@Kevin White. I know Zairika well. Other than 4 CD boom boxes I got together once in the late 90's with friends, however, I've never really heard it as its supposed to be performed (although I've merged the individual mp3's for convenience which kind of defeats the purpose and, obviously, the fun :-P).

I do not however think that directional sound is meaningless jut because a TV screen is only in front of us. We are still ultimately spectators and much of the emotional impact of movies comes from their ability to make us to forget that distance. Surround sound ads a visceral element that helps in just that. Specifically locating all sounds usually isn't nearly as important as just being immersed. Erecting more barriers to being drawn in seems odd when the point watching a movie (or reading a book, etc) is to forget the text on the page or the pictures on the screen and just sink into the story. If the 2 dimensionality of the picture plane tends to pull us out of the moment, why multiply shortcomings by demanding the same level of artifice from the sound?

Look at horror. Well made horror films are all about what we hear and don't see. Sound design is critical to pulling you in and making you scared. And I promise you that even a movie like The Others or Pan's Labyrinth benefit immensely from good sound design. Pan's Labyrinth is in fact one of my top reference discs for showing off my system and none of it has top do with bullets whizzing by or huge explosions. Its all about creating mood and emotional impact.

I just realized I did spend more on my speakers and receiver ($2100 Aperion speakers and $700 Onkyo setup) than I did on my TV ($2100 Sony Bravia) but its not because I think sound is more important. They are equally important to me.

Its just that speakers are a longer term investment in my opinion so its worth spending a bit more. I'll keep these for 15 years or more. The TV might get replaced or rotated out to another room in 5 to 10 years.

@Kevin. Hearing the world in through two ears and reproducing the sounds of the world through two speakers are totally different things.

In one situation the sound sources are originating from all around us. There is ambience, reflected sound, reverberation, etc. In the other you have an attempt to communicate this multi-source sound using just two sources. Quality 2 channel systems have a more accurate soundstage than cheaper systems, but there will always be a limit to the width and depth of this illusion (not to mention its always directional which real life is not). 2 speakers simply can not reproduce the emersion a well crafted surround mix can provide.

Same here. I consider Netflix streaming a last ditch option too because of the lack of surround. Based on the content I usually watch via Netflix (often TV series), I probably shouldn't look at it this way but I do. If I can get it on disc with discreet surround I am willing to wait. Just like with HD content, with a good sound system you become spoiled and its hard to be satisfied with plain old stereo.

If I do stream Netflix I might engage Pro Logic II or Neo 6 but its still just not the same as a kick ass TrueHD or DTS-HD mix.

Its an interesting idea but you'd likely have to leave basic SD over the air since it does serve as an emergency communications system. Plus I doubt all the stations that just bought expensive new digital HD OTA broadcasting equipment will go down without a fight.

I do think that wireless broadband is horribly restrictive right now due to a lack of competition and freeing up more frequencies on which companies could operate would be a good thing. But the stranglehold that the big 4 carrier now have on the airwaves is just not working. Eventually, the FCC is going to have to demand the airwaves be open to any competitor like they did plain old telephone service. As long as the carriers can have these mini-monopolies real competition and innovation just can't happen.

When lawyers attack!

Its kind of fun to watch Nilay open up a can of legal whoop ass every
now and then. Almost like a geekier Judge Judy.

HD Nation is a really good show. On that particular episode, Patrick and Robert also talked a bit about the fact that the studios aren't giving very good masters of their content to the streaming services. I wonder if that's why we wind up with so much crappy pan and scan and windowboxing on Netflix Watch Now?

Requiring people carry SD cards around with them to buy a product is a losing proposition. No card = no sale. Imagine how well grocery stores would do if they refused to sell people groceries who didn't didn't bring their own bags?

Oh, and then there is the issue of how many people actually have SD card readers connected to their TV's.

Any smart business plan does not erect barriers to entry before it has even begun.

Who the hell is this "mainstream" audience who is not comfortable with Netflix physical or streaming rentals yet happen to have SD card readers hooked up to their TV's? If someone is tecg savvy enough to have an SD card reader hooked up to their TV they aren't afraid of the internet or unable to find video online. Mainstream they are not and they are likely already using another service that doesn't require them to leave the house (Apple TV, Amazon, Vudu, Netflix, etc) or they are just getting their content off of bit torrent.

I consider myself an early adopter. I have an Apple TV, and Xbox360, and an LG BDP390 (replacing my earlier Sony S-300) blu-ray player all hardwired to a router with 14Mbps internet access connected to my LCD TV. Yet even with all that gear I still don't have a way to read an SD card at my TV so who the hell is the audience for this kiosk?

"4GB of H.264 or equiv can produce a much better picture than 8GB of MPEG-2 used in a DL DVD."

Even if it was the same quality of DVD, you still have to go to the store to buy these things so there goes the convenience factor. What's the difference between hauling a packet of USB drives around these things and a box of DVD's? At least DVD copy protection is easily broken which makes it more flexible as a digital file. And Flash RAM isn't nearly as cheap as optical media so someone going to have to eat the extra cost and my guess is it won't be Paramount. I just don't see how any sane business person could give this the green light.

Any new format that is going to stand a chance in the marketplace has to have a compelling advantage over the status quo: either quality, convenience, or price. And it has to have CE industry wide agreement and all the studios on board. This has none of those things. Its just a slightly different form factor... a novelty and a gimmick. A few studios might agree to put a limited selection of titles out little things like this every so often to dip their toes in the water but I doubt any of them think these formats will ever gain any traction. Over the years micro-cassettes, Minidisc, DVD Audio, SACD, UMD have all come and gone without any real impact in the US market even though they all had tiny little sections devoted to them in stores for a while (and I mean tiny, like 3 feet or so).