1617 said:


> Tivo only supports AC3 audio so it isn't worth the effort for me to use it as a media server. It's great with DVD's where you always have a DD track but many Blu-Ray titles are DTS.


pyTivo takes care of all that for you, but it just takes a while to do the transcoding.

I agree it's not worth it.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

moxie1617 said:


> Tivo only supports AC3 audio so it isn't worth the effort for me to use it as a media server. It's great with DVD's where you always have a DD track but many Blu-Ray titles are DTS.


One of the reasons I would love the TiVo to start supporting DTS sound tracks.

I don't see that happening for a while though. The Licencing fees for DTS audio are quite a bit higher than for DD 5.1 (AC3).

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

MikeMar said:


> Lots of people talk about ripping DVDs hear


Since most of them have ears, that's not surprising. What's your point?


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> If you're into this sort of thing, you should get a dedicated media player.


My LG BD390 is or does have a built in dedicated media player. Although it isn't as robust as some of the stand alone media players available. One of the BD390's strange drawbacks is it WON'T play VC-1 encoded video files. Strange since it is a Blu-ray player and WILL play VC-1 encoded blu-ray discs. It will also play a VC-1 encoded AVCHD DVD or Blu-ray disc if I reburn it back to it.

I could convert VC-1 encoded M2TS files to MPG2 or h.264. Which would then play on my BD390. However even on my super fast computer the processing time of this conversion ends up lasting fora bout 8hrs +. Because of this I use my TiVo with pyTiVo to watch any Blu-ray rips that encoded using the VC-1 codec. Sure it takes about 2x the length of the video to transfer. But in our family we don't mind. Besides that if we are in a really big hurry we will go dig out the Blu-ray disc and use it.

As far as being worth it? It is for me. As I have several NAS (Networked Attached Storage) devices with a total space of about 18TB of space. I STORE my entire Blu-ray & DVD collection on the NAS. That way I have INSTANT access to any of the movies I own. I don't have to worry about the discs getting lost, stolen, broken or damaged.

This method is completely legal. As their "High end" dedicated devices that do the same thing. Example being Kaladescope and Axionix. Both have movie sever systems that run from about $5,000 and up.

Riping Blu-rays and DVD's is legal under certain circumstances. What I didn't want to end up being a discussion in the thread is the discussion of when is it legal to Rip Blu-rays & DVD's.

There are still alot of people who still aren't watching or using the Blu-ray format yet either. It's growing though.

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> My LG BD390 is or does have a built in dedicated media player. Although it isn't as robust as some of the stand alone media players available. One of the BD390's strange drawbacks is it WON'T play VC-1 encoded video files. Strange since it is a Blu-ray player and WILL play VC-1 encoded blu-ray discs. It will also play a VC-1 encoded AVCHD DVD or Blu-ray disc if I reburn it back to it.
> 
> I could convert VC-1 encoded M2TS files to MPG2 or h.264. Which would then play on my BD390. However even on my super fast computer the processing time of this conversion ends up lasting fora bout 8hrs +. Because of this I use my TiVo with pyTiVo to watch any Blu-ray rips that encoded using the VC-1 codec. Sure it takes about 2x the length of the video to transfer. But in our family we don't mind. Besides that if we are in a really big hurry we will go dig out the Blu-ray disc and use it.
> 
> ...


1) By dedicated media player, I mean one that streams all content without requiring transcoding. Dune, PCH, etc.

2) It is most definitely *not* "legal", or rather the DMCA currently prohibits, backing up BluRays, with or without maintaining encryption. Until the protected copy of BluRay comes out, you legally can't do this.

3) The Kaleidoscope, etc., are only for DVDs, and they store completely encrypted copies that can only be played with the device. And they are still on shaky ground. But in any event, it's not BluRay, as that's not legal in the US.

While it's true that as long as you own the media, and aren't sharing it, you likely won't be prosecuted, it is still illegal, and if I were you, I wouldn't be so free about posting what you do.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> 1) By dedicated media player, I mean one that streams all content without requiring transcoding. Dune, PCH, etc.


That's what the LG BD390 Blu-ray player does. It just isn't as robust as some of the other stand alone media players are. Plays / streams all the files I need it to. Albeit one exception. VC-1 encoded video. LOL



AbMagFab said:


> 2) It is most definitely *not* "legal", or rather the DMCA currently prohibits, backing up BluRays, with or without maintaining encryption. Until the protected copy of BluRay comes out, you legally can't do this.


See thats where alot of debate is going on & one of the big reasons no lawsuits have been filed agains't anyone for backing up Blu-rays/DVD's. Because copyright law clearly says it is legal. The DMCA *DOESN'T* prohibit backing up of any software or electronic media. What the DMCA *does prohibit *is_ software &/or hardware _that _breaks_ DRM encryption such as that, that is used on Blu-rays and DVD's. ie BD+ AACS, CSS and other forms of encryption. It's one of the reasons that all of the software that you can obtain from the internet that does allow you to rip Blu-rays and DVD's is coming from countries that the USA can't enforce the DMCA, nor will their own governments enforce it as well. But as far as the DMCA goes it just bans software/hardware that breaks DRM encryption technologies.



AbMagFab said:


> 3) The Kaleidoscope, etc., are only for DVDs, and they store completely encrypted copies that can only be played with the device. And they are still on shaky ground. But in any event, it's not BluRay, as that's not legal in the US.


Im not for sure about the Kaleidoscope. But the Axionix *DOES* support tranfering a *BLU-RAY* disc to their storage medium. I haven't ever seen a Kaleidoscope system in use. I do have a relative that DOES have the Axionix system and it deffinately *DOES* support Blu-ray. You are correct though. The system does in fact store the encrypted copy of the DVD &/or Blu-ray on it's hard drive system. It won't allow you to burn a new disc, nor will allow you to copy the movie off it's hard drive. Even if you take it's hard drive system and attach it to another computer that can see the files. It won't play those files either. Axionix is doing something very similar to it's system that TiVo does with it's TiVo recordings that are marked as untransferable.



AbMagFab said:


> While it's true that as long as you own the media, and aren't sharing it, you likely won't be prosecuted, it is still illegal, and if I were you, I wouldn't be so free about posting what you do.


See thats where the real question lies too. Is it or isn't it? Even legal authorities (Lawyers) have a huge debate going about this in their own online forums.

Im really not worried about it. If I am sued I am willing to take it court and go all the way to the US supreme court as well if needed. I believe the DMCA is a violation of our 1st amendment rights among a violation in other respects. Currently their are at least 12 cases pending in our Federal court system tha could knock down the DMCA once any one of them reach the US supreme court.

Even the law suits the RIAA have filed agains't people end up getting settled out of court before any have ever reached the US supreme courts. I know personally of someone that was sued. They said take em to court... after 2 appeals the RIAA dropped their case again'st them. Hmmmmm makes you wonder why the RIAA would just drop the case?

TGC


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

It's as illegal as speeding.. and as you know, we never see anyone speed. I voted but won't go into specifics.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

I see no reason to rip BR's, I have a BR player hooked to my 50" plasma.

Diane


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

dianebrat said:


> I see no reason to rip BR's, I have a BR player


+1. The biggest reason I don't is because of the hard drive space that will get eaten up. The effort to do so is a distant second.

As far as convenience, I don't think it really is all that difficult to get up from the couch, get the disc (whether standard DVD, HD-DVD, or Blu-Ray), and put it in the player.

The only ones I have considered ripping are the HD-DVD's, so that I can remove the dedicated player and cut down on my entertainment system clutter.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

dianebrat said:


> I see no reason to rip BR's, I have a BR player hooked to my 50" plasma.
> 
> Diane





RonDawg said:


> +1. The biggest reason I don't is because of the hard drive space that will get eaten up. The effort to do so is a distant second.
> 
> As far as convenience, I don't think it really is all that difficult to get up from the couch, get the disc (whether standard DVD, HD-DVD, or Blu-Ray), and put it in the player.
> 
> The only ones I have considered ripping are the HD-DVD's, so that I can remove the dedicated player and cut down on my entertainment system clutter.


Not everyone has a need to rip Blu-rays or even DVD's. In fact most people don't really have the need. Even for backup purposes. Even those of us who do rip BR's and DVD's all have different motivations to do so. My poll, or my posts in this thread were never meant to imply that everyone should, or that everyone has a need to rip BR's &/or DVD's.

I started my poll because I know people do rip Blu-rays as well as DVD's and I am curious to see how people play back their rips.

At the time I write this exactly 50% (16 voters) are ripping Blu-rays. (Or at least voted that they do). I will assume (As wrong as it may be to assume) that they also rip SD-DVD's as well.

Even so I can't speak for other peoples reasons for ripping Blu-rays &/or DVD's. My reasons are simple.

*1)* To backup my investment. Copyright law clearly states I have the right to *backup* any electronic media that I own. Although the DCMA clearly states that the software that_ breaks DRM _*IS* illegal. So the Backup copy of the original BR &/or DVD isn't illegal. Providing it is only used as a backup copy. The process to obtain your backup copy is illegal as well as the software to do so, because it breaks DRM encryption. Ripping CD's of their music is NOT illegal simply because 99.99% of music CD's aren't using any form of DRM encryption. The RIAA wasn't/isn't sueing people over ripping the music CD's. They were suing over the SHARING of those rips.

*2)* Protection from loss, Theft, or damage of DVD &/or Blu-ray. Before I started ripping DVD's/Blu-rays and saving them to my NAS and then locking away the discs in our Fireproof/waterproof vault my kids & even myself have destroyed probably about 30+ DVD's. I take it neither one of you have had kids or yourselfs acidentally ruin any DVD's or BR's????

*3)* Convenience. I have multiple TV sets, with multiple TiVo's etc... Only one blu-ray player. Thus using a NAS, A network & TiVo one can watch a BR/DVD disc on any set. Not just the main room.

