<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Star Trek: The Next Generation DVD Release</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.trektoday.com/content/2013/02/star-trek-the-next-generation-dvd-release/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.trektoday.com/content/2013/02/star-trek-the-next-generation-dvd-release/</link>
	<description>Daily Star Trek news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 11:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.trektoday.com/content/2013/02/star-trek-the-next-generation-dvd-release/comment-page-1/#comment-12677</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=23426#comment-12677</guid>
		<description>It makes sense to you, me, and everyone else - but to Hollywood, it would be giving away something for nothing.  It&#039;s how that place works.  You want quality, you pay extra.  You want generic, you pay less.  They fail to realize they&#039;d boost over-all sales and make more money in the end on combined DVD and blu-ray sales by doing as you suggest, because short-term the blu-rays wouldn&#039;t make as much instantly.

Also, these new DVD covers - most of them are cool, but a few are using season 1 photos (you can tell by the hair and uniforms) as their basis and it ends up looking dumb.  Crusher prime example.  1987 hair and all... </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It makes sense to you, me, and everyone else &#8211; but to Hollywood, it would be giving away something for nothing.  It&#8217;s how that place works.  You want quality, you pay extra.  You want generic, you pay less.  They fail to realize they&#8217;d boost over-all sales and make more money in the end on combined DVD and blu-ray sales by doing as you suggest, because short-term the blu-rays wouldn&#8217;t make as much instantly.</p>
<p>Also, these new DVD covers &#8211; most of them are cool, but a few are using season 1 photos (you can tell by the hair and uniforms) as their basis and it ends up looking dumb.  Crusher prime example.  1987 hair and all&#8230; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Robert Gill</title>
		<link>http://www.trektoday.com/content/2013/02/star-trek-the-next-generation-dvd-release/comment-page-1/#comment-12656</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Robert Gill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=23426#comment-12656</guid>
		<description>Surely it would make more sense to simply transfer the recently remastered editions onto DVD, they&#039;d still look noticably superior to the edited-on-video SD editions, for the same reason that films always looked superior on VHS to stuff shot with a video camera on VHS 

There&#039;s a reason why DVD is marketed alongside Blu Ray, and that&#039;s because Blu Ray is still out of the price range of a lot of people</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely it would make more sense to simply transfer the recently remastered editions onto DVD, they&#8217;d still look noticably superior to the edited-on-video SD editions, for the same reason that films always looked superior on VHS to stuff shot with a video camera on VHS </p>
<p>There&#8217;s a reason why DVD is marketed alongside Blu Ray, and that&#8217;s because Blu Ray is still out of the price range of a lot of people</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
