Chris Marquette Message Board

If he had to have surgery, I wonder if it had anything to do with burns. You can get some nasty burns from a lightning strike.

Bought these recently.

$4 from Walmart

$19.99 dual pack from Target

That would be nice.

I also need the exact time for the above scene as well.

Book Cover

Posters for movies I'm interested in that hasn't been released in the U.S. yet (as far as I know)

No Summer was in Thank God It's Friday.

I know that because I have that in my dvd profiler wishlist.

I also remember her on Family Matters playing some sort of nerdy lady who was really shy.

Has anyone noticed that the deflector dish moves right before the Enterprise goes to warp?

It opens up sort of like a flower.

Creepy cloud.

A couple things I noticed.

It appears to be the end of the cloud formation, with the clear sunlight sky behind it. Thus giving the clouds a golden hue.
Looks like major air updraft is occurring on each side of the funnel like structure.
Also looks like two funnel clouds. The foreground one is fairly well structured.
The one right behind it looks like it fell apart and can see a core like structure in the middle of it.

But whatever type of clouds these are, they sure are strange. Almost alien looking.

I didn't know where else to post this, so here it goes.

Does the guy on the far right sort of look like Chris?
Especially the smaller Blu-Ray artwork.

I think there is a big difference between the change from standard tv to Digital TV and any sort of switch to an all internet based system of entertainment.

With the Digital TV transition there was a few options available to consumers. Completely switch to HDTV. Get their tv via cable or satellite and keep their analog tv, buy a converter box to use with their analog tv or do nothing and get nothing.

The government knew how much this affect consumers and offered a $50 coupon for the converter box for those consumers who only get tv through an analog tv connected only to an antenna.

Their is a major difference between that and an all internet based method of receiving tv.

It would be required that all households be outfitted with high-speed internet. Who is going to pay the bill for such a radical change in the way that consumers receive their tv signals?

If it's going to be the government, well we see how well the DTV switch went. Shortages of the coupons, stores out of stock of the converters and back in early 2009 upwards of 3 million people weren't ready. Plus the cost of outfitting millions of households would be much more expensive than just a $50 coupon for those that needed one.

If it's going to be the consumer, again the DTV switch didn't go over so smoothly either. As stated above, plus when the June switch happened there was something like 300,000 people who weren't ready. The economy is currently down the toilet, and to ask consumers to pay for high-speed internet retro-fitting wouldn't really help the economy too much either.

Plus I wonder how many consumers would really want to pay a monthly bill for high-speed internet? People are already cutting back on entertainment and some are already dropping cable tv as a result. During any sort of transition people would have to have both cable and high-speed internet. The guy I'm renting from is paying close to $150 a month for both - and that's not even for the high-speed internet that would be required for an all internet based tv.

If there was a transition to internet based tv I really wonder how many households wouldn't be ready? I bet you a whole bunch more than those not ready for the DTV switch. Probably tens of millions of households.

So I see a whole bunch of obstacles in any sort of an all out transition to only an internet based tv. The cost of retro-fitting millions of households either paid for by the government or the consumer, the cost of the monthly internet bill when quite a few are already dropping their cable because of it's high cost.

Oh yeah, and I forgot about who is going to buy all of this new equipment that would be required to access internet based tv. I highly doubt that the government is going to pay for either a new computer for those households that need a computer or need a better one to gain access to high-speed internet or a new TV that would be connected to a high-speed internet computer or a new TV that can access high-speed internet directly.
Plus many homes currently have more than one tv, so who's going to pay for all of this new equipment and retro-fitting rooms such as other bedrooms or the kitchen.

But regardless, consumers were offered choices and even if they wanted to watch tv on their analog tv with an antenna they still can even after the DTV transition.
But that's not the same as with an only internet based system. Either every household would have to switch over or for those that don't - then nothing. People don't like to be forced into things, they like to have a choice. So for those that either won't or can't retro-fit their homes with high-speed internet or have the correct equipment to access internet based tv then they would be cut off completely.

The more I look at it, the more and more expensive this sounds for either the government, the consumer or both of them.

It's not about having disposable income, it's about the very expensive transition to an only internet based tv that is going to curtail any sort of quick and easy transition to it. That's why it's not going to happen in 5 years or even 10 years.

For if they were just going to switch over to an internet based tv say within the next 5 years, they are going to cut off likely around 75% or more of the tv viewing households. Gee I wonder how much money the "money men" would lose then?