*4)* Portability. Saved to a portable hard drive we can easily play these movies in our RV (laptop hooked up to TV) without fear of reason #3.

TGC

P.S. As far as eating up hard drive space? Hard drives are cheap! In some cases a hard drive is even cheaper than the cost of a single Blu-ray movie! I saw a 1TB refurb seagate drive at Fry's a couple days ago for $39.99. Still with 3 year warranty!


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> That's what the LG BD390 Blu-ray player does. It just isn't as robust as some of the other stand alone media players are. Plays / streams all the files I need it to. Albeit one exception. VC-1 encoded video. LOL
> 
> See thats where alot of debate is going on & one of the big reasons no lawsuits have been filed agains't anyone for backing up Blu-rays/DVD's. Because copyright law clearly says it is legal. The DMCA *DOESN'T* prohibit backing up of any software or electronic media. What the DMCA *does prohibit *is_ software &/or hardware _that _breaks_ DRM encryption such as that, that is used on Blu-rays and DVD's. ie BD+ AACS, CSS and other forms of encryption. It's one of the reasons that all of the software that you can obtain from the internet that does allow you to rip Blu-rays and DVD's is coming from countries that the USA can't enforce the DMCA, nor will their own governments enforce it as well. But as far as the DMCA goes it just bans software/hardware that breaks DRM encryption technologies.
> 
> ...


It most definitely *is* illegal. Since the only way to stream it is to break the encryption. You can't get around that.

The only question is whether it's *enforceable*. I doubt we'll see anyone get taken to court simply for backing up their own media, as long as they aren't sharing it.

And I said a media player that supports all formats *without transcoding*. The LG isn't that, by your own statement - so I'm confused why you would continue to say it is?


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

bschuler2007 said:


> It's as illegal as speeding.. and as you know, we never see anyone speed. I voted but won't go into specifics.


Yes... Speeding is illegal... However...........

Under some circumstances speeding DOES in fact become legal. These circumstances do vary from state to state, city to city.

Here are some exceptions that speeding above the posted speed limit is legal.

1) The President of the United States of America's convoy under federal law is not bound or required to follow the posted speed limits. Now that doesn't mean that they don't follow the speed limits. Just that under federal law they are not required too.

2) Emergency Vehicles responding to an emergency call, or ambulances taking a patient to a hospital in a life &/or limb threatning condition is legally allowed to go above the posted speed limits. This exception varies from state to state and the amount that they may go above the posted speed also varies from city to city, state to state & even departments.

3) U.S.A. Military vehicles when on official buisness are not bound by a states posted speed limit. However opperation of a Military moter vehicle is governed by military rules and regulations & for the most part they require the opperator to follow the states motor vehicle laws. EVen then their are still exceptions.

4) Again varies from state to state. But some states even allow a personal private vehicle to go above the posted speed limits in times of an emergency where their is immiment danger of loss of life &/or limb of themselvs or another occupant of the vehicle.

The point I was trying to make... is that while you are correct. Speeding for the most part is illegal & still many millions of americans break that law. The point I was trying to make is that even with speeding THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS that make it legal.

TGC


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

TexasGrillChef said:


> Not everyone has a need to rip Blu-rays or even DVD's. In fact most people don't really have the need. Even for backup purposes. Even those of us who do rip BR's and DVD's all have different motivations to do so. My poll, or my posts in this thread were never meant to imply that everyone should, or that everyone has a need to rip BR's &/or DVD's.
> 
> I started my poll because I know people do rip Blu-rays as well as DVD's and I am curious to see how people play back their rips.
> 
> ...


1. I never brought up the DRM issue (although others have) and personally, if I bought the disc, and it's not a pirate copy itself, I don't see why I can't store the data it contains in the way I see fit. Same goes with that region coding BS; I bought the disc, I should be able to view it no matter what country I am in. I shouldn't be prevented from viewing something because I am in the "wrong" country (assuming the content itself is not illegal to view, such as child porn).

2. I don't have children so the issue about accidentally-ruined discs is moot. My nieces and nephews are old enough that they respect my property and don't go messing with stuff. But if you have small children then yes I can understand that, though other things (the TV, media players, DVR's etc.) can still be ruined. I've never ruined a disc myself, at least one that is a manufactured disc. Recordable CD/DVD is of course a different matter.

3. 98% of my video viewing is on the main TV in the living room, especially since I just bought a new plasma  But if you have multiple TV's spread all over the house, I can see where this makes sense.

4. Again I don't have childen so it's a moot point for me, but I can see where this would be useful to others.

5. Yeah hard drives are constantly coming down in price but I don't feel like swapping them out and transferring data from old to new just for the purpose.

My response was not meant to criticize/mock people who do rip their digital media collection onto hard drives, but I think far fewer people actually do this than the poll represents.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> And I said a media player that supports all formats *without transcoding*. The LG isn't that, by your own statement - so I'm confused why you would continue to say it is?


I guess I said that because *NO* media player that I have ever seen, hardware or software wise plays *ALL* audio/video formats.

Every single media player I have seen leaves out support for at least one file type or another. So by your deffinition of a media player that you speak of doesn't actually exist.

By all means... if you think otherwise. Please Please tell me what you think that device is. The Popcorn hour (All versions) even leaves out a few file types it won't play.

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

RonDawg said:


> My response was not meant to criticize/mock people who do rip their digital media collection onto hard drives, but I think far fewer people actually do this than the poll represents.


I can't argue that point with you at all. According to the lastest statistics that I have seen. Only about 20% of the USA with HDTV's have a blu-ray player so far. Although that number is growing.

Even if you take Blu-ray out of the picture and look at statistics around ripping SD-DVD's the number who do that is realtively small as well. Blu-ray ripping is even a smaller percentage of that.

Just guessing here. But I would suspect that if my poll were given to all TiVo users. I would be willing to bet that the selection "I don't rip Blu-rays/DVD's" would be around 90-95%. I put that selection in there to give those who don't a way to "opt out" I am mainly interested in those who do rip & how they play their rips back.

Just out of curiosity. Which plasma did you get? I am thinking about a new one to replace in another room I have. I haven't decided between an LED/LCD or going with plasma. My main room I have a Pioneer Plasma 65" thats about 3 or 4 years old.

TGC


----------



## rocko (Oct 29, 2002)

TexasGrillChef said:


> Please tell me what you think that device is.


IMO, it's called a computer - you're not tied to a single player. Newer video processors crank out top-shelf video and varied audio support has been around for a while.

And I'm glad we're not discussing the legal/moral ramifications of DVD/BR rips


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> I guess I said that because *NO* media player that I have ever seen, hardware or software wise plays *ALL* audio/video formats.
> 
> Every single media player I have seen leaves out support for at least one file type or another. So by your deffinition of a media player that you speak of doesn't actually exist.
> 
> ...


We're talking all media formats from DVD and BDs. The PCH, the Dune, and HDX (or whatever it is), and a couple others currently support all audio and video formats from all DVD and BD media. So yes, they are out there. (And the LG most definitely doesn't.)


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

RonDawg said:


> 1. I never brought up the DRM issue (although others have) *and personally, if I bought the disc, and it's not a pirate copy itself, I don't see why I can't store the data it contains in the way I see fit*. Same goes with that region coding BS; I bought the disc, I should be able to view it no matter what country I am in. I shouldn't be prevented from viewing something because I am in the "wrong" country (assuming the content itself is not illegal to view, such as child porn).


Because that's illegal. What you personally think is irrelevent.

You would be better off arguing that it's probably unenforcable in the case where you own the media and only use the scanned version for backup or personal use. But breaking the encryption (which you have to do at some point to play it) is most definitely illegal, no gray area here at all.


----------



## djwilso (Dec 23, 2006)

TGC:

The legalities aside, could you explain how exactly you get the Blu-ray movie onto the TiVo after you have ripped it?

I've never ripped one, but my understanding is that you end up with a bunch of "m2ts" files.

How do you transfer that file to TiVo using pyTiVo? Do you have to use some other software to put it in a form that pyTiVo can use?


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

djwilso said:


> TGC:
> 
> The legalities aside, could you explain how exactly you get the Blu-ray movie onto the TiVo after you have ripped it?
> 
> ...


If you choose to do so, you can rip just the movie into a single M2TS or MKV file. pyTivo can then transcode it to something the Tivo can play, assuming you have all the necessary codecs on the machine running pyTivo.


----------



## mchief (Sep 10, 2005)

I don't transfer to Tivo. I rip to M2TS and copy to a portable hard drive for use on my DLNA/USB Samsung TV. That way I retain DTS sound. I tried streaming from the PC but the wireless setup is not fast enough to handle streaming HD. Too many rebuffers.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> We're talking all media formats from DVD and BDs. The PCH, the Dune, and HDX (or whatever it is), and a couple others currently support all audio and video formats from all DVD and BD media. So yes, they are out there. (And the LG most definitely doesn't.)


See your limiting yourself to the formats/codecs that are used on DVD's &/or blu-rays. In that instance you are correct. PCH & Dune both support those. Although there are models of media players out there that still have issues with playing VC-1 encoded video formats. Most of those are the older models. Even some of the older models of the PCH have issues with VC-1 encoded video.

Here is one big example. The Western Digital Media player. The original version WON'T play VC-1 encoded video files. MKV, M2TS etc... Their NEW version I believe the call it their "Live" version, to replace their older unit now supports VC-1 encoded video.

What I have found is that most if not all of the networked media player enhanced Blu-ray players currently on the market don't have VC-1 playback capability from anything other than a Blu-ray disc.

I am content for now with my present setup. I know things will improve over time. Who knows LG and Samsung might give a firmware update in the future that will allow the media players to play VC-1 encoded video off the network &/or hard drive.

