Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

oncontracts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 210 posts

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#111

Post by Sesse__ »

interpol_p wrote: post #43
tqi wrote: post #22

Monster Cables is a name I hadn't thought about in ages... I mostly remember them as the company that tried to convince people that digital images would look better via a more expensive cable.

When wiring up my projector, I needed a 10 or 20 meter HDMI cable. The first one I got produced a snowy image on the screen — it wasn't like analogue static, but it was definitely a poor quality image. I replaced that cable with a more expensive one and the image looked correct. It surprised me that there would be a difference in HDMI cables, because I thought exactly the same way — a digital signal is a digital sign…

That's not really what digital implies, but you figured out the important part: When digital signals fail, they do so in a very obvious fashion. A worse cable won’t give you “less saturated blacks” or something else that's subtle, it will give you random bit errors that manifest as snow. If the picture isn't obviously bad, then it is as good as any cable will give you.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#112

Post by RandomBacon »

nerdile wrote: post #64
chrisweekly wrote: post #16

All bullies are cowards.

Agreed. Bschmidt###... who hurt you? Why is this your life?

I removed the numbers and looked up that username to try and figure out what was going on, but it seems to be an empty account from 2010.

I feel sad for the person if they think this is the best use of their time.

Re about "nobody sees these", only registered users with half a brain see them, and they're the ones who can easily filter out people acting like a child with nothing better to do. It's people not logged in who don't have "show dead" enabled that don't see it.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#113

Post by miki123211 »

jdlshore wrote: post #3
biglyburrito wrote: post #2

The complete story: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/index.htm

For anybody who’s wondering what happened next, this is from the above link: “Monster's counsel had made a horrible mistake, and probably caused lasting harm to the company, by sending me that ridiculous letter. But he, and Monster, did apparently know the first rule of holes: "If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." The end, therefore, of the story was a bit anticlimactic. Knowing that I was able to defend my…

Maybe writing that letter was a bad idea in the first place?

It was good for Blue Jeans and for Monster, as they both avoided expensive litigation, but from a more general perspective, it would have been better if Monster thought Blue Jeans was an easy victim, sued and got its comeuppance.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#114

Post by chgs »

jpgvm wrote: post #69
bolognafairy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there . Emphasis mine. As someone that sold AV equipment, including cables, in the late ‘00s / early ‘10s, nerds that misunderstood the nuances of this were the single worst group of customers to work with. You could see them coming a mile away. By the time “gold-plated HDMI cables are a scam” gets down to their level of ps…

I wish HDMI would die as a standard. The TV folk won't that happen though, controlling HDMI allows them to control the ecosystem by extension. Would be nice if the EU could step in an make DisplayPort the required connection and protocol like they did for the USB-C port for charging.

Yes, SDI is far superior

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#116

Post by intrasight »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #44
jaredandrews wrote: post #36

I had no idea Monster sold anything other than over priced guitar cables... About 15 yeard ago, I knew a guy who exclusively bought Monster... well he had two of them, one from the guitar to the pedal board and another from the board to the amp. But it wasn't because of their alleged improved sound quality or whatever, it was because they had a lifetime warranty. Dude had bought two monster 1/4inch cables and gotten…

I definitely got upsold on a Monster cable when I bought my first guitar on the back of that lifetime warranty. Joke's on me, I guess; the cable is almost 20 years old and still working, never had to use the warranty even once. I need to take worse care of my things.

My bass cable is a Monster Cable and is ~45 years old. Bought it when I was 15.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#117

Post by twoodfin »

pdpi wrote: post #28
jdlshore wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anybody who’s wondering what happened next, this is from the above link: “Monster's counsel had made a horrible mistake, and probably caused lasting harm to the company, by sending me that ridiculous letter. But he, and Monster, did apparently know the first rule of holes: "If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." The end, therefore, of the story was a bit anticlimactic. Knowing that I was able to defend my…

> Monster's counsel had made a horrible mistake, and probably caused lasting harm to the company, by sending me that ridiculous letter This sort of thing always reminds of the Jack Daniels cease and desist letter[0], which, at least for me, had the exact opposite effect. 0. https://brokenpianoforpresident.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/jac...

Relatedly, Jack Daniel’s recently won a unanimous Supreme Court decision affirming their right to pursue trademark claims against a dog toy manufacturer.

The toy company claimed their products were parodies, which have heightened protection from such claims, but the Court didn’t buy it.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/22-148

Fun oral argument for an extended dog walk; you get to hear the justices argue about scatological jokes and whiskey bottle shapes.

JD’s advocate, Lisa Blatt, is also reliably a hoot.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#118

Post by magicalhippo »

bolognafairy wrote: post #52
m463 wrote: post #48

I remember buying audio gear (think receiver, amplifier, cd player) and being the focus of the upsell for 2-5x more expensive monster cables. Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there, and seeing the young sales guy pause and then "get it". And I got the (relatively) cheap cables. Also speaker wire. You can get perfectly good copper cables for less, probably in…

> Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there . Emphasis mine. As someone that sold AV equipment, including cables, in the late ‘00s / early ‘10s, nerds that misunderstood the nuances of this were the single worst group of customers to work with. You could see them coming a mile away. By the time “gold-plated HDMI cables are a scam” gets down to their level of ps…

I discovered exactly this the hard way when I got my Blu-ray UltraHD setup.

The included cable wasn't long enough so I bought a new one that I thought looked good, came home and didn't work right.

That's when I discovered not all HDMI cables are the same, and I had to check supported bandwidth.

Sadly the cheapest cable I could find in town that supported my needs were... Monster Cable.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#119

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #106
flomo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Because humans are petty, and if they feel slighted, they will go out of their way to take revenge, even if it provides them no material benefit. This may seem illogical, but is actually crucial to make society function, because it punishes non-cooperative behaviors.

>This may seem illogical, but is actually crucial to make society function, because it punishes non-cooperative behaviors.

Good observation. Peer pressure is along similar lines.

Re: Monster Cables picked the wrong guy to threaten (2008)

#120

Post by globnomulous »

bolognafairy wrote: post #52
m463 wrote: post #48

I remember buying audio gear (think receiver, amplifier, cd player) and being the focus of the upsell for 2-5x more expensive monster cables. Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there, and seeing the young sales guy pause and then "get it". And I got the (relatively) cheap cables. Also speaker wire. You can get perfectly good copper cables for less, probably in…

> Once I patiently explained that a cable shouldn't matter for digital as long as the bits got there . Emphasis mine. As someone that sold AV equipment, including cables, in the late ‘00s / early ‘10s, nerds that misunderstood the nuances of this were the single worst group of customers to work with. You could see them coming a mile away. By the time “gold-plated HDMI cables are a scam” gets down to their level of ps…

My side-by-side, A/B comparison of monoprice RCA/coaxial cables and higher-end RCA cables revealed a clearly audible difference. Blew me away. I realize HDMI works differently, though, and there is some preposterous snake oil in the world of cables, which BJC admirably fights, partly through their superb articles.
Post reply on HN