 |
 |
 |
 |
||
           |
Stop the Anti-Divx Madness! Posted by Bear [IP: 207.87.125.218] on November 15, 1998 at 21:58:54: In Reply to: Stop the Anti-Divx Madness! posted by David on November 15, 1998 at 06:26:20: :in my city of 180,000 in Texas there are NO DVD rentals available. But if DVD rentals are becoming so commonplace, the case for Divx pretty much crumbles, as Divx's ONLY appeal is its rental-price vs. DVD purchase price. My Ohio town of 220,000 is typically behind the rest of the country in obtaining new technology (we're not likely to get an HDTV signal well into 2000.) : And a single standard IS easier for everyone, but format wars are MEANT to be fought in a free market, not avoided by killing off one format with propaganda and hyperbole. I'm not sure that I share a fondness of format wars. It would have been better to establish Beta than VHS. Adopting DAT, Mini-Disc, or even DCC (for gosh sakes!) would have been preferable to maintaining my reliance on analog cassettes. I also don't believe that consumers are particularly well served by having 18 ATSC formats. Offering 3-4 formats would have provided choice, but equipement would be less expensive for programmers and consumers. Compromise is often preferable to war... I fully agree that some supporters of DVD have gone overboard in their arguments, but that's not gonna stop me from telling the truth about DIVX. It's not necessary or effective to resort to propaganda or hyperbole--the truth is so much more devestating. DIVX will ultimately kill itself because it's business model makes silly assumptions. Heck, one result of the swift death of DIVX will be your ability to choose between many vendors in your area for DVD rentals. : : 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. : You're right, no video rental store would sell Divx titles; Divx COMPETES with rentals. It's an entirely NEW business model. I have 13 VHS rental locatons within 5 miles of my home. The remaining 9 VHS vendors that don't rent DVDs can easily add this capability. These businesses did not pop up overnight--it took years. What is gained by scrapping these local vendors in favor of others who make the baffling choice to line the pockets of a West Coast law firm and CC? : That's reassuring to hear. However, durability is still debatable. With digital technology, only so much data loss can occur before you get a near-unwatchable glitch, whereas a slightly damaged VHS tape can still be rented (though VERY annoying). I'm satisfied on the durability issue. I've been talking with my county library about establishing a DVD lending program, and the manager of their multi-media department mentioned that they have had very few problems with CDs over the years. Next time I speak with him, I'll inquire about whether they've done any formal study of the replacement rate for CDs. The DVD rental centers have found DVDs more durable, space efficient, and profitable than VHS. The biggest gripe my buddy has is that it will take a few years for the number of DVD releases to approach VHS's. : First, the democratic, capitalistic system was designed to minimize repression and exploitation (the former of which anti-Divx'ers are equally guilty of attempting). Perhaps our founding fathers established something other than a "democratic capitalistic system". My copy of the constitution clearly establishes slavery as a legal institution. Who are the opponents of DIVX repressing? CC? The Hollywood lawyers? Customers who are missing out on DIVX's technical or financial superiority? If opposing DIVX is repression, then every economic actor who influences business decisions is also a practitioner of repression. :Repression in a capitalist society is carried out by the rich vs. in communism where it is by those in office; at least everyone's got a chance to be rich (even Circuit City). Communism was bad, but was slavery any better? Communism would never have existed if capitalists had been more vigilant and given half a thought to the utility of some semblance of economic fairness. DIVX attempts to centralize the power to distribute our media products, and if successful would reduce our choice of vendors. That sounds far closer to repression than my objections to this greedy scheme.
Follow Ups:
Return to the new SMR Forums Menu
|
|
|||
|
 © SMR Group 2001-2004 - http://www.smr-group.co.uk/ |
|
|||