TiVo is getting ready to announce in March new things coming to our TiVo's as well as new hardware as well. For all we know they could be adding DLNA support to our TiVo's & new hardware which could remove the need for a PCH or Dune as well.

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

mchief said:


> I don't transfer to Tivo. I rip to M2TS and copy to a portable hard drive for use on my DLNA/USB Samsung TV. That way I retain DTS sound. I tried streaming from the PC but the wireless setup is not fast enough to handle streaming HD. Too many rebuffers.


My LG BD390 has wireless N capability. If I setup my Wireless N gateway in the same room as my BD390 I don't havea problem streaming wirelessly the HD video.

The problem is that isn't where I want to keep my Wireless N Gateway, as when it's in the Living room other parts of the house lose wireless access. Where I do keep it most of the time will work just fine for laptop & other wireless uses, but like yourself when trying to stream to the BD390 over wireless N it still does alot of buffering as well. If I run a gigabit ethernet hard wired cable I don't have a problem. I just haven't gotten around to doing that yet where the ethernet cable is hidden. Seems the wife & kids don't like the cable running down the hall, down the stairs etc... they keep tripping over it! So in the mean time I do the same thing you do. I copy the files off to a USB hard drive too.

TGC


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

TexasGrillChef said:


> Just out of curiosity. Which plasma did you get? I am thinking about a new one to replace in another room I have. I haven't decided between an LED/LCD or going with plasma. My main room I have a Pioneer Plasma 65" thats about 3 or 4 years old.


The Panasonic G15 series* in 46 inch. I originally had been looking at Sony, since 3 of my last 4 TV's have been Sonys, but then I saw the picture of this TV and was hooked.

(*Yes I am aware of the lengthy thread on AVS Forum about the problems some people have had with the Panny G series, in particular the G10's, and I will be keeping a close eye on the black levels.)


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> Because that's illegal. What you personally think is irrelevent.
> 
> You would be better off arguing that it's probably unenforcable in the case where you own the media and only use the scanned version for backup or personal use. But breaking the encryption (which you have to do at some point to play it) is most definitely illegal, no gray area here at all.


Again I didn't enter this thread to debate the legality of disc-ripping as it related to DRM. I simply aired my opinion of it.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

RonDawg said:


> 1. I never brought up the DRM issue (although others have) and personally, if I bought the disc, and it's not a pirate copy itself, I don't see why I can't store the data it contains in the way I see fit. Same goes with that region coding BS; I bought the disc, I should be able to view it no matter what country I am in. I shouldn't be prevented from viewing something because I am in the "wrong" country (assuming the content itself is not illegal to view, such as child porn).





RonDawg said:


> Again I didn't enter this thread to debate the legality of disc-ripping as it related to DRM. I simply aired my opinion of it.


And yet, you did debate it...


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> What I have found is that most if not all of the networked media player enhanced Blu-ray players currently on the market don't have VC-1 playback capability from anything other than a Blu-ray disc.


Exactly, and back to my original point, you should buy a real media player. BluRay players, and other multi-purpose commercial players, don't work. But real media players (like Dune, PCH, and some others) work very well.

Not sure why you want to debate this point so much, as it's fairly black-and-white.

(And yes, I'm limiting myself to the media that we're talking about - DVD and BluRay - which covers pretty much everything but some illegally downloaded content.)


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> And yet, you did debate it...


Again I am not debating it. I gave my opinion of it. Not the same as arguing whether or not it is legal.

I don't know why you insist in derailing this thread with the legality of DRM.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

RonDawg said:


> Again I am not debating it. I gave my opinion of it. Not the same as arguing whether or not it is legal.
> 
> I don't know why you insist in derailing this thread with the legality of DRM.


Now you're debating whether you debated it...


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> Now you're debating whether you debated it...


Go. Away.


----------



## T1V0 (Jun 14, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> Now you're debating whether you debated it...


just like every thread you post in...


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

I don't care if it's "illegal" or not. I should be able to protect my "investment".
Back in the day, I dubbed my LP's to cassette to reduce wear and tear on the LP's.
I've made back up copies of software for my computer which has saved me many headaches.
I should be able to do the same with DVDs that I buy.
Having said that, the only reason I rip my DVDs is to transfer them to my Tivo.
Using the trick play functions of the Tivo is SO much better than DVD player controls.


----------



## JTYoung1 (Aug 13, 2006)

Since TiVo cannot do the advanced audio codecs like DTS-HD MA, I have no reason to rip my Blu-ray discs and play them over my TiVo.


----------



## djwilso (Dec 23, 2006)

steve614 said:


> Using the trick play functions of the Tivo is SO much better than DVD player controls.


I really agree there. TiVo has the absolute best Fast Forward and Rewind functions of any consumer electronics device I have ever used. The DVD/BD player people should take a lesson.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

djwilso said:


> I really agree there. TiVo has the absolute best Fast Forward and Rewind functions of any consumer electronics device I have ever used. The DVD/BD player people should take a lesson.


Alot has to be said for the brand & model of BR/DVD player as well. I remember a few years back I had one DVD player (Before BR was available) that had a 30 second skip forward and reverse as well as jog dial and variable playback speed forward or reverse from 1/16 speed to 32x speed. Quite nice. But you are correct. Hard to find a BR player with those capabilities even on high end BR players.

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

RonDawg said:


> Go. Away.


Really? Not too impressive... you can probably do better...


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

steve614 said:


> I don't care if it's "illegal" or not. I should be able to protect my "investment".
> Back in the day, I dubbed my LP's to cassette to reduce wear and tear on the LP's.
> I've made back up copies of software for my computer which has saved me many headaches.
> I should be able to do the same with DVDs that I buy.
> ...


Oh, I completely agree that you *should* be able to. The problem is, a bunch of beaurocrats and the RIAA/MPAA decided that to pass the DMCA that explicity says you *can't*.

If what's right ever gets close to what's legal, we'll be in utopia.

And for trick play, I totally agree, but:

1) It takes about 2x real time to transfer the show, which for me at least is sort of useless - I don't want to wait an hour or more to watch a movie after I've decided what to watch.

2) You give up HD audio, which is a huge deal (if you have a system that supports it well).


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> 1) It takes about 2x real time to transfer the show, which for me at least is sort of useless - I don't want to wait an hour or more to watch a movie after I've decided what to watch.
> 
> 2) You give up HD audio, which is a huge deal (if you have a system that supports it well).


1) Very true... It does.... I take it then that you don't have a _Netflix _account as since you don't want to wait an hour or two to watch the movie you decided you wante to see, you obviously can't wait a day or two for Netflix to send it to you either? Am I correct there as well? LOL  Just giving ya a hard time.

2) I do have a good system that does support DTS-HD as well as TrueHD in a 6.1 format. My receiver does support 7.1 audio, just haven't gotten around to replacing my speakers or adding a few more.

One thing I have noticed. Is that for the most part, movies with great sound effects lots of action the HD audio does make a difference. Where I found that it doesn't make as big a difference is like for most chick flix. Movies that don't have alot of Special effects sounds, or lots of action in them.

An example. "Julie and Julia" Nice little chick flick that I actually liked, because I am a big fan of Julia Child as well as being a chef myself. So I actualy liked this movie. Anyways though... it was a movie that I didn't notice much difference if any at all between DTS-HD and DTS. I did notice a bigger difference between DTS and DD (AC3) then I did between DTS-hd and DTS. NOW... since TiVo doesn't currently support DTS thats a bigger killer for me. Thank goodness "Julie and Julia" is a h.264 BR and not a VC-1 blu-ray so I can now play it on my LG BD390 which is a DLNA compliant player as well. 

So like someone else in the thread said... TiVo doesn't support DTS either so watching a Blu-ray rip on the TiVo isn't the best alternative. Especially if you own the Blu-ray.

I will say this though. Watching a Blu-ray rip on a TiVo *IS* still better than watching the *SAME *movie in HD via _Netflix_. As the PQ is still better than _Netflix_ and you get AC3. *No* AC3 audio with_ Netflix_. At least not yet. It's coming with _Netflix_. But it isn't here yet. (When I say _Netflix_, I am refering to the _Netflix_ streaming service)

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> 1) Very true... It does.... I take it then that you don't have a _Netflix _account as since you don't want to wait an hour or two to watch the movie you decided you wante to see, you obviously can't wait a day or two for Netflix to send it to you either? Am I correct there as well? LOL  Just giving ya a hard time.
> 
> 2) I do have a good system that does support DTS-HD as well as TrueHD in a 6.1 format. My receiver does support 7.1 audio, just haven't gotten around to replacing my speakers or adding a few more.
> 
> ...


You are correct that I don't use NetFlix for BluRay. I do have it for streaming, but the sound is so bad, and the selection so limited, I rarely use it.

And my comparison was more between using Tivo and a "real" media streamer. Having that option, I would never go to Tivo given the ~1 hour delay, versus the instant watching (with HD audio). I am happy to give up the silky-smooth FF/RW and trick-play.

HD audio makes a bigger difference the better your equipment (pre-pro and speakers), and the better/less damaged your ears. However it is like fine wine, in that not everyone will appreciate the differences, and it's a flattening curve on cost-to-sound-improvement.

Since DTS is usually twice the bandwidth of DD, you get an improvement that is still pretty far back on the curve, so it should be noticable to most people on most equipment.

HD audio is up to another 10x the bandwidth, but the curve does flatten in terms of appreciating the differences, especially factoring in equipment and ears.

Anyway, on my system and with my ears, even dialog-heavy movies sound much better - the subtle ambient noises present in every movie to create an immersive environment are almost completely lost in the DD and DTS tracks, but still very present on the lossless HD audio tracks. I am able to get all that more sucked into a movie as a result.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> You are correct that I don't use NetFlix for BluRay. I do have it for streaming, but the sound is so bad, and the selection so limited, I rarely use it.
> 
> And my comparison was more between using Tivo and a "real" media streamer. Having that option, I would never go to Tivo given the ~1 hour delay, versus the instant watching (with HD audio). I am happy to give up the silky-smooth FF/RW and trick-play.
> 
> ...


