CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › DVDs are here to stay, but VHS is still holding on

DVDs are here to stay, but VHS is still holding on

Started by Drew Young10 · · 👁 5 views · 25 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Drew Young10Richard Hernandez13Richard Howard2loneowl45ARebecca Miller2nimblemarlin17Gerald Rivera60fadedsailor932Matthew Thomas17
Drew Young10 Drew Young10 MemberOP
41 messages
joined Nov 2007
#1 ·
So, about eighteen months ago, I picked up a solid DVD setup—speakers, everything, the whole nine yards. Then my old VCR bit the dust, so I went out and grabbed a brand-new DVR. But honestly? I’m already looking at having to head back to Best Buy to swap it out. The thing is, I can't actually record what I want directly from the TV—you know, like if I want to catch a specific series, or maybe just pause a movie because I have to run an errand... this new tech just doesn't seem to allow that kind of flexibility.😢
I guess you could say that's a massive downside to these modern DVD players.
Is anyone else struggling to let go of a perfectly good old-school VCR?
Richard Hernandez13 Richard Hernandez13 Regular
269 messages
joined May 2004
#2 ·
Are you absolutely certain that the new technique doesn't actually promise that?
Drew Young10 Drew Young10 MemberOP
41 messages
joined Nov 2007
#3 ·
Maybe there’s some overpriced gadget out there designed specifically for filming, but honestly, video is just the cheapest little recording assistant you can get.
Or maybe I just completely misread the instructions in the DVD manual. 🙂
Richard Howard2 Richard Howard2 Active Member
128 messages
joined Dec 2002
#4 ·
Drew Young10 said:I miss being able to record whatever I want directly from my TV—like catching a series, or pausing a movie because I have to step out for a second. This modern tech just doesn't allow for that.😢
In my view, that's a massive drawback for the DVD format.


Perhaps you overlooked this, but DVD recorders have actually been around for quite some time now.
loneowl45 loneowl45 Member
12 messages
joined Dec 2004
#5 ·
VHS is still going strong 😁
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#6 ·
You can find DVD burners on the market now, and they aren't even that pricey. As far as I'm concerned, VHS is ancient history.
Rebecca Miller2 Rebecca Miller2 Active Member
114 messages
joined Jan 2008
#7 ·
Richard Hernandez13 said:Are you sure the new tech isn't promising that?

It does, but it’s just too slow. Like the old saying goes: a promise is just a tease for the impatient!😁

People are terrified of DVD burners and software... they fear it might actually disrupt the big corporations' business models.😕
nimblemarlin17 nimblemarlin17 Regular
459 messages
joined Mar 2004
#8 ·
Look, DVD burners aren't exactly breaking the bank anymore, but there's always a catch. Sure, you can find those new DVD burners with built-in hard drives that cost a premium, but they're leagues ahead of the cheap stuff. Honestly, why would anyone bother picking up one of those budget DVD-R drives right now when it's obvious they're basically dead on arrival?
Rebecca Miller2 Rebecca Miller2 Active Member
114 messages
joined Jan 2008
#9 ·
Syke said:You can find DVD burners on the market now, and they aren't even that pricey. For me, VHS is ancient history.


They won't be history for a long time yet!😁 🙂
Richard Hernandez13 Richard Hernandez13 Regular
269 messages
joined May 2004
#10 ·
I actually meant to write 'enables' 😬
Rebecca Miller2 Rebecca Miller2 Active Member
114 messages
joined Jan 2008
#11 ·
nimblemarlin17 said:Actually, DVD burners aren't that pricey anymore, but there's always a catch. They've released these newer DVD burners with built-in hard drives that cost more, but they're much better. Why would anyone bother with those cheap current DVD-R drives when it's obvious they have no staying power?


The hard drive option sounds like the smarter move. Probably best to just wait until the price drops. Though we aren't exactly known for our patience!🙂 😁
nimblemarlin17 nimblemarlin17 Regular
459 messages
joined Mar 2004
#12 ·
Of course it’s a way better option. You won't even need DVDs anymore, unless you're talking about the originals. Everything you burn is just going to sit on a 200 GB HDD. Why bother with discs when you've got a drive like that?
Gerald Rivera60 Gerald Rivera60 Active Member
129 messages
joined Feb 2007
#13 ·
There’s also the option of using a PC capture card... for about $200 you basically have a video recorder sitting on your computer.

