I use BD-R as a method of backing up my photography work as I hit certain quotas of data (obviously pointless to burn a BD if I don't have ~25GB waiting to burn to it). I do still buy Blu-ray movies (and lately the 4K UltraHD variants) mostly because a) I want to "own" the movies (even if the studios think they're only licensing the content to me), and b) I like to use tools like makemkv to rip the disc and store it on a hard drive collection of movies. At approximately 25-35GB per movie, it can get kind of large, but the picture quality is worth it.
Wondering how long it'll be before we can rip 4K UHD Blu-rays though.
I use them mostly for gaming. I've found phone screens to be too small, both from a visual perspective, as well as an interface perspective. I couldn't imagine trying to use them for productivity though. Can you get BT keyboards (or use the on-screen keyboard)? Sure, but both typically sacrifice something (appearance, feel, layout) to remain portable. Even laptop keyboards don't feel right compared to a desktop keyboard.
Having said that, as others have suggested, they do have their limited uses. Watching videos, browsing the web and performing basic tasks (sending an e-mail, updating a spreadsheet, making minimal edits to a document) all fit within reasonable use for them. I also think as their prices come down they will be a basic addition for most people for just those very reasons: performs all of the tasks they can with their phone, but on a significantly larger and easier to see/interact with screen. I know the Galaxy Tab S2 is a natural complement to folks that use the S6 or S7: you can take calls/texts received by your phone on the tablet. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar functionality on iPads for folks with iPhones.
I think it loses the ability to call itself a "TV series" when it refuses to air over a conventional method for getting television into your home... Just sayin'.
How come? Consider the source of the word "television," tele meaning from a distance, and vision being to view something. The show is still being presented to a large audience over a great geographic distance, you're still viewing something remotely from where it's produced. Only the technology behind it has changed, moving from radio frequencies over the air to radio frequencies over a coaxial cable, and now to pulses of light over fiber.
Yes, but the model up until now has mostly been either free (OTA) or paying for an entire service (cable, minus the odd premium channels). This is streaming, which inherently limits the available quality to whatever CBS feels like providing and whatever your available bandwidth can handle; with ATSC OTA there's little reason to made content look worse on purpose, though cable/satellite is a mixed bag (cue up the stories of Comcast squeezing more and more channels into smaller space).
I love Trek, but I hope this flops so CBS will know their service is lame.
In what way is it "lame"? Shows cost money to produce, and that money has to come from somewhere. Consider that a lot of scripted prime time shows cost in the $3-4 million range to produce. You'd need 3-4 million people to chip in a buck to cover the cost of a show, but consider how many shows CBS is running and how many shows people watch. Scorpion, The Big Bang Theory, 2 Broke Girls, NCIS and its two spin-offs, Blue Bloods, The Good Wife, Code Black, CSI and CSI: Cyber, Extant, Limitless, Hawaii Five-O, Madam Secretary, Elementary, The Mentalist, Mom, The Odd Couple, Person of Interest, Stalker, Supergirl, Life in Pieces, Criminal Minds, and the pending Angel from Hell, plus a few more. That's a lot of money, and considering that ads on the web don't snatch nearly the same kind of value as ads from OTA/MSO grab they have to make up the deficit somewhere.
So that's $6/mo to cover the production of more than twenty five different scripted television shows (not to mention the cost of licensing NCAA games, game shows, news programs, and reality shows). Assuming an average run of 25 episodes per season for each show, and a 12 month run, that's 12 per episode that CBS is getting to cover the cost of production of everything, advertising/promotion, and bandwidth for streaming. Even if you only watch three shows, you're paying 96 per episode which is cheaper than the going rate on iTunes, Amazon Prime or Google Play.
The money they make off of television advertising (OTA/cable) is pretty big, IIRC. Also, FWIW, CBS made a profit of $1.4 billion last year... hardly sounds like they're hurting. I guess what I'm getting at is... they appear to be forcing people into a specific service using a name brand they know will get at least some people to bite. You have a loyal fanbase, why potentially ruin that by forcing them on to your platform? To make it so you have to pay for it AND can't skip ads?
How much of that pound of chicken was actual chicken and how much was injected water? Just curious.
The only likely users are techies and early-adopter types. I could see a small business in these things for gamers and marketing and some other niche uses but I really don't see full immersion VR headsets becoming a mainstream technology.
Not sure I'd qualify the porn industry as niche, but if they pick up on this, and I reckon they will, that might certainly push sales big-time.
Besides, why "stream" things as Google advertises?
Because some things are a lot more fun to watch in real-time at the same time as other people. Think (e-)sports and things like that.
Sure, I can watch the match the next day on youtube, but it isn't quite the same.
The current theory is that Mars, like Earth, at one point had a molten core that spun, thus causing a magnetic field that held an atmosphere.
The core solidified, stopped spinning, the field collapsed and the atmosphere went its merry way off into space.
In other news, just because your house burned down after getting hit by lightning does not mean it's safe for my 3 year old to play with matches.
Does Japan know something that Detroit doesn't?
Math...
But give them some respect, they aren't backward savages like most american's seem to believe.
Or, to phrase it somewhat differently, they're hardly any more backward and savage than most americans.
"Well, if you can't believe what you read in a comic book, what *can* you believe?!" -- Bullwinkle J. Moose