Absolutely. So many different variables that have an effect on sound quality. What one person notices in one enviroment they may not notice in another.
I have a pretty upscale system as far as my audio equipment and speakers go. The enviroment that the system has been installed in though isn't the best enviroment. Maybe in the next house I get I will have a custom home theater room built. One that has been properlly designed with the proper acoustics & sound proofing designed for the type of speakers I choose for that room. Then again with all the concerts & races (Car & Motorcycle) I used to work at & go to when I was younger my ears aren't in the best of conditions anymore so it may be a moot point! LOL 

About the only thing I watch on Netflix streaming are old movies, TV series that were made before even the days of stereo much less 5.1 audio. Such as the Alfred Hitchcock hour etc.. Even the DVD versions of the stuff I watch on Netflix streaming doesn't even have a DD or DTS sound track.

TGC


----------



## JTYoung1 (Aug 13, 2006)

Someone explain to me why the hell I would want to back up somewhere between 20 and 35GB of data from a Blu-ray disc to a hard drive, losing a lossless audio stream and instead getting a lossy AC3 stream? On top of that can the TiVo even do 1080p?


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

JTYoung1 said:


> Someone explain to me why the hell I would want to back up somewhere between 20 and 35GB of data from a Blu-ray disc to a hard drive, losing a lossless audio stream and instead getting a lossy AC3 stream? On top of that can the TiVo even do 1080p?


Sure I will explain that.... Here ya go....

*1)* You can back up a Blu-ray disc to a Hard Drive and *NOT* lose any data at all. You can create a Blu-ray disc image. Hard drive space is cheaper per gigabyte then blank Blu-ray discs. Should you damage or lose your Blu-ray disc & if you have backed it up & have a blu-ray writer, you can then reburn the blank Blu-ray disc and it will be identical to the original Blu-ray disc that you ripped. No loss of anything whatsoever. You can even make use of the Blu-ray live features if you want. Thus a true and total backup to protect your investment against loss.

*2)* I rip a blu-ray and keep the DTS audio track if the blu-ray had a DTS track. Some have Dolby (AC3) track so on those blu-rays you never had DTS anyways even if you play the original Blu-ray in your blu-ray player. What you DO lose is the HD uncompressed audio track. Being either DTS-HD or True-HD. But to get those even with your Blu-ray player you need a Receiver that has DTS-HD & True-HD capability anyways. MOST people don't have receivers capable of DTS-HD or True HD yet. You can rip the Blu-ray and create a Movie file that includes the DTS-HD or TrueHD audio track for those other options besides the TiVo that are capable of playing back DTS-HD or TrueHD audio tracks.

*3)* The TiVo's *ARE* capable of playing 1080p content. The feature just has not yet been enabled on the TiVo hardware yet. Look very closely at a TiVo HD/HDXL unit. You will notice a 1080p light on the unit. Although it never lights up. At least not currently. So while they can't do 1080p TODAY, they maybe able to do it in the future.

*4) *Not everyone who rips a Blu-ray will play it on their TiVo. Look at the above poll for this thread. Look at the other options one has to play Blu-ray rips. Almost every other option has 1080p capability. A few of those options even haver the capability to play back DTS-HD and True-HD audio tracks as well. (Provided you have a DTS-HD/True-HD capable receiver)

Hope that provides a decent explantion for you as to why you might consider ripping Blu-ray discs.

TGC


----------



## JTYoung1 (Aug 13, 2006)

> 1) You can back up a Blu-ray disc to a Hard Drive and NOT lose any data at all. You can create a Blu-ray disc image. Hard drive space is cheaper per gigabyte then blank Blu-ray discs. Should you damage or lose your Blu-ray disc & if you have backed it up & have a blu-ray writer, you can then reburn the blank Blu-ray disc and it will be identical to the original Blu-ray disc that you ripped. No loss of anything whatsoever. You can even make use of the Blu-ray live features if you want. Thus a true and total backup to protect your investment against loss.


Sure disc space is cheap, but reburning a BD is a time consuming and AFAIK there are no 50GB discs to burn material to yet.



> 2) I rip a blu-ray and keep the DTS audio track if the blu-ray had a DTS track. Some have Dolby (AC3) track so on those blu-rays you never had DTS anyways even if you play the original Blu-ray in your blu-ray player. What you DO lose is the HD uncompressed audio track. Being either DTS-HD or True-HD. But to get those even with your Blu-ray player you need a Receiver that has DTS-HD & True-HD capability anyways. MOST people don't have receivers capable of DTS-HD or True HD yet. You can rip the Blu-ray and create a Movie file that includes the DTS-HD or TrueHD audio track for those other options besides the TiVo that are capable of playing back DTS-HD or TrueHD audio tracks.


I happen to have a receiver that has both of those capabilities, people that use a PS3 for their player have the capability to decode that in the player. There are also quite a few newer BD players that do the decoding in the unit and pass uncompressed PCM to the receiver via HDMI. If you can get lossless audio, why would you want to listen to a lossy AC3?



> 3) The TiVo's ARE capable of playing 1080p content. The feature just has not yet been enabled on the TiVo hardware yet. Look very closely at a TiVo HD/HDXL unit. You will notice a 1080p light on the unit. Although it never lights up. At least not currently. So while they can't do 1080p TODAY, they maybe able to do it in the future.


A Blu-ray player can pass 1080p now, why would you want to watch something in 1080i when you can simply insert the disc and watch it in 1080p?



> 4) Not everyone who rips a Blu-ray will play it on their TiVo. Look at the above poll for this thread. Look at the other options one has to play Blu-ray rips. Almost every other option has 1080p capability. A few of those options even haver the capability to play back DTS-HD and True-HD audio tracks as well. (Provided you have a DTS-HD/True-HD capable receiver)


If you have the capability to play back in 1080p with lossless audio, I could see someone with a large collection of media having it on disc to access quickly, but to rip it to play back over a TiVo just doesn't make sense. TiVo does many things well, but it is not yet suited to be a media player for Blu-ray movies.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

JTYoung1 said:


> Sure disc space is cheap, but reburning a BD is a time consuming and AFAIK there are no 50GB discs to burn material to yet.


Actually there are.. I have about 6 of them. They aren't the re-writable though. They did cost about $16 a pience to. Sure it's time consuming to reburn the Blu-ray disc. But you only need to do that, if you loose, or damage the original. Now in my family and many families with small children lost &/or damaged DVD's is fairly common. Now in my family while we haven't yet lost or damaged any Blu-ray discs. In the last 5 years or so our family has lost or damaged at least 20 DVD's. That is before I started backing them up. So I take it if you lose or damage a Blu-ray disc you won't mind spending antoher $30 for another Blu-ray disc of that movie, or do without if it was a* LIMITED *release of that movie?



JTYoung1 said:


> I happen to have a receiver that has both of those capabilities, people that use a PS3 for their player have the capability to decode that in the player. There are also quite a few newer BD players that do the decoding in the unit and pass uncompressed PCM to the receiver via HDMI. If you can get lossless audio, why would you want to listen to a lossy AC3?


And of course DTS is also lossy as well. Now I will agree. If your one of the small percentage that does have a receiver that can play DTS-HD or True-HD 
then by all means of course you woudn't want to play back any lossy type audio if you had available the uncompressed audio. PCM isn't all that it is cracked up to be. I have PCM on my receiver as well & when I use that function it sounds like crap. I have turned off PCM on both the receier and my blu-ray. Many of the other Hardware options to play back ripped Blu-rays *DO* have the capability to output the uncompressed audio track to a compatible receiver. PS/3, PCH, some of the newer networked Blu-ray players, HTPC's etc. I *never* said that the TiVo was the only option, nor did I ever say it was the best option. I agree. Personally I don't playback blu-ray rips on the TiVo either. Except for a few exceptions.



JTYoung1 said:


> A Blu-ray player can pass 1080p now, why would you want to watch something in 1080i when you can simply insert the disc and watch it in 1080p?


I have a Networked Blu-ray player that can playback blu-ray rips from a USB hard drive &/or a DLNA network server. It will play those back in full 1080p as well. It also depends on the TV you have as well. If you have a TV capable of playing 1080p then of course. You want that. There are still many millions of americans that still don't have that capability in their sets. Also, most (not all) can't tell the difference in 1080p and 1080i in sets that are 32" or smaller anyways. I have a 65" plasma so I can tell the difference. In my bedroom I only have a 32" it doesnt' do 1080p. So kinda pointless to even worry about it on that set. The Hot Tub TV is also 32" and it doesn't do 1080p either. So a moot point there as well.



JTYoung1 said:


> If you have the capability to play back in 1080p with lossless audio, I could see someone with a large collection of media having it on disc to access quickly, but to rip it to play back over a TiVo just doesn't make sense. TiVo does many things well, but it is not yet suited to be a media player for Blu-ray movies.


Like said before. I never said the TiVo was the best or the only alternative to playing back Blu-ray Rips. Many of the other options *ARE* capable of playing the rips in full 1080p as well as with lossless audio. Some of the newer Networked Blu-ray players, The Western Digital Live media player, Popcorn Hour, HTPC's are to name just a few of the new devices that can play lossless audio and 1080p content. I don't own a PS/3 but some say it can do it as well.

Here are 2 additional reasons one may want to play back a blu-ray rip instead of using the acutual blu-ray disc.

*1)* No disc to have get lost, stolen or damaged. Quite possible if you have younger children around.

