| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Reg Berkeley's News
from King:
Seems to be very attractive. Will check it out! Thanks
|
04-09-07 03:51pm
|
Reply
2
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from messmer:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Sorry, Reg, maybe I should qualify my comment by saying that I went back a couple of months, looking at all the covers of the updates, and only found a couple of DVDs that would appeal to me, personally. Most appeared to be very much main stream.
First time around I found tons of fetish material and I was truly itching to re-subscribe to your site to get something that was different from the usual offered by the others but, as you said, good "hairy" or "pregnant" DVDs, as an example, are hard to find so maybe I was not entirely fair in my assessment and a bit hard on you.
|
12-06-09 12:14pm
|
Reply
3
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from anyonebutme:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
"Who the hell wants to download a 20 minute scene that's over 1 GB?"
I do.
12mbps 1920x1080 VC-1 encodes are so beautiful to watch. But then again I prefer quality over quantity.
"Bottom line...our Computer sized files are damn near the source material and almost impossible to differentiate from our DVD sized files."
Building on what the previous responder said, 2mbps is not nearly enough to achieve transparency along side a good dvd encode, for someone who values quality. 4mbps is getting there, and such parameters places a 20 minute scene at 600mb, well short of a gigabyte. Either way, when I join a website today, I look for better than dvd quality.
|
10-13-09 08:53pm
|
Reply
4
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from jd1961:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
It's true, I avoid the mega size downloads.
I've seen H.264 at another site, and I like it.
|
10-13-09 08:18am
|
Reply
5
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Khan:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
I looked and saw the same thing as the user (above) you might have your techies check the coding as the Join link isn't working.
|
07-19-09 07:20pm
|
Reply
6
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Cybertoad:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Hmm so you can join for just one month at that price, sounds pretty darn good.
|
06-23-09 11:45am
|
Reply
7
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Cybertoad:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Is the site really only 8.33 per month as the site says ?
If so that remarkable and a great deal. The site says DVD quality.
And why I agree 79 isn't bad for a review. It low in my opinion for a DVD site with that price. I am outta cash right now our I would try it out myself. I still stand that in my thoughts any site with 2 cons and is under a 90 needs more explanation.
|
06-23-09 11:13am
|
Reply
8
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Goldfish:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Reg, I'll give you the limit on the medium. I guess my hit on quality came in because I discarded some otherwise good clips because they were fuzzy/had bad picture quality or was chopped down to size because of the letterbox.
But I still gave you a 79, that ain't bad! ;-)
|
06-22-09 07:21pm
|
Reply
9
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from messmer:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Hi Reg, as a former member who praised your site highly (see my review) I can enlighten you as to the "why does not every single person do the free trial of five free downloads! I used two tokens and those two downloads convinced me to subscribe! Why bother with the other three tokens if the first two are enough to convince you? Keep up the good work! :-)
|
06-05-09 12:18pm
|
Reply
10
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from wiild1:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Great to hear that you keep investing in technology and that you honestly care about your customers/fans. That should pay off longterm.
I just downloaded of a 306MB video in ca 2mins, impressive. The speed was hoovering: 1.96-2.1 MB/s
|
06-05-09 07:46am
|
Reply
11
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from wiild1:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Keep up the good work Reg Berkeley, I have only been a free trial member for one day but I can alreay see in the commentaries and your choice of content that you guys actually like porn yourselves and that you know this stuff.
I think most companies would benefit from having porn experst/enthusiasts buying the rights to the content, doing the commentaries, do editotial picks etc.
Good work!
|
06-05-09 03:34am
|
Reply
12
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Tree Rodent:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Thanks for the info Reg. It's nice to know it's not just us in the UK suffering. There's some strange stuff happening out there at the moment. I don't want to get too harsh about Video Box, but when I was a member last year I had speeds down to 1kb/sec! That site is still my worst by far, for download speeds, but I do get a slow download on a lot of sites now at those peak times.
I guess you noticed the review by Messmer. Great to see you're getting some recognition at last, and featuring high in the PU scores. With your customer service you deserve it. You must hate me - my score of 90 is dragging your average score down!
|
02-25-09 02:51pm
|
Reply
13
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from TrashMan:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
1) OK, shall do in the future.
2) OK i see. A little unexpected (usually when I do sorting on other sites it usually applies to the entire list), but its there. I suggest putting a little note somewhere that you have to click ALL to get the full list since the "sort" button applies to the current choice.
3) All good. I never really use the links anyway, i just like the interface at those other sites (probably because the sites are brighter, with lighter colors)
4) sounds good.
5) ok
6) Well, i agree that the majority of comments are useless junk reviews of the scene (or the screencaps) but i find it worthwhile when, say, VideoBox gets an performer wrong and there are 5 member comments which indicate that it is wrong and list the right name. I don't think anyone contacts VideoBox over incorrect names, tags or anything else. So it might be worthwhile to do what software sites like Softpedia do and have a button which lets uses send updates/corrections through the use of a form, or at least links to your "contact us" form.
|
01-15-09 05:13pm
|
Reply
14
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#12
from TrashMan:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
640x480 looks more normal than 720x480. 720x480 always looks stretched to me. Same goes for 352x240 vs 320x240.
|
01-15-09 02:19pm
|
Reply
15
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from moonbyrd:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
OK... I just assumed you were doing the same thing I was. I had to educate myself a bit to be able to watch the VB videos with Windows Media Player (actually, on a TV screen used as a secondary display on the computer). Now I use a small program to set the parameters AspectRatioX and AspectRatioY for each of the videos I download from them. But this is boring stuff and not about your site.
It seemed to me there was a bit of a vendetta against the Czech and Hungarian Eurobabes going on in the editorial comments. I can see the rationale but not everyone can speak fluent English. Myself I have sort of warmed up to them over time. No big deal though.
|
01-15-09 06:18am
|
Reply
16
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from moonbyrd:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
Thanks for your reply, Reg. I know about the square and nonsquare pixels. In fact that's why your videos look right and Videobox's look a bit squashed. However, this can be corrected by telling the playing software what the correct aspect ratio should be - which I assume you are doing with the 16x9 content, with a couple of parameters in the file header. (And which VB fails to do to their videos.) Why not do this in both cases? I'm not sure how much the size reduction contributes to the overall quality, but at least it adds one interpolation step to the process.
As to the comments, some people apparently like them and I can take them or leave them. I guess the ones I happened to read were of the more negative variety.
|
01-15-09 05:28am
|
Reply
17
|
American Vice
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from jd1961:
(Reg Berkeley's Reply)
He's right, 640 x 480 is the proper ratio.
|
01-15-09 05:03am
|