Plus, it makes skipping commercials during a movie pretty effortless...
Richard Howard2 Richard Howard2 Active Member
128 messages
joined Dec 2002
#14 ·
nimblemarlin17 said:Of course it's a hundred times better. You won't even need DVDs anymore, except for the originals you buy. Everything you burn will just sit on a hard drive with about 200 GB of space. Why bother with discs when you have a hard drive like that?

Transfer methods will likely dwindle down to just flash cards. We can already pick up a 1 GB USB flash drive, and in just a few years, we'll be buying 10-20 GB cards for next to nothing.

A year ago, a PC DVD burner cost $667, now it's $167, while a high-end model was $2667, and now it's only 2000-$1000.

I suppose the conclusion is that the future looks promising...
Richard Hernandez13 Richard Hernandez13 Regular
269 messages
joined May 2004
#15 ·
But honestly, if we're talking about recorders or hard drives inside DVD players, they really ought to support real-time recording.

I've been wondering, just how good are these current burners actually performing?
Do you think there's some kind of trade-off happening between the recording speed and the actual picture quality?
fadedsailor932 fadedsailor932 Active Member
101 messages
joined Oct 2004
#16 ·
..Man, once I saw those prices... you can grab a 40GB high-def DVD for maybe $150, which isn't even that bad... A decent DVD burner goes for about $250 or $300, and honestly, the price is tanking fast. I remember seeing a Panasonic 80GB DVD burner for just 10 $167 at the start of the year, and now it's sitting around $40 (or so I heard)... Anyway, once the price for a burner drops below $500—which I think is gonna happen any day now—it’s game over for the VHS era. We'll be down to the last nail in the coffin for 🙂

..plus, I read that the biggest tech megastore in the States actually pulled VHS from their shelves because they didn't sell a single tape in 18 months...
nimblemarlin17 nimblemarlin17 Regular
459 messages
joined Mar 2004
#17 ·
Since we’re already talking about the DVD format, has anyone else noticed that the whole prediction about DivX becoming the "MP3 of movies" was a total bust? The cost of burning movies onto blank DVDs has dropped so much that using DivX isn't even cheaper or more practical anymore. 😁
Richard Howard2 Richard Howard2 Active Member
128 messages
joined Dec 2002
#18 ·
Richard Hernandez13 said:It is my firm belief that recorders and hard drives integrated into DVD players ought to support real-time recording capabilities. It is a basic necessity.

How much quality can we actually expect from these modern recorders?
Is there some sort of compromise being made between recording speeds and image quality?

Technology continues its relentless march forward, yet I find myself thinking that we aren't even facing any significant hurdles as it stands.

Modern devices equipped with an HDD now feature time-shifting capabilities. This essentially means that while a program is still being recorded, you can already begin watching what has been captured. Furthermore, they offer on-screen editing tools for your recorded material, which you can eventually burn onto a DVD.

Everything out there offers far superior alternatives to VHS. The only real issue is that many of us simply aren't used to it; people struggle to believe that the whole process is actually much simpler than they think. When you factor in that a standard DVD now costs about the same as an old VHS tape—and considering we can record significantly more footage onto an HDD depending on the quality and capacity—VHS just doesn't stand a chance anymore.

It’s only a matter of time—give it a year or two, maybe less—but the distribution of VHS films is going to grind to a complete halt. It's inevitable.

If we push this line of thinking even further, what year are we actually looking at—maybe 2006 or 2007—for when Blu-ray and HD-DVD finally hit the shelves here in the States? We're talking about formats with capacities around 30GB that will actually carry high-definition footage. It might be the moment we finally experience true digitalization.

The fundamental issue remains that even with today's hardware, the entire system hasn't truly achieved full digitalization yet.
The reality of our setup is somewhat underwhelming. Most of the footage we capture—and frankly, most of the cameras used in filmmaking in general—is primarily analog, with the exception of digital satellite broadcasts. However, even those digital signals aren't truly digital by the time they reach us. Our satellite receivers lack any legitimate digital outputs; instead, they provide standard analog RCA connections. This means the signal is forced through a D/A converter before it ever hits our gear. From there, we feed those analog inputs into a system that records onto a digital DVD format. Consequently, we aren't achieving a true full-path digital transfer. It is, quite simply, a loss in quality.

The digital revolution finally arrived this year with the introduction of HDMI devices. Specifically, we saw the debut of the first HDMI DVD player, the Pioneer 868, alongside the first HDMI-compatible display, the Pioneer plasma PDP-HD404.

