CHDBits VS HDBits

[kookwiz]

HDbits

[Disme]

The mature question would be: If you are a member at HD-Bits or CHD-Bits, do you need another tracker to get your HD-needs filled?

[shipwreck]

HDBits is actually about the only HD tracker I'm not on, so I can't comment on it. However, I definitely need more than two very good HD sites. More often than not, one site has a certain older release other sites don't have, this is particularly the case when it comes to full Blurays. Not to mention all the internal groups whose releases remain 'internal' more often than not - there are at least half a dozen HD sites that have very good internal groups, releases I wouldn't want to miss.

[Disme]

I've been using HDBits, the Usenet and occasionally DDL-boards for all my full Blu-ray needs and am more than satisfied with it.

The question is how much HDD-space, bandwidth and or Blu-Ray-discs one wants to fill.
I sometimes wonder what people do with all those untouched blu-ray, considering to are up to 50 GB a piece.
Do you people have unlimited HDD-space, unlimited internet quota's and unlimited empty blu-ray-discs and tons of spare time or am I missing something?

[shipwreck]

One word: NAS.

Hard disk space is dirt cheap, the challenge is to have a certain degree of protection and redundancy of your data. This can be achieved with a NAS and RAID (level 1, 5 ,6 etc.), or specialised storage distributions like unRAID etc. unRAID currently allows you expandability up to 40TB of protected hard disk space (2TB drives).

A cheap mans storage solution would be those multi bay hard drive enclosures that allow RAID / JBOD.

Bandwidth is no problem over here, and optical media is dead.

[Disme]

One word: NAS.

Hard disk space is dirt cheap, the challenge is to have a certain degree of protection and redundancy of your data. This can be achieved with a NAS and RAID (level 1, 5 ,6 etc.), or specialised storage distributions like unRAID etc. unRAID currently allows you expandability up to 40TB of protected hard disk space (2TB drives).

I own a NAS myself ... nothing fancy, just a synology 411j with 4 X 2 TB HDD's in raid 5, and another 3 X 2 TB HDD's in my desktop. All my torrenting and usenetting is done on the NAS since some weeks so my desktop can finally be powered down after years of seeding 24/7.
Currently +- 10 TB of storage, unlimited internet-quota and download untouched Blu-ray's that I remux myself, stripping language soundtracks and menu's and the likes. But a decent stripped blu-ray still is around 30 GB (varying from +20 to +40 GB in general) ... a 2TB HDD still costs about € 70,00 or 80,00, and I can easily download +2TB a month, meaning I would have to a new HDD every month.

I do like movies and tv-shows, but I frankly won't spend that kind of money, nor time to watch all of that without having no real life left.

When I look at many members at HD-trackers I cannot shake the feeling most of 'em just use their seedbox to build massive buffers (like 10's or 100's of TB's) but they would have to invest a fortune if they would store all the blu-rays they downloaded.

[shipwreck]

I do remuxes myself, too, so I do feel your pain. However, not every single movie out there deserves 30 and more GB of space. Often, the original transfer is simply not good enough to justify the download, or the movie itself is not good enough, or both, so an encode is more than sufficient. I definitely don't download full Blurays or remuxes exclusively, that would be madness. Most of my downloads still are encodes.

However, once in a while I do look for an older full Bluray I like, e.g. when a proper remux hasn't been released yet. That's when having a number of HD sites to search comes in handy. As I said, I'm not on HDBits, but I heard that retention of full Blurays is very good there in particular. The same supposedly applies to newsgroups, too, so that probably explains why you don't see the need.

[IdolEyes787]

I do remuxes myself, too, so I do feel your pain. However, not every single movie out there deserves 30 and more GB of space. Often, the original transfer is simply not good enough to justify the download, or the movie itself is not good enough, or both, so an encode is more than sufficient. I definitely don't download full Blurays or remuxes exclusively, that would be madness. Most of my downloads still are encodes.

However, once in a while I do look for an older full Bluray I like, e.g. when a proper remux hasn't been released yet. That's when having a number of HD sites to search comes in handy. As I said, I'm not on HDBits, but I heard that retention of full Blurays is very good there in particular. The same supposedly applies to newsgroups, too, so that probably explains why you don't see the need.

No offense but after you like watch a movie whot's the point of having a copy of it?
Especially since you apparently are never at a loss to have something else to watch.

[shipwreck]

I don't live alone, my girlfriend may want to watch it, too. And I actually like watching certain movies more than once. However, I do delete a lot of crappy movies, too. Not everything deserves to be stored, let alone bought...

[Disme]

No offense but after you like watch a movie whot's the point of having a copy of it?
Especially since you apparently are never at a loss to have something else to watch.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I for one have a large collection of kids-movies and kids-tv-series. My kids can watch a movie over and over again, same thing with tv-shows.

I myself keep some movies that I find exceptionally good for 'collection'-purposes. I doubt I will watch them in the near future, but there might come a time I'll have some more spare time and feel like watching a particular movie again.