Convert your DVD’s to any video format with TDMore DVD Converter

Convert your DVD’s to any video format with this handy Windows tool.
TDMDVD-11

I don’t know about you, but I have an absolutely HUGE DVD collection.  I’ve got DVD’s. I’ve got Blu-rays.  I’ve got movies coming out of my ears…and I absolutely love them all. All of them; but I have a huge problem. I’m running out of physical storage space for all of them.  Literally.  I’m really struggling to find a place to store even one more physical jewel case. Its probably for this reason alone that I really love applications like TDMore DVD Converter..  It’s a DVD converter for Windows, and if it can help me…it can help you, too.

TDMore DVD Converter is a versatile DVD converter and ripper that helps users quickly and efficiently convert DVD’s.  With it, you can convert DVDs to MP4, MKV, WMV, FLV, AVI, VOB, TS among other video formats.  You can also convert 2D to 3D video in MP4, MKV, WMV, TS, AVI formats.  If you’re into the audio tracks, you can convert your DVD’s to MP3, WAV, AAC, FLAC, M4A as well as other audio formats.

The app uses some pretty advanced compression power to get the job done. It uses H.265 HEVC.  That gives it the ability to shrink both audio and video down to about 50% of its actual size without losing any quality during playback.  That means that the files should work very nicely on your smartphone, tablet, or anywhere else you have a finite amount of non-upgradable storage (like many of the more popular ultrabooks and other notebooks on the market today as well).  Speaking of working with today’s popular hardware, the app has integrated NVIDIA’s CUDA and Intel’s Quick Sync technologies to dramatically reduce conversion times without skimping on playback quality.

The new version of TDMore DVD Converter can provide amazing functions as other popular software with the most reasonable price. For more information, please visit official website.

TDMore DVD Converter is a decent app. Its easy to use and has supports some really cool technology built into it that allows it to create some really small video conversions.  The big problem with this app, however, is its non-standard user interface.  The problem here is PC based performance after the conversion starts.

The app does all right with its own functionality.  The PC does ok on its own, but not every PC will handle multi-tasks ok.  Now, that’s not necessarily a specific problem with THIS app on mid-range to high-end PC, but on low-end or budget based PC’s, it may be; AND the non-standard app graphical interface doesn’t help.

TDMore DVD Converter does a really great job converting movies. On my PC, it was fast and quick and PC performance didn’t tank; but then again, I have a quad-core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM. Other PC’s may not fare as well as mine; but the end result on the ripped movie will be really great.

Download

Related Posts:

Aereo – The Fat Lady has Sung

Aereo notifies customers of Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Atlanta-Aereo

Over the past year, it’s been quite a ride for the little startup company that would. Aereo has been through a lot. Their past three years have been an interesting go – alternative TV watching with a rented antenna, a cloud based DVR… allowing you to watch all of your stuff over the internet from nearly anywhere in the world.

The world… LOVED the idea.

Networks and cable companies… totally HATED the idea.

They wanted a cut of Aereo’s business and took them to court to get it. In late June of this year, it was determined that Aereo DID infringe on the copyrights of broadcast and content owners.

That was a huge setback for them; and they didn’t have a “Plan B” to fall back on at the time. As such, after the SCotUS basically killed their business model, Aereo halted operations and took a brief “pause.”

Today, 2014-11-21, Chet Kanojia, Aereo’s CEO, sent a letter to their customers and supporters. The letter informs every one of the company’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization filing.

“…Accordingly, today, we filed for Chapter 11 reorganization proceedings. We also appointed Lawton Bloom of Argus to serve as Aereo’s Chief Restructuring Officer during this period.

Chapter 11 will permit Aereo to maximize the value of its business and assets without the extensive cost and distraction of defending drawn out litigation in several courts.”

The full letter to customers and supporters can be seen here at what’s left of Aereo’s home page.

Now, what they actually plan to reorganize into…? Nobody knows yet. Not a clue. The fact that they are filing for Chapter 11 (reorganization) though and not Chapter 7 (liquidation) says that they might have an idea of SOMETHING to build a business around. However, based on the court findings I wrote about earlier this year (links, again, are above…) I wouldn’t expect it to look ANYTHING like their “current” business model.

Since the SCotUS classified them as a cable company, basically requiring them to pay rebroadcasting fees to networks and other content providers, their business model of working within the current confines of US copyright law have been quashed. Aereo didn’t want to have to pay the rebroadcasting fees because they are steep and prohibitive to the model they were trying to put in place. While their model SEEMED to work within the law, the SCotUS disagreed and the rest is history.

IF Aereo has worked out a deal with the networks and other content providers, I’d be interested to know what it might be… However, if you’re looking for something quick, cool, fast, and above all…cheap, I wouldn’t count on it… and you can totally forget the cloud based DVR thing, too. Yeah. that ain’t NEVER gonna happen…

Is Aereo something you’re interested in? Are the issues of Aereo’s case of interest to you? Were you a customer of theirs? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the issue and this development. Why don’t you join me in the discussion area, below and give me your thoughts?

