bcc1d6c7   
   From: epwise@yahoo.com   
      
   Matthew Garvey  wrote in news:00508c53-9af0-49d6-b76e-   
   f8e3e3b4b167@w8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:   
      
   > On May 6, 11:50 am, Wiseguy  wrote:   
   >   
   >> > This bewilders me   
   >> > Lady Di says in the hologram ad: "When I watch a DVD it's got to be   
   >> > Blu-ray!" Why do people seem to think that Blu-ray is a subset of   
   DVD?   
   >> > I keep hearing that, often with the wording "[on] Blu-ray DVD".   
   This   
   >> > is just silly.   
   >>   
   >> DVD can mean Digital Video Disc.  A Blu-ray is technically also a   
   digit   
   > al   
   >> video disc.   DVDs came first.  A Blu-ray is an improvement of that   
   >> technology. Both are readily available. What's silly about it?   
   >   
   > Skipping over the Video/Versatile quagmire...   
   >   
   > It is all three of those words, but that doesn't mean it's a DVD   
   > physically or in software. It's no less compact than a CD - does that   
   > make it a compact disc? It's read with a laser - does that make it a   
   > laserdisc or laservision? It's also a high definition digital v__   
   > disc. So it's HD-DVD too?   
   >   
   > Nowhere on a BD package does it identify as a DVD unless there is a   
   > DVD included as well. That's because it's not one. I suppose a certain   
   > casual blending is acceptable, if still silly. I wouldn't leap at   
   > someone for pointing out a shelf of one's home video purchases as "my   
   > DVDs" if there are some Blu-rays mixed in. I take certain usages as   
   > intentionally funny thanks to incorrectness such as in a Community   
   > episode where a foreign exchange student notices that Abed has a   
   > Kickpuncher movie "on Blu-ray DVD!" (or DVD Blu-ray, I forget).   
   >   
   > There's no way, though, that an advertisement like the one seen would   
   > (or should, anyway) make that confusion, especially if it's actually   
   > for the format and not a store that's selling them. They often even go   
   > out of their way to use the exactly correct brand terms (Blu-ray Disc   
   > doesn't really roll off the tongue but it's usually in there   
   > somewhere). I find it pretty silly that a video store sticker   
   > identified a recent purchase of mine with both terms, and that's just   
   > the sort of usage I'm griping about.   
   >   
   >   
      
   Blu-ray is simply the name of the format that won.  Essentially it is   
   similar to a HD-DVD.  You'd have no problem with that format being   
   called a DVD?   
      
   They're more similar than a Beta and VHS tapes but both of those are   
   still videotapes.   
      
   Anyway, for a five-second bit on a TV series, it's too much to make a   
   big deal about unless you're anally-obsessed.   
      
   >>   
   >> > Opening   
   >> > This is a new one, mostly. After a regular clouds-driveway-couch   
   short   
   >> > opening, there was no TV! Why on earth?   
   >>   
   >> Because that's the way they wanted to do it.   
   >   
   > That doesn't really answer "why". (A better question might be who made   
   > that happen.) Last week it actually made some sense, since the couch   
   > gag blended into act 1. Here it was like a time-saving measure when no   
   > time needed to be saved at all.   
   >   
   >   
      
   There can be several theories about why it was done and who was   
   responsible.  Does it matter? Do you need to see the TV for closure?   
      
      
   >> > And finally   
   >> > For whatever reason, the NASCAR race this afternoon ran four hours   
   >> > long, and here in Eastern Time it wrapped up and made way for the   
   new   
   >> > Simpsons at 8:25 pm, skipping both the Simpsons repeat (RABF07) and   
   a   
   >> > NEW Cleveland Show (Of Lice and Men). Could someone in the west   
   fill   
   >> > me in on what you get?   
   >>   
   >> Why refer to Simpsons by production number and Cleveland Show by   
   title?   
   >   
   > TO BUG YOU.   
   >   
   > For what it's worth, Don Del Grande tells me that the west got the   
   > Simpsons repeat and a Cleveland Show repeat as well (so the new   
   > episode was shelved for everyone).   
   >   
      
   The only thing that "bugs" me is why someone who wants to impart   
   information about an episode would intentionally withhold probably the   
   most important information regarding the identification of said episode-   
   the title.  Everywhere else in the universe of information of television   
   (books, internet, etc.) the title is the basic information given to   
   identify an episode.  Everyone knows this.  Everyone else gives titles.   
   And more people than myself have said this.   
      
   The only reason you don't is because you think it makes you look   
   intellectually superior and you like to be smug about it.   
      
   The reason you don't give The Cleveland Show's production number is   
   either you're not anally fanatic about that series or you're too lazy to   
   look it up to be consistent...a quality of "real" writers.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)