*2)* If you have one of the Blu-rays that was *NOT* released with the DVD version &/or the digital copy as well, & you wish to play it in your Vehicles DVD system, or in you RV, or on some other Video Player while your traveling around. While more & more Blu-rays are coming with the DVD version &/or digital copy capabilities. Most of the Blu-rays releasesd so far do not yet have this capability. While it may take my computer several hours to process a rip etc... It only takes about 15 min of user interaction. Well worth saving me another $10 to $30. Besides that. As of yet their are not any Blu-ray players that are available for vehicles. Some of the up-scale larger RV's can handle normal home Blu-ray players, but even those still don't work well while the RV is in motion either.

I do understand that for *YOU*... Ripping a blu-ray might not be advantages for *YOUR* situation. For many others it can be. For any one or more of the above reasons.

TGC


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

TexasGrillChef said:


> And of course DTS is also lossy as well. Now I will agree. If your one of the small percentage that does have a receiver that can play DTS-HD or True-HD then by all means of course you woudn't want to play back any lossy type audio if you had available the uncompressed audio. PCM isn't all that it is cracked up to be. I have PCM on my receiver as well & when I use that function it sounds like crap. I have turned off PCM on both the receier and my blu-ray.


There should be no discernible difference between an uncompressed PCM track sent to your receiver and a DTS-HD or TrueHD track that your receiver decodes. What kind of results were you seeing? Saying PCM isn't all it's cracked up to be because of your personal experience seems a little over-reaching.


----------



## robpdotcom (Jun 8, 2005)

AbMagFab said:


> ...And my comparison was more between using Tivo and a "real" media streamer. Having that option, I would never go to Tivo given the ~1 hour delay, versus the instant watching (with HD audio)....


I always assumed that media players, such as the WD Media Player, couldn't send the HD audio through the HDMI. But it looks like I was wrong. Can it send the DD True HD, DTS-HD MA, and uncompressed LPCM through HDMI to an A/V receiver?


----------



## JTYoung1 (Aug 13, 2006)

David Platt said:


> There should be no discernible difference between an uncompressed PCM track sent to your receiver and a DTS-HD or TrueHD track that your receiver decodes. What kind of results were you seeing? Saying PCM isn't all it's cracked up to be because of your personal experience seems a little over-reaching.


I've heard both uncompressed PCM and when decoding has been done in the receiver and could not tell you the difference between the two, and I have quite a bit of money tied up in speakers and receiver (they cost several times what my TV and BD player cost)


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

For me, its about presenting ALL media content we own or have access to on ONE consistant user interface on ALL displays in the home and our motorhome. Tivo does that with out switching devices, fumbling with remotes or the low WAF associated with all that. Every tv works the same. All media is accessed from the same menu system.

Giving up DTS-HD for AC3 is a very small price to pay for that level of integration. Besides, none of my audio equipment in the main home theater decodes DTS-HD nor PCM above 2 channel. Very little video content can show much difference between 1080i and 1080p unless paused. Especially since most hd source material other than broadcast tv is film based at 24fps anyway.

So, is Tivo the absolute highest fidelty way to play a movie? No, but for most mainstream users, its better than the equipment they have anyway.

Is Tivo the best all media presentation system? For us, its the only one out there that does it ALL. Broadcast, IP based, home moves, photos, music, DVR and network access, all in one place.

I hope Tivo continues to improve, there are things that need improving.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

Ditto what jcthorne said. 
Currently I have over 6TBs of data shared in the form of music, tv shows, movies, podcasts, pictures and music videos. I love having everything available at a touch of a button.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

David Platt said:


> There should be no discernible difference between an uncompressed PCM track sent to your receiver and a DTS-HD or TrueHD track that your receiver decodes. What kind of results were you seeing? Saying PCM isn't all it's cracked up to be because of your personal experience seems a little over-reaching.


Well it just doesn't seem as crisp and clear to me as the other options. It also doesn't seem that I am getting the Surround Sound effect out of the other 4 speakers. FL, FR, RL, RR, RC, RL that I am otherwise feeling that I am getting out of DTS-HD or True-HD. Now this could be because of my Player or the reciever that I have of course.

When I said that.. I admit that was totally because of my personal expereience.

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

robpdotcom said:


> I always assumed that media players, such as the WD Media Player, couldn't send the HD audio through the HDMI. But it looks like I was wrong. Can it send the DD True HD, DTS-HD MA, and uncompressed LPCM through HDMI to an A/V receiver?


The second generation of the WD Media player positively can. I am not for sure about the first generation unit. I know its capabilities are more limited than the 2nd generation unit.

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

jcthorne said:


> For me, its about presenting ALL media content we own or have access to on ONE consistant user interface on ALL displays in the home and our motorhome. Tivo does that with out switching devices, fumbling with remotes or the low WAF associated with all that. Every tv works the same. All media is accessed from the same menu system.
> 
> Giving up DTS-HD for AC3 is a very small price to pay for that level of integration. Besides, none of my audio equipment in the main home theater decodes DTS-HD nor PCM above 2 channel. Very little video content can show much difference between 1080i and 1080p unless paused. Especially since most hd source material other than broadcast tv is film based at 24fps anyway.
> 
> ...


Very good point. I love the thought of a what is known as the "One Box" solution. I strive very hard to have as few boxes as possible in my home entertainment center.

I would love the thought of a "one box" design. However I doubt that will ever happen as the "Game" companies want to devise their own system. A DVR add on device is coming for the PS3.

The other problem with one box designs is that you'll never get the best of all worlds in a one box design.

Even so, some of my equipment does double duty. An example... In my home entertainment center I have 3 devices that can do Netflix streaming. My BD390 blu-ray player, My XBox 360 and my TiVo. All 3 will play music, or display a slide show over the network as well. All 3 will play movies in one version or the other over the network as well.

Yet even so, each device has things that *NONE* of the others can do. TiVo is a DVR, the others are not. The BD390 plays Blu-ray discs, The others do not. The XBox 360 plays games. The others do not, or plays only limited basic style games.

In my RV which in all honesty is nothing more than a "pimped" out camper. I have a slingcatcher hooked up to it, as well as my laptop, a WD Media Player (2nd Gen), It also has a built in Blu-ray player as well. So I am easily able to play anything I want their as well.

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

bschuler2007 said:


> Ditto what jcthorne said.
> Currently I have over 6TBs of data shared in the form of music, tv shows, movies, podcasts, pictures and music videos. I love having everything available at a touch of a button.


One of the big reasons, that I am hoping that on March 2nd, TiVo will anounce that the TiVo's will be DLNA compliant. That will make using a DLNA certified NAS even more beneficial to our TiVo's and make them even easier to play/stream/download content we want to watch using our TiVo's. We can only hope though.

Maybe even DTS will be supported as well. The Broadcom chip inside the TiVo S3/HD/HDXL is capable of supporting DTS. I doubt it will come on the March 2nd announcement though.

TGC


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

jcthorne said:


> Giving up DTS-HD for AC3 is a very small price to pay for that level of integration. Besides, none of my audio equipment in the main home theater decodes DTS-HD nor PCM above 2 channel. Very little video content can show much difference between 1080i and 1080p unless paused. Especially since most hd source material other than broadcast tv is film based at 24fps anyway.


Sure, with very low-end equipment, the Tivo is just fine. But for the many of us who have invested money in a home theater, the Tivo is junk when compared to native 24p BluRays with HD audio. And frankly the low-end market is happy with the awful cable-co DVRs.



> So, is Tivo the absolute highest fidelty way to play a movie? No, but for most mainstream users, its better than the equipment they have anyway.


Right, and if that's what Tivo is targeting, then it better be <$99. They can't have a $400 unit with features that are targeting the low-end mass-market consumer. And again, the CableCo DVRs are already there.



> Is Tivo the best all media presentation system? For us, its the only one out there that does it ALL. Broadcast, IP based, home moves, photos, music, DVR and network access, all in one place.


Except it does much of it with really crappy quality. 1080p+HD audio is junk on the Tivo, photos are horrible on the Tivo (even the "HD" photo app), music sounds okay, but the usability is awful, and home movies now are awful as well since they are generally HD AVCHD, which means you have to wait 2x the home movie length before watching it. And for internet TV, you have to manage it all from a PC, and/or navigate through a series of vague Tivo menus to perhaps find something you're interested in. Netflix is sketchy at best. Amazon and BlockB are too expensive for the low quality and 24-hour viewing window.

*Can Tivo hobble through everything? Sure. But it sucks at almost everything other than watching time-shifted cable/OTA TV.*

If they want this to succeed, they need to meet or exceed the current set of low-cost (sub-$500) media players already on the market. If they could do that, plus regular Tivo stuff, plus fix the broken VOD model, they'd lock up both the low-end and high-end market for a while.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

AbMagFab,
I've seen you say "wait 2X the length" before playing a transferred show a few times now. Just to clarify, are you talking Pytivo or Tivo Goback. Just wondering cuz Goback is slow as molasses, but with Pytivo I can generally start watching an HD movie about 5-10 mins after starting the transfer.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

I was going to make the same observation about the 2x comment. This leads me to believe he has not seen what the TivoHD is capable of in terms of HD movie presentation either. If he is transferring transcoded mpeg2 streams, he is NOT seeing what the tivo can do.

As for the menu system for music, have you tried Harmonium lately? Now better than any network media player I have used.

I would like to clairify that I do not have 'mainstream' equipment. There is over $60k of equipment in our home theater room starting with a 12k 1080p 3 element projector, 6.4kW of amplification and top notch processing, cabling speakers, screen etc.

I maintain that for film based sources, there is VERY little difference in presentation quality between a 24fps 1080p properly encoded mp4 file with ac3 audio and the bluray disc presentation of the same film. On any screen in the house smaller than the 10ft HT screen, not noticable AT ALL.