Related Posts:

Aereo – No, Really… We’re a Cable Company

In an interesting turn of events, Aereo has decided to, “go with it.”

I’ve been doing a lot of yacking about Aereo over the past few months.  The SCOTUS recently ruled that the company violated broadcaster copyright ownership when it rebroadcast antenna captured OTA signals over the internet, without the appropriate license.  Then the company pushed pause for a bit while it huddled and decided on its next steps.

TV on the Internet

They’ve made a decision. They’ve decided to embrace the ruling.

Wait…!  What?!

Yep. They’ve decided to embrace the ruling.

One of the options that many technologists – myself included – have suggested for Aereo was to pay for a compulsory license.  The only way they would qualify for something like that would be to categorize themselves as a cable company.  Doing so would qualify them to take part in a royalty system setup in the Copyright Act of 1976 that allows cable systems to retransmit copyrighted programming by paying royalty fees with the Licensing Division of the US Copyright Office.  Aereo can pay the fees and won’t need the approval of any broadcasters in order to restart operations.  They basically drop the “FRAND-styled” payment off and crank ‘er up again.

Specifically, Aereo is arguing that

“if [we are] a ‘cable system’ as that term is defined in the Copyright Act, it is eligible for a statutory license, and its transmissions may not be enjoined.”  It’s a compelling argument as, that’s what the type of company the SCOTUS said Aereo was in its original ruling in June 2014.  Aereo added that it’s already begun filing the necessary paperwork to begin paying the royalties in its response to the Second Circuit Court.

The broadcasters involved in the case are, well, in a word – flabbergasted.  In their opinion, Aereo is “astonishing in its presumption” that the SCOTUS transformed them into a cable company, especially since they’ve been arguing from the get-go that they are not.

It’s up to the Second Circuit Court to decide whether to issue an order for Aereo to totally cease operations or allow them to continue operating during the pending trial.

Aereo’s main argument is that the broadcasters can’t have it both ways.  If Aereo’s business model classifies it as a cable company as defined by the SCOTUS ruling and the Copyright Act of 1976, then they should be entitled to the compulsory license under the Act.  It’s clear that the broadcasters don’t want their content pushed over the Internet, and they certainly don’t want it time shifted (via DVR) without a MUCH larger fee from Aereo.  The argument has some legs.  It’s just up to both sides now to make their arguments for or against this new classification.

What do you think?  Is Aereo a cable company?  Should they be closed down during the trial? Should they be eligible for the compulsory license, or should they have to pay a larger royalty to the Broadcasters if they wish to be in business?  Has greed taken the broadcasters too far; or are they entitled to more money? If so, why?  Why don’t you let me know in the comments section, below and tell me what you think?

Related Posts:

Aereo Pushes Pause

After the latest from the SCOTUS, Aereo is taking a step back…

aereo

The SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has been on a roll lately, and it seems they’ve rolled right over Aereo in a sweeping decision that has all but shut down the little startup that would.  While I’m not an Aereo subscriber, the company has sent out a second update to its users.  The company has decided to “pause.”

In his short update to Aereo’s customers, Aereo CEO and Founder Chet Kanojia let’s everyone know exactly what the company is looking to do in the coming days.  They’re pausing operations as of 11:30am ET Saturday 2014-06-28.

“As a result of that decision, our case has been returned to the lower Court. We have decided to pause our operations temporarily as we consult with the court and map out our next steps… All of our users will be refunded their last paid month. If you have questions about your account, please email support@aereo.com or tweet us @AereoSupport.”

At this point, as I understand things, Aereo has three options:
1. Cease total operations and close down
While this would be the most disappointing of all the options available to Aereo at this point, it seems like this is the most likely outcome. Their case has been returned to the lower Court and the decision that was originally found in their favor has been overturned.  The trial, if it goes forward, is still on, but with the Supreme Court having indicated that Aereo is effectively a cable company (as defined by Congress, in 1976, I think…) Aereo has said that they would close their doors rather than take either action 2 or 3, below.
2. Change their technology so they do not infringe copyright laws
I have no idea exactly WHAT this would entail, but it MAY be possible for Aereo to change what they’re doing so that they don’t infringe on the copyright owner’s performance.  I had heard on TWiT that some experts had explained that there’s NO WAY a dime-sized antenna could be pulling in any kind of OTA TV signal and that what was likely happening was that each antenna was instead part of an array that pulled in the appropriate signal(s) in each broadcast area. As such, this is where you get the 1976 cable company (think: regional, shared or community antenna) comparison.
3. Try to strike a deal with the Networks and Pay a Rebroadcast Fee
All of the hullaballoo could be over tomorrow if Aereo agreed to pay a rebroadcasting fee.   It’s unlikely that that will happen, however, as Aereo went to great pains to construct their product and business model around what they believed to be loopholes in the law.  While not illegal by any means (EVERY corporation does that with the tax laws of EVERY government they do business with, world-wide), they did get shot down.  As they went to such great lengths to avoid having to pay ANY kind of rebroadcasting fee, it’s unlikely that Aereo will agree to pay the fees on behalf of their customers (with them likely passing that fee on to each customer…). However, this would make everything legal, and wouldn’t require Aereo to do anything to their technology or their product(s).

