 |
 |
 |
 |
||
           |
Stop the Anti-Divx Madness! Posted by Bear [IP: 195.232.122.23] on November 14, 1998 at 19:03:41: In Reply to: Stop the Anti-Divx Madness! posted by David on November 14, 1998 at 18:39:32: : I don't understand the rabid anti-Divx propaganda. Yes, open DVD is better: enhanced for widescreen titles, extras, etc., in fact, I'm getting a DVD player, myself. But why try to limit other people's freedom to choose Divx? I am against DIVX because I want DVD to become as ubiquitous as VHS rental. VHS really took off when Beta died. A single standard is easier for everyone. : DVD rentals are still scarce, there are concerns about the durability of DVDs for the rental market, and most important, there are LOTS of movies I'd pay $4.50 to see once but would NEVER spend $20 to 30 to BUY it, since I'd never watch it again. For the price of 3 DVDs, you can watch 16 Divx discs. So the question for the renter is, to rent on VHS or to get a Divx disc with 2.5x the resolution and warble-free audio for a LITTLE more money. That's sheer rubbish. I live in a medium sized town in the MidWest. Within a 5 mile radius of my home, I have 1 DIVX vendor (CC) and 4 DVD rental outlets. (there are also 9 other vendors who only rent VHS) DIVX will continue to be more scarce than DVD rental because the other consumer electronics retailers are not incented to put money in CC's pocket. The VHS rental outlets are certainly not going to scrap their business models and decrease repeat visits in the process. I have never personally rented a bad DVD (about 40 attempts so far). I've talked with 3 of the vendors in my area and the HIGHEST failure rate they reported to me was 1-2%. My buddy who works at the place I rent most often told me that the failures occur when someone cracks a disk-he's never seen one fail due to scratches. He also says their profit margin is far higher for DVD than VHS because DVD is more affordable and durable. Except for Blockbuster, the DVD rental outfits charge $1.99 for two nights. If I turn in EVERY disk TWO days late, I still save money over DIVX. In fact, I'm late less than 10% of the time. For the price of 4 DIVX rentals, I can rent 9 DVDs. I paid $329.99 (Best Buy) for my Pioneer DVD player which included component connections for my widescreen Toshiba TV and DTS to cover my options in the future. The Zenith/Goldstar was $399.99 at CC. If I didn't want component outs or DTS (which the DIVX player doesn't offer) I could have chosen from a Toshiba or Philips for less than $285! The question for the renter is: do you want to pay a higher initial cost for inferior hardware that will continue to cost you more each time you use it? : Let's not force people to choose between VHS rentals and DVD purchase. Divx is a nice happy medium between the two for many people. Isn't this a country whose founders came here to avoid having the views of the majority forced upon them? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The founding fathers: 1. escaped from religious persecution and 2. established a socio-economic system marked by repression and exploitation. You're arguing the former, but I think that CC and their pettifogging partners better fit the latter.
Follow Ups:
Return to the new SMR Forums Menu
|
|
|||
|
 © SMR Group 2001-2004 - http://www.smr-group.co.uk/ |
|
|||
