Right, so the obvious answer here is: "No, you don't need a Blu-ray player." But, you know -- do you need a Blu-ray player? At its core, the latest argument put forth by an Orlando Sentinel editor is yet another debate over the viability of the format in comparison to upscaled DVD and in the wake of surging support for HD streaming, but there are certainly a lot of points made that we vehemently disagree with. According to the editor, the "difference between DVD and Blu-ray is nowhere near as striking [as VHS and DVD], despite what the consumer electronics retailers and manufacturers might tell you." He goes on to assert that a BD player simply isn't worth purchasing if you've already got a stout DVD library, particularly if you own an upconverting DVD player. Ruining any shot at anyone taking his view seriously were the remarks by his colleague, who watched Planet of the Apes on a BD deck and a $40 DVD player; according to him: "The features are fancier, but the picture? No improvement. Investing in a [Blu-ray] player... is a needless expense. Downloads are the future, not discs in a cute blue box." Let the firefight begin.

[Thanks, Anthony]