HDMI It is finally happening. After more than two decades of being stuck with the limitations of SCART, we are seeing a global standard that actually moves us forward—a fully digital transfer for both audio and video capable of handling massive amounts of data. Up until this point, our only options for purely digital transfers were DVI, which is strictly video-only, or FireWire via i.Link, which could handle both audio and video for DV camcorders. However, both of those standards fall short because they simply lack the necessary bandwidth to sustain a high-quality signal. For instance, FireWire tops out at 400 Mbit/s, which is barely enough to push through basic television resolution. We need more.
That is precisely why we have HDMI. With a bandwidth reaching up to 5 Gbps—which, if you think about it, is roughly ten times faster than a standard HDD—it provides the necessary headroom to handle high-definition video and audio from next-gen media like HD-DVD and Blu-ray. It’s also designed to accommodate those high-definition TV signals that have already been broadcasting here in the US and over in Japan for several years now. As for Europe, they should be seeing similar transitions around 2006.

The role of legacy FireWire is finally shifting toward high-end digital music transfer. For much of the last decade—that awkward transition period from analog to digital—we’ve relied on coaxial or optical connections. Honestly, those have always provided enough bandwidth for standard CD players or even Dolby Digital and DTS tracks on a DVD. But let’s face it: the era of the basic CD is dying. We are moving into the age of Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio, which demand true high-definition sound. Up until now, you were pretty much stuck using analog connections to hear that level of detail, but starting this year, we are seeing FireWire integrated for digital signal transfer. It’s an ideal solution.

And just like that, we are witnessing the total transition to a full-digital workflow. It’s happening right before our eyes. Back in 2001, Pitof shot the first entirely HDD-based film—not a single scrap of tape used—captured on a digital camera, titled *Vidocq*. Later, in 2002, they went ahead and transferred it onto standard tape. The editing was handled on an Apple Mac G4. A strange era, really. Moving from physical reels to bits and bytes... quite a shift.

Back in 2002, George Lucas released Star Wars: Attack of the Clones, which stands as the first true digital Hollywood production. His original intention was to bypass analog film entirely, but he was ultimately forced to concede. It turns out that even here in the States—let alone across the rest of the world—there simply weren't enough fully digital theaters available to make such a move commercially viable at the time.

The avalanche has officially begun. Once DVD, Blu-ray, HD-DVD, and HDTV become deeply ingrained in our American consumer habits—and once movie theaters finally finish their modernization—we’re going to see the systematic recording of digital films.

As the right technology becomes available (think full-path digital A/V receivers, Sony already has one for about $27 $0.00, along with HDMI-equipped HD LCD and Plasma screens, projectors, and eventually DVD/Blu-ray players), I can say with some confidence that we are entering an era where we can experience all media, whether audio or video, exactly as it was intended in the studio. No loss, no compromise.
Richard Howard2 Richard Howard2 Active Member
128 messages
joined Dec 2002
#19 ·
nimblemarlin17 said:Since we are on the subject of the DVD format, I wonder if anyone else has noticed that the prediction about DivX becoming the "MP3 of movies" hasn't really panned out. The cost of burning movies onto blank DVDs has plummeted so much that using DivX isn't even cheaper or more practical anymore.😁

Precisely. The whole point of DivX is becoming questionable, though it certainly hasn't died off just yet.

The issue is that since a large portion of DVD movies come as dual-layer discs (8.4 GB), I still find myself needing those dual-layer DVDs. They remain quite expensive—roughly $33 per unit—so during this brief window where prices are dropping, we can still take advantage of DivX to squeeze those types of films onto single-layer 4.7 GB discs.

Now, DivX quality is inferior to a standard DVD when you cram it onto a single CD, but if you stretch it across a 4.7 GB DVD, there is, quite literally, no discernible difference in quality.

Furthermore, DivX will likely persist as a medium for internet sharing and backups. Just as we utilize MP3s for music, we will soon be burning DVDs containing compilations of multiple DivX films (you can fit about 10 to 15 movies on one dual-layer disc) and exchanging them over the net.
nimblemarlin17 nimblemarlin17 Regular
459 messages
joined Mar 2004
#20 ·
Look, I know people are still pinning all the blame on Netflix, but let's be real: those old-school DVD players that can actually handle .avi files? They don't have a leg to stand under any upcoming tech standards. DivX might stick around as a way to swap files, but even that’s looking shaky. If we don't get some kind of flat-rate deal soon, it’s honestly going to be cheaper to just grab a physical DVD from Blockbuster or borrow one from a buddy than to bother downloading movies from the internet.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads