Originally Posted by thefish
Well I just use it to record TV - I can't speak for others who have other uses for them. But you seem convinced that the people here are defending their use of replaytv out of ignorance.
That's what I'm seeing in this thread--people who don't realize how far the multimedia world has become, people who are cocooned inside the ReplayTV world that "works so well" (and in fact it does) and therefore simply don't bother to see if there are better ways to do things now, 10 years or more after buying their first ReplayTV.
That assumption seems unfounded based on what I read here
Well, I guess we'll agree to disagree.
Sure there is always something better. And I, like others here, have tried alternatives and decided there is still some use in replay for us. Convenience and cost, not ignorance, is what drove my decision.
I wasn't directing my comments at you, clearly. You're not ignorant--you've made informed decisions.
But many are making UNinformed decisions, and I see that here.
The horse analogy is silly. Do you think replay users are like the Amish?
Well, those who choose to play their Blu-Ray Discs out s-video, realtime, to a fancy VCR (that's what the Replay is at that point) seem like it. As someone pointed out, you can rip the disc way faster and maintain its quality.
Maybe it is like driving a car from 10 years ago that you still like, but not a horse.
no, not at all. Your example would be like ripping a disc using software that doesn't convert to a modern file format that might play on a wider variety of newer devices. You're still driving the car, but you don't have satellite radio in the ten year old car. But you have a car, with a radio. And air conditioning. And all the modern conveniences.