this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
332 points (97.7% liked)

Programmer Humor

34254 readers
108 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
cat_programmer@lemmy.ml
332
sony why rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 2 weeks ago by Unknown_0671@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I think it's hilarious that Sony was so scared of Bluray failing and becoming another Betamax that they basically bought out any future from under HD-DVD which probably would have been more successful (like VHS).

In the end, streaming won the day and Blurays are already a thing of the past.

To be clear, the first Blurays were coming out in June 2006, Netflix began internet streaming in January 2007, barely six months later.

Whoopsie doodles Sony you fucking idiots.

(I mean there's a lot of reason streaming sucks but fuck Sony for real.)

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 49 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Blurays are still way better than streaming though, especially the UHD ones. Bitrate is always way higher and the audio is noticeably crisper in my opinion.

I still regularly buy Blu rays, but it has to be for a specific kind of film or one of my favourites.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

But what is the benefit of Bluray over dowloading?

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That bluray is the source of your release.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The bluray is an export of the movie with lower compression flashed to a BluRay disk. Then we rip it back out of the disk.

The BluRay does not really add value besides as a physical storage medium. It is about as useful as DVD's were in the past.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's more useful than breaking into a cinema, stealing the hdd and emcryption keys and storing the screening file on your server.
And more useful than camrips.

What I want to say: It's the best you can get to archival quality without aquiring the source files.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago

For sure but I used to think that BluRay in itself had any added value as in "it is better than the quality of a playable file". But it does not. It simply is like a DVD which contains a high quality version if the film.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It can be hard to find full 4k atmos versions online in my opinion. But usual benefits are the same for any physical collection. Actually having something tangible you can look at and touch and know you'll always have as long as you look after it and disc rot doesn't come for it before your own demise.

[–] JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Disc rot

Back up your physical media!!

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Can't you just get the BR-ISO and remux yourself?

[–] SuperIce@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

For FHD Blu-Rays yes (though IIRC you need to download a file with the list of AACS keys for decryption). For UHD BluRays, you need to get a drive that people have made a custom firmware for and flash the firmware first. This is because UHD drives also have hardware level encryption protection that prevents you from being able to read the discs directly (assuming the firmware is working as intended, hence the need to flash a custom firmware). Realistically, just find a remux torrent. It's much easier.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Speaking only for UHD blurays - to get similar quality requires large files. Storing a collection of giant files is a hassle.

[–] ftbd@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I disagree. Having 5TB worth of movies on a hard drive / NAS is way more convenient than having 5TB of movies spread across 100 blurays.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

They're a tad bigger than that (100 GB per disc), and I've lost enough hard disks over the years to not want to have to deal with backing up files that big. Not when I can have a small collection of shelf stable discs that won't suffer mechanical failure short of deliberate damage.

Anyway, you can disagree all you like. If it's not inconvenient for you, excellent, but for me it is. Hard disks sit in the back of my mind as ticking time bombs that I need to keep an eye on if I want to trust them. Ugh, I've done enough of that in my life. So many dodgy disks!

Oh and that also assumes a load of infrastructure in my home that I don't have. I know how to set it up, but I don't want to. Been there, done that. I'd rather check the second hand UHD shelf at CEX and pick up the occasional disc when the price isn't silly.

Of course, eventually my UHDs will decay, but the timescale is decades rather than years.

[–] gila@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago

There's caveats to that these days. Official streaming, in practice, sure. But with a debrid/similar service and sufficient bandwidth, you can pirate stream files with equivalent quality to uncompressed Blurays

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

Betas outlived VHSs by several years. It wasn’t Betas that caused Sony to act like that with BluRays, it was DATs.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Are you talking about Betamax, ATRAC3, MemoryStick, Video8, Digital8, UMD, MiniDisc or BluRay?

[–] Unknown_0671@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 weeks ago

all of the above plus DVD+R, Betacam, and probably others im forgetting

[–] LiamTheBox@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Bluray rips are the best, sadly it consumes too much bandwith and energy.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Easy. Just rip each blu-ray to its own hard drive. It makes filing easier too.

[–] ZiemekZ@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Or don't rip and just use the damn disk.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wonder what their answer is going to be for Dolby Atmos? I am sure they could think of a another protocol that is just as pointless for your standard TV sound sticks.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm always tickled when I see soundbars that ostensibly support Dolby Atmos.

[–] Earflap@reddthat.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Why? I'm not an a/v guy.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Dolby Atmos is a surround sound technology. The most basic speaker setup for it is 5.1.2: 5 = front left and right, centre, rear left and right 1 = subwoofer (bass box) 2 = ceiling speakers

So a soundbar - a single block sat in the centre below the screen - claiming to do immersive surround sound is up there with gold-plated fibreoptic leads.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

To add on, it supports up to 20.1.10 and that is where the protocol may shine. However, full spacial sound is not new, and Atmos is just Sony's proprietary version.

I stole the "sound stick" bit from Benn Jordans blunt overview on atmos: https://youtu.be/5Dw3aKbw5Wo

(Atmos is all caps as well? Meh, whatever.)

[–] HStone32@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

As an incurable optimist, I look forward to the day digitally licensed media goes under, and analog media makes its grand return

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

You wouldn't download... a vinyl record...

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

Desperately recreating the last shitstorm that happened to go their way.

Kinda worked for Blu-Ray copying VHS vs Betamax, did not work for PS3 copying PS1/PS2 vs everything else.