Cable company DVRs do not present any media other than the cable company sent video streams they recorded, as such they are not comparable to the Tivo at all. Fortunatly for us, we do not play video games so an xbox is not a concern. For us, Tivo presents it all. There is no other device on the market that can. 

I say again, Tivo needs to improve. Better quality outputs, support of more formats, a better HD user interface, bug fixes etc. But given that we will NOT go back to multiple non networkable, non shareable componets for various media, tivo is the only solution that currently works.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

bschuler2007 said:


> AbMagFab,
> I've seen you say "wait 2X the length" before playing a transferred show a few times now. Just to clarify, are you talking Pytivo or Tivo Goback. Just wondering cuz Goback is slow as molasses, but with Pytivo I can generally start watching an HD movie about 5-10 mins after starting the transfer.


This whole thread is about BluRay movies. If you rip a BluRay movie, it needs to be transcoded before being sent to the Tivo. pyTivo or TTG, doesn't matter.

That means a 2-hour movie takes 4+ hours to transfer to the Tivo (HD/S3), and you lose all the HD audio, and you end up in 1080i/60 instead of 1080p/24.

For anyone who has even a nominal investment in a HT, watching a BluRay at 1080i with no HD audio is a mess compared to the original.

Again, sure Tivo can hobble through many things, but it does only one thing well - time shifting TV. Everything else is pretty much a joke right now.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

jcthorne said:


> I maintain that for film based sources, there is VERY little difference in presentation quality between a 24fps 1080p properly encoded mp4 file with ac3 audio and the bluray disc presentation of the same film. On any screen in the house smaller than the 10ft HT screen, not noticable AT ALL.


Not sure what point you're making, but the Tivo can't display either of those natively. So what difference does it make? And most BD's are some form of MP4/VC1, so again not sure what point you're making.

The Tivo will convert all of that to 1080i/60 + AC3 at best. And there is a huge difference between 1080p/24 and a 1080i/60 conversion of it, whether it's MP4 or MP2.

And if you can't hear the difference between AC3 and lossless HD audio, you need better speakers and/or a better pre-pro.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

Thanks for the clarification cuz I was just wondering. I use pre-converted to HD mp4 and mkv files via Pytivo, maybe that is why I see a speed difference.

As for the rest, yeah Blu-ray seems to follow the old CD argument:
If you want the best sound possible and the files in their native format you need to carry around 80 cds and a high end portable cd player. You look like someone in the 80ies.. but you don't care.. it is all about quality.

For some, lossless flac is fine (after all, it is lossless), and you move up to an portable mp3 player that can carry hundreds of huge flac songs.

Then for the majority of users (who don't claim to be able to hear a dog whistle), you move up to (lossy) high bitrate mp3s. Now you got every album by every artist you like in the palm of your hand and add neat stuff like coverflow, etc..

I'd say ripping Blu-ray follows the same formula. For pure trueists.. a disc is the only option. For most, a high-end HD mkv conversion is fine and almost undistinguishable. Then for a select few, a completely stripped 600mb file is fine.

Personally.. I think almost everyone will be ripping sooner than later as handheld portable HD players become the norm and home media librarys become common. There will still be those homes with record players and blu-ray players.. but that will be the minority. And some people will claim compressed HD killed video like audio fanatics to this day claim the CD format killed audio. But that is life and their viewpoint.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

bschuler2007 said:


> Thanks for the clarification cuz I was just wondering. I use pre-converted to HD mp4 and mkv files via Pytivo, maybe that is why I see a speed difference.
> 
> As for the rest, yeah Blu-ray seems to follow the old CD argument:
> If you want the best sound possible and the files in their native format you need to carry around 80 cds and a high end portable cd player. You look like someone in the 80ies.. but you don't care.. it is all about quality.
> ...


Nope, again, you're missing the point.

As TGC has kept saying, it's easy to scan your BDs with a 1:1 quality rip, maintaining 100% of the audio and video quality.

Then you can play them with any one of the current crop of media players, that stream them instantly, in their native format, with all HD audio maintained.

No conversion. Full HD video and HD audio. No physical media to carry around.

Next time, instead of attacking, you might want to open your mind a little and assume there's a chance other people might actually know more than you?


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

Sorry if it came off as an attack, it really wasn't meant to be. It's just my views on ripping Blu-rays. Not even sure how you got that I was attacking you personally, but if it sounded that way, I apologize. I never flame anyone. 

I was just stating that I think compressed lossless video will be the norm.. not just a 1:1 rip. I mean would you carry a 1000 page dictionary around or a 650 page compressed dictionary that contained all the same stuff. Sure it requires some might to change that 650 pages back to 1000.. but I expect even handheld units will have all the compute power required in less than a year. And everyday there are improvements in compression, where Blu-ray discs are locked in to their standard.

Kinda like how most people's current media librarys are filled with divx/xvid and not vob or mpeg. Advancements are made and devices/people go with the flow.


----------



## StanSimmons (Jun 10, 2000)

AbMagFab said:


> Nope, again, you're missing the point.
> 
> As TGC has kept saying, it's easy to scan your BDs with a 1:1 quality rip, maintaining 100% of the audio and video quality.
> 
> ...


Dude, chill.

He wasn't attacking you. He was stating his opinion, and a valid one.

Not everyone needs the full blu-ray "experience". I'm perfectly happy with my HD mp4's that transfer NATIVELY to my TiVoHD with NO conversion needed at time of upload by pyTivo. The transfer is much faster than real time, the only slow part is when I do the original, one time only, HandBrake conversion to a TiVoHD compatible mp4 format.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

bschuler2007 said:


> You look like someone in the 80ies.. but you don't care.. it is all about quality.


Kind of an attack, and further, it's out of a lack of understanding.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

StanSimmons said:


> Not everyone needs the full blu-ray "experience". I'm perfectly happy with my HD mp4's that transfer NATIVELY to my TiVoHD with NO conversion needed at time of upload by pyTivo. The transfer is much faster than real time, the only slow part is when I do the original, one time only, HandBrake conversion to a TiVoHD compatible mp4 format.


Completely agree, but this thread was about ripping BluRay. What you're describing is not much better than something you could record off Tivo to begin with - 1080i+AC3 at best. HDNETMovies (one of the higher bandwidth channels) puts out great quality movies - but they're far from BluRay.

If you don't have the equipment to appreciate the difference - as most of the world doesn't - then I agree, 1080i+AC3 is fine. But there's really no need to rip BluRays for that, just TTG the stuff you want for free, then stream it back when you're ready.

But if you want really good audio and video quality - far above anything the Tivo can do - then you need to rip the full HD audio and HD video from a BluRay disk, and play it back on something that can do so properly.

It seems like you're all under the misconception that this is somehow more difficult, either to rip or to play back? It's not. The ripping to a more compressed format is actually harder, and the playback on a Tivo versus a PCH or Dune is no harder or easier, just different. Anyone who can use a Tivo, along with a passable universal remote, can easily use one of the current crop of BluRay-capable media players.

And you're getting the same end result - your movie collection completely digital, and available on-demand from any TV. With the Tivo, you sacrifice a large amount of audio and video quality for the sake of a single box solution, but with an okay media player and universal remote, you sacrifice nothing.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

bschuler2007 said:


> Sorry if it came off as an attack, it really wasn't meant to be. It's just my views on ripping Blu-rays. Not even sure how you got that I was attacking you personally, but if it sounded that way, I apologize. I never flame anyone.
> 
> I was just stating that I think compressed lossless video will be the norm.. not just a 1:1 rip. I mean would you carry a 1000 page dictionary around or a 650 page compressed dictionary that contained all the same stuff. Sure it requires some might to change that 650 pages back to 1000.. but I expect even handheld units will have all the compute power required in less than a year. And everyday there are improvements in compression, where Blu-ray discs are locked in to their standard.
> 
> Kinda like how most people's current media librarys are filled with divx/xvid and not vob or mpeg. Advancements are made and devices/people go with the flow.


This is a disk space argument. What difference does it make, since disk space is virtually free? Why would you want to compress further?

Your original argument is about using one, semi-crippled device (Tivo) to play everything back, as a justification for "who cares about HD audio and video quality".

Now you're saying it's 600-pages versus 1000-pages, which is a disk space argument. This is not a good basis for your points, as sacrificing quality for disk space makes no sense, since disk space is becoming close to free. And you're not going to compress a BD down much further anyway, since it's already highly compressed, without severely impacting picture quality to a point where everyone can tell. As it is, a semi-average 2-hour full quality 1080p/24+HD audio BD movie is about the same size (15-20GB) as an MPEG-2 1080i movie from HBO or HDNet.

Anyway, disk space is not a strong argument to make.


----------



## funguy123us (Dec 29, 2009)

I use my PC to watch movies. It's nice to be able to do both work and fun at the same place.


----------



## StanSimmons (Jun 10, 2000)

AbMagFab said:


> Completely agree, *(1) but this thread was about ripping BluRay*. What you're describing is not much better than something you could record off Tivo to begin with - 1080i+AC3 at best. HDNETMovies (one of the higher bandwidth channels) puts out great quality movies - but they're far from BluRay.
> 
> If you don't have the equipment to appreciate the difference - as most of the world doesn't - then I agree, 1080i+AC3 is fine. *(2) But there's really no need to rip BluRays for that, just TTG the stuff you want for free*, then stream it back when you're ready.
> 
> ...


1. The OP started this thread about ripping BluRay... and playing it back thru a TiVoHD. You have continually taken it off track, and berated anybody that disagreed with you.

2. If you own the BluRay disk, and are willing to take the legal risk (which, again, the OP asked not to pollute this thread with), ripping and converting it is trivial, finding a reasonable quality download of the same material is sometimes impossible.

3. If they own one... Many people can afford one playback device, or only have the space for one device. I can't afford to upgrade my system right now, so I play with what I have. I have an old BluRay player that isn't upgradeable, and won't play many of the new BR releases... Ripping on a pc (no HDMI on that PC) and playing thru the TiVoHD is my only option for those BR releases. Ease of use is not necessarily the issue.

While you are technically correct, not everyone has the resources available that you apparently have. It is possible for two, or more, solutions to be correct... not every solution has to be optimal.


----------



## T1V0 (Jun 14, 2006)

StanSimmons said:


> You have continually taken it off track, and berated anybody that disagreed with you.


well, sure. it's agmabfag. he does that in everything thread he posts in


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I hate dealing with discs. So recently I started ripping my 374 HD DVD titles and 356 BD titles to the ISO format. Although I currently only have 24TB of storage in my HP MSS WHS so I will be adding another 10TB or 12TB to my HP MSS WHS in March.

I recently got several media players. A Dune Base and Prime, an Xtreamer and a Popcorn hour C200 and A200. They all work well with the media and BD ISO. Although each player has it's strengths and weaknesses. I did sell my Dune players and decided to keep my Xtreamer for taking media on the go and am using my PCH A200 and C200 at home. It is so much nicer not having to wade through a bunch of discs.

I'll also be selling six of my stand alone BD players(including my LGBD390), and four HD DVD . And be left with only my PS3 Slim in case I do have the urge to play an actual disc.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

"You look like someone in the 80ies.. but you don't care.. it is all about quality."

That's not an attack, lol, and I wasn't speaking specifically about you, seriously. I was just stating the FACT that if I take a picture of someone today who is carrying around a portable CD player or a bunch of CDs, then show that picture to a group of people. That group of people will think it was taken sometime in the 80ies or early 90ies. 
That is a fact, and don't ask about vinyl records or 8 tracks (would have to explain to the people what they were first, lol).
If you DO happen to carry around a portable CD player, then I am sorry, but it doesn't change the FACT that you look like someone from the late 80ies to most people.
I was alluding to the point that most likely Blu-ray players will be outdated in the next 5-7 years due to downloads, memory cards, etc.. and most people's media libraries will be mainly compressed HD (based on current SD trends).
FYI: Microsoft even stated the same viewpoint when asked about adding Blu-ray to the Xbox 360 or the next gen game system. The didn't see the point, as to them, it is a dead end.


----------



## en sabur nur (Oct 30, 2007)

bschuler2007 said:


> "You look like someone in the 80ies.. but you don't care.. it is all about quality."
> 
> That's not an attack, lol, and I wasn't speaking specifically about you, seriously. I was just stating the FACT that if I take a picture of someone today who is carrying around a portable CD player or a bunch of CDs, then show that picture to a group of people. That group of people will think it was taken sometime in the 80ies or early 90ies.
> That is a fact, and don't ask about vinyl records or 8 tracks (would have to explain to the people what they were first, lol).
> ...


Also, from all the reviews I read about Vudu HDX and the Xbox 360 HD download service, the picture quality rivals Blu ray, even though they are using much smaller file sizes. I enjoy Blu ray disks and own many, but it is not neccesary to enjoy a good HD picture. I really liked that "80's" analogy. It hit the core of the hd audio debate and the hd picture debate.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

StanSimmons said:


> 1. The OP started this thread about ripping BluRay... and playing it back thru a TiVoHD. You have continually taken it off track, and berated anybody that disagreed with you.
> 
> 2. If you own the BluRay disk, and are willing to take the legal risk (which, again, the OP asked not to pollute this thread with), ripping and converting it is trivial, finding a reasonable quality download of the same material is sometimes impossible.
> 
> ...


Wow, you couldn't be more wrong.

The *poll right here in this thread* is asking what makes the most sense for playing back ripped BluRays (legalities aside).

I am debating the point that the Tivo is a worthy tool for this. It's only a tool if you don't care about audio or video quality.

Media players - an option *right here on this poll*, and completely on topic - are a much much better way to play back the ripped content, with full HD audio and video quality.

And you misunderstood my "downloading" statement. You can record a show on your Tivo in HD, download it from the Tivo to your media storage, and then play it back whenever you want, in HD with AC3. My point is that the quality of that movie is about the same as the quality of a severly compressed, ripped BluRay downgraded to AC3 and 1080i, and played back on the Tivo.

Save yourself the $10-$30 if you're simply going to take the amazing BluRay HD audio and HD video, and downgrade it something you can get for free (subscription fees aside) off your Tivo right now.

And you also misunderstand Microsoft (and others). They are simply stating that downloaded content will prevail. They are making no statements about the longer-term quality of that content. In fact, places like NetFlix are having trouble getting real traction on their streaming content due to - wait for it - lousy video and audio. They are upping the audio to DD5.1 soon, and the video to 1080p later. Huh, imagine that, audio and video quality matters?

And bottom line - I completely agree that a small portion of people have the equipment to appreciate full HD audio, and perhaps even full BD HD video. *But then Tivo can't sell the equipment at $500 or more, since the only market that targets are the customers who have the equipment to appreciate that Tivo simply sucks as an HD media player.*


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

en sabur nur said:


> Also, from all the reviews I read about Vudu HDX and the Xbox 360 HD download service, the picture quality rivals Blu ray, even though they are using much smaller file sizes. I enjoy Blu ray disks and own many, but it is not neccesary to enjoy a good HD picture. I really liked that "80's" analogy. It hit the core of the hd audio debate and the hd picture debate.


Actually, it hits the core of "most consumers don't care about quality".

For the past few years, there's been an increasing trend of people using lossless FLAC, or 320k MP3s, because - they realize the quality of digital music is kind of crappy. Wow - you mean those people who knew better and no one listened to were actually right?

The only reason 128k MP3 originally prevailed was it was *just* enough quality to sound good on ear buds. So the mass consumer drones were happy to buy crappy quality MP3s. But Apple is now at 192k, and Amazon at 256k. Much much better than before. I wonder why, if it sounds just as good? Oh yeah, because it sounds better. And people are now paying like $400 for ear buds, and can hear the difference.

I'd be shocked to hear that anyone who actually listens to music, nowadays is ripping their own collection to anything less than 320kbps MP3, most likely lossless FLAC or lossless WMA.

Disk space is practically free! There's no reason to have any digital media at anything less than the best quality. But, back to the original point, most consumers don't care about quality, and so they are happy to pay the same amount for severely degraded quality, and then go on message boards defending it.

The only people winning here are the companies who make money off these drones. Nice job!


----------



## StanSimmons (Jun 10, 2000)

TexasGrillChef said:


> *Just curious how many people are playing their HD Blu-ray rips on their TiVo or if they are playing (watching) them using some other device.*
> 
> This thread isn't about nor do I wish to discuss any legality of playing a Blu-ray rip on your TiVo (or any other device for that matter).
> 
> ...





AbMagFab said:


> Wow, you couldn't be more wrong.
> 
> The *poll right here in this thread* is asking *what makes the most sense* for playing back ripped BluRays (legalities aside).
> 
> ...


Do you even read the threads you post in?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> Actually, it hits the core of "most consumers don't care about quality".
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


why are people drones if quality of media is not their top factor? Disk space on a PC is cheap enough, sure but that does not give you all the space you need on the portable player.

What I love are people thinking that everyone listens to music with 400$ ear buds or watches video on 60inch HDTVs.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

StanSimmons said:


> Do you even read the threads you post in?


Yup - he said - do you play them on your Tivo, and if not, what media player do you play them on?

Seems like a reasonable place to debate the value of playing them on a Tivo, versus something else.

Mainly because most people have no idea what these choices even mean, and what they give up to play them on a Tivo. If I were the general user coming here, I have no idea what that difference even means. Now, there's lots of back-and-forth in here debating the merits of both.

You don't have to agree with any viewpoint, but certainly the discussion of both couldn't be more on-topic.

What am I missing?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> Actually, it hits the core of "most consumers don't care about quality".
> 
> For the past few years, there's been an increasing trend of people using lossless FLAC, or 320k MP3s, because - they realize the quality of digital music is kind of crappy. Wow - you mean those people who knew better and no one listened to were actually right?
> 
> ...


prepare to be surprised. It's rare that I run into anyone using a bitrate that high. Most people I run into that are listening to music and ripping it for use in an MP3/WMA player are using lower bitrate files.

Personally I use 192kbs WMA files for my music that I rip(I also rip a WMA lossless version for home use) and music that is purchased digitally is usually 256kbs MP3s or 192kbs WMAs.

But I am far form the norm. Your average user is listening to lower quality music files.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

The Wizard of Oz 40th Anniversary Blu-ray was captured at 4K and then down converted for Blu-ray. Why? Cuz the ugly truth is, someday even Blu-ray will be somebodys lousy sounding 128k Mp3. It's a sad fact of life.

Microsoft's stance includes the fact that download quality will actually surpass that of Blu-ray.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> prepare to be surprised. It's rare that I run into anyone using a bitrate that high. Most people I run into that are listening to music and ripping it for use in an MP3/WMA player are using lower bitrate files.
> 
> Personally I use 192kbs WMA files for my music that I rip(I also rip a WMA lossless version for home use) and music that is purchased digitally is usually 256kbs MP3s or 192kbs WMAs.
> 
> But I am far form the norm. Your average user is listening to lower quality music files.


I actually rip everything at 320kbs MP3's. Simply because the head units in my vehicles can't play WMA's. Thus for simplicity I keep everything in MP3 format. Even for the home. For the most part I can't really tell the difference. Especially in my car/truck where there are so many other "Noises" you need to deal with FIRST and SHOULD be able to hear no matter what music you are or aren't playing.

Having been a paramedic for a 10 years even though it was many years ago. I can't tell you how many people I have pulled up behind with "LIGHTS and SIRENS" going and they were totally oblivious. A few times I could HEAR THEIR music even OVER my sirens! (Subwoofers booming that is). Those people are probably so deaf by now they can't tell the difference between 48kbps and 320kbps! LOL

TGC


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

bschuler2007 said:


> The Wizard of Oz 40th Anniversary Blu-ray was captured at 4K and then down converted for Blu-ray. Why? Cuz the ugly truth is, someday even Blu-ray will be somebodys lousy sounding 128k Mp3. It's a sad fact of life.
> 
> Microsoft's stance includes the fact that download quality will actually surpass that of Blu-ray.


Yep it won't be to long before online streaming and downloading will surpass the quality and economical feasability of that of blu-ray.

Especially with _Google_ bring *1 gig* *ULTRA* high broadband internet access to 5 cities in the USA before the end of the year. DALLAS being one of those cities. YEAH! (However I doubt it will be in my area of dallas ) The FCC and a few others are looking into *10gbps SUPER ULTRA *broadband internet to be available to 90% of the country by the year 2020.

Once SUPER ULTRA broadband reaches 90% of the US market I can almost garuntee that online streaming/downloading of movies will replace that of Blu-ray. With quality being equal to or exceeding that of Blu-ray and STILL with all the features of blu-ray and even more.

TGC


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> It seems like you're all under the misconception that this is somehow more difficult, either to rip or to play back? It's not. The ripping to a more compressed format is actually harder, and the playback on a Tivo versus a PCH or Dune is no harder or easier, just different. Anyone who can use a Tivo, along with a passable universal remote, can easily use one of the current crop of BluRay-capable media players.


Isn't it true that the current crop of streamers (such as PCH) are only good for *simple linear playback?* Isn't their human interface inferior to TiVos for FF, REW, 30-second skip, etc? And, yes, I want to do all that even for movies I watch. I don't just want to be a couch potato for two straight hours.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

TexasGrillChef said:


> Especially with _Google_ bring *1 gig* *ULTRA* high broadband internet access to 5 cities in the USA before the end of the year. DALLAS being one of those cities. YEAH! (However I doubt it will be in my area of dallas ) The FCC and a few others are looking into *10gbps SUPER ULTRA *broadband internet to be available to 90% of the country by the year 2020.


I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that, the economics aren't there and IMO won't be there even in 10 years.

Plus you have to solve the "gatekeeper" problem, where the "last mile" providers will attempt to heavily toll this service. E.g. some cable companies want to cap service at ridiculously low values such as 10 GB/month. Even Comcast, my ISP, currently sets limits of 250 GB/month. That's less than 4 minutes of broadband at 10 gigabits per second. Yes of course those limits will increase, but not enough to make gigabit speed local service anything that makes sense, except for marketing purposes.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that, the economics aren't there and IMO won't be there even in 10 years.
> 
> Plus you have to solve the "gatekeeper" problem, where the "last mile" providers will attempt to heavily toll this service. E.g. some cable companies want to cap service at ridiculously low values such as 10 GB/month. Even Comcast, my ISP, currently sets limits of 250 GB/month. That's less than 4 minutes of broadband at 10 gigabits per second. Yes of course those limits will increase, but not enough to make gigabit speed local service anything that makes sense, except for marketing purposes.


Well Google has gotten pretty big, pretty powerfull, and pretty dam rich. Their touting extremely low priced 1gbps service and even free in "low" income areas. Their desire is to bring Ultra High speed internet to everyone including those that otherwise can't afford it.

Same idea behind the $100 laptop. Which I agree hasn't gone over to well. But those poor 3rd world countries that have managed to get the 350,000 $100 laptops have in fact made a world of difference in their countries.

Who knows. I tend to be optimistic. While HD conversion has taken longer than expected. Blu-ray acceptance has happend ALOT faster than the acceptance of DVD's when people were still using VHS players. Maybe one of the reasons Blu-ray accecptance came alot faster is because of the timing. Ie... Blu-ray became affordable at about the same time analog OTA was discontinued and people started buying new HDTV's to replace their older SD sets. Alot of people figured they would just upgrade their DVD players as well. I say that because a friend of mine who is a manager at a Best Buy close by said that about 38% of all the HDTV's they sell are also sold a Blu-ray player in the same sale as the HDTV. That doesn't include the number of Blu-ray players sold to those who allready have HDTV's.

I personally believe that once internet speeds get fast enough. Bandwidth caps will become a moot point.

Think of cell phones. At one time when cell phones first came out in the 1980's. Cell phone usuage was by the minute. NO PACKAGED minutes were included in any plan. Unlimited plans were a "pipe" dream. N*OW* today... Look at the number of Unlimited plans available at very affordable prices. Verizon & AT&T both have unlimited minute plans for $70 a month. $20 for unlimited Text/MMS messging. And Clear wire has unlimited 4g internet access (in some cities) for $45 for unlimited internet.

Consider Comcast that gives you a 250gb cap as well. They are only capping your internet in areas where you *can't *choose Verizon FIOS. Here in DFW, Time Warner Cable announced Bandwidth caps on their Internet. They changed their mind when they were flooded with calls of subscribers that were going to switch to Verizon. Verizon also inistiated a local ad campain saying how they don't have bandwidth caps.

You maybe right.. it make take a while... but Im just saying I wouldn't hold my breath that it won't happen either. (Don't hold your breath either way).

TGC


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

TexasGrillChef said:


> Consider Comcast that gives you a 250gb cap as well. They are only capping your internet in areas where you *can't *choose Verizon FIOS.


Comcast is rolling this out everywhere around the country. I have FiOS available to me, but have been too lazy to switch. I am capped. I just logged in to my account and I can see that I've used 17GB this month and have 233GB remaining. Some people might think of that as a challenge, but I don't.


----------



## funguy123us (Dec 29, 2009)

I didn't know there was a cap like this? Is this widespread?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

funguy123us said:


> I didn't know there was a cap like this? Is this widespread?


This has been in the works for quite a while, but I don't know how widespread it is yet.

It just started for us about 3 months ago. I think I got an email or an insert about it enclosed in my bill.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Comcast is rolling this out everywhere around the country. I have FiOS available to me, but have been too lazy to switch. I am capped. I just logged in to my account and I can see that I've used 17GB this month and have 233GB remaining. Some people might think of that as a challenge, but I don't.


250gb is plenty for most people thats the sad fact. Its only the minority when it comes down to it that ever uses more than 250gb. I think I saw the statistics. Only about 20%. Which also points out a fact of why is it even needed in the first place.

I know my mom has no need for unlimited internet access. All she does is a little browsing here & there, paying bills etc... and email.

Me on the other hand. I use TONS of slingbox, Netflix etc...

TGC


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

TexasGrillChef said:


> 250gb is plenty for most people thats the sad fact. Its only the minority when it comes down to it that ever uses more than 250gb. I think I saw the statistics. Only about 20%. Which also points out a fact of why is it even needed in the first place.
> 
> I know my mom has no need for unlimited internet access. All she does is a little browsing here & there, paying bills etc... and email.
> 
> ...


simply put - because of the 20% going over 250gb a month 90% are trading files that Comcast (with its hands in content ownership as well) wants stopped.

Once you have a legit service with mass market acceptance that makes revenue from moving xgb of data to the consumer then you will see the caps go away. Netflix and Amazon are the tail of something much larger but how much tail is left until we get to the meat of it is the question many businesses are asking. Google seems to think it found the answer. hope they did.


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> Actually, it hits the core of "most consumers don't care about quality".
> 
> For the past few years, there's been an increasing trend of people using lossless FLAC, or 320k MP3s, because - they realize the quality of digital music is kind of crappy. Wow - you mean those people who knew better and no one listened to were actually right?


I'm sure the quality issue is part of the trend, but there's another factor that you're ignoring: portable players, which is what a large majority of people rip their music collections for, now have the capacity to handle large collection in lossless or high bit-rate formats. That simply wasn't the case a few years ago.


----------



## rfryar (Feb 15, 2008)

I am going to state my OPINIONs, so if you debate them fine, but they are mine not yours.

In the past 4 years I started down the path of creating media center PCs to display all my media on all my TVs in my house. I ripped all the CDs in a lossless format, Ripped all my DVDs as ISOs and Ripped Blu-Rays as well.

However maintaining those PCs, the software side, keeping things wife and kid friendly became a full time job. I realized that the TiVo, while it is far from being perfect was a great intermediate device. 

My family already knows the TiVo interface and the fact that I no longer have to maintain all the PCs and interfaces, not to mention telling all the sitters how to use the multiple devices just to watch my kids favorite movies.

So I started to convert all my DVDs to a TiVo friendly format that I can just stream via Streambaby on demand. This process is straightforward and yes it does introduce loss, but it also makes my entire video library more convenient. 

I no longer have to support many HTPCs with the constantly changing UIs, codec support, etc. I also no longer have to leave instructions on how to switch video inputs or remotes to watch a movie. My kids know how to use the Streambaby interface to select their movie and immediately stream it to the screen.

I understand the fidelity comments that AbMagFab is making, however he is being a bit too extreme. Just because today I choose to reduce the quality in favor of convenience today, that does not mean I lose that option in the future. I am not ripping and throwing away my discs. I still have the originals.

So down the road when Uber Media device comes out that magically supports all video and audio codecs and provide an easy to use and cost friendly option I can switch to that format.

But for today the TiVo is a convenient solution to my families needs.

Argue all you wish AbMagFab, but this is MY OPINION not yours.

Rick


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

rfryar said:


> I am going to state my OPINIONs, so if you debate them fine, but they are mine not yours.
> 
> In the past 4 years I started down the path of creating media center PCs to display all my media on all my TVs in my house. I ripped all the CDs in a lossless format, Ripped all my DVDs as ISOs and Ripped Blu-Rays as well.
> 
> ...


Cool... so when you voted.. I am assuming you voted for the TiVo then?

TGC


----------