At this point, it’s all on hold as Aereo circles the proverbial airport and tries to figure out how to move forward.  What I think is funny is that Aereo in their current incarnation represents what the consumer wants and how many see the future of television.  Nearly all video is going to go from OTA to OTI (over the internet) in 5 to 15 years.

I think Comcast sees this as fact, as they have been steadily raising the price of their Internet service over the past few years in order to combat lost or declining television package revenue.  Most consumers would love to purchase individual channel broadcasts or services – i.e. an a la cart service – instead of having networks or specific channels bundled with channels and services they will never use.  They’d also rather push it over the internet to a connected TV, computer, mobile device or other set top box so they could watch what they want, where they want, when they want.

The issue is without a doubt, complicated.  I actually think very few people in this country know what the TRUE right and wrong answers are to these legal questions, based on the current state of all relevant US legislation.  In the end, I think it’s all going to boil down to who gets paid and how much they get paid; but that’s just me, I guess.  Greed in America is running amok at this point (and I’m a conservative, too….); and I’m not certain where it will all end.

What do you think of all of this?  Are you an Aereo customer? Are you a cord cutter? If you don’t have an Aereo subscription, were you thinking of getting one if and when the product became available in your home city?  Do me a favor and sound off in the comments area, below and tell me what you think. I’d love to hear a confirming or contrasting decision. As I said, this is a confusing and complicated question, and the results of all of this are going to be felt for quite a long time, I think.

 

 Our other article about Aereo Infringes Copyright

Related Posts:

Aereo Infringes Copyright – UPDATED

OK..!   Time for Plan B… What?   There is no Plan B..??

Aereo_logoWell crap!

Without a Plan B, Aereo cofounder Chet Kanojia had previously stated in April 2014 that without support of their business model by the Supreme Court, they would have to shut down.   Unfortunately for cord cutter’s everywhere (me included…) this is a horrible development not only for Aereo, but for American consumers everywhere.

What Aereo did was simple – it provided a small digital antenna for a customer to rent in their home city.   Aereo then transmitted the video received by that antenna over the internet for that consumer. Said consumer was able to view that video over the internet. The consumer could be physically in their home city, or they could be anywhere on the planet (provided they had an internet connection and the means to view the video signal).

Major networks filed suit against Aereo because this violated their business model of broadcasting television content to their viewers. They were also completely cut out of the revenue model; and cable companies and the networks that broadcast over them are desperately hungry for that revenue (so, now you know why the networks and cable companies sued them in court).

The Supreme Court’s split decision (6-3 in favor of the current copyright holders, or the networks) held that “Aereo’s customers constitute ‘the public,’ and that retransmitting television networks’ copyrighted material goes against their exclusive right to perform their works publicly as the holders of the copyright.” Justice Breyer wrote the majority opinion.

According to that opinion, “We must decide whether respondent Aereo, Inc., infringes this exclusive right by selling its subscribers a technologically complex service that allows them to watch television programs over the Internet at about the same time as the programs are broadcast over the air,” the opinion reads. “We conclude that it does.”

In my opinion, the Court got it WAY wrong.   Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito got it right. Justice Scalia wrote the dissenting opinion, indicating that, [The networks failed to prove that Aereo’s product constitutes a performance] “at the very outset because Aereo does not “perform” at all.   The Court manages to reach the opposite conclusion only by disregarding widely accepted rules for service-provider liability and adopting in their place an improvised standard (“looks-like-cable-TV”) that will sow confusion for years to come.”

So yeah… those three DO get it. And with a 6-3 split, it’s clear that not everyone misunderstood not only the technology involved, but the business models that both sides employ to conduct business. I’m very disappointed in the results.

What about you?   Will the results of today’s decision effect you? Are you an Aereo customer? How do you feel about the Supreme Court’s decision?   Did they get it right?   Does Aereo’s product constitute a “performance” as legally defined by copyright law?   What do you think should have happened?   Why don’t you join me in the discussion area below and give me your opinion?

UPDATE:
Since writing this column early the morning that the decision was announced (2014-06-25), Aereo has released the following statement.   I’ve read it a couple of times, but I’m not entirely certain HOW the company intends to “fight on” as they state in their posting to the public. Perhaps they will modify the way the system works. Perhaps they will work with the networks to somehow provide them with a percentage of their revenue stream.   (Perhaps I’ll win the lottery tonight and it won’t matter…)

In the end, I do believe this is a huge setback for the American consumer.   I will be monitoring this story and will report on any materially interesting updates that become available.

Related Posts:

Stay in touch with Soft32

Soft32.com is a software free download website that provides:

121.218 programs and games that were downloaded 237.780.356 times by 402.775 members in our Soft32.com Community!

Get the latest software updates directly to your inbox

Find us on Facebook