Slashdot Mirror
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
Ian Lamont writes "More than six months after HD-DVD gave up the ghost, there are several signs that Sony's rival Blu-ray format is struggling to gain consumer acceptance. According to recent sales data from Nielsen, market share for Blu-ray discs in the U.S. is declining, and Sony and its Blu-ray partners are trying several tactics to boost the format — including free trial discs bundled into magazines and cheap Blu-ray players that cost less than $200."
Can anyone say DRM? Consumers do not like DRM and thus are not buying Blu-Ray. The poor economy is also a factor.
After all, Blu-Ray's real competitor wasn't HD-DVD. It was, and still is, downloads.
Frivolous new overpriced tech does poorly in tough times. Who'da thunk it?
Caveat Utilitor
I'm not about to rebuy my DVD collection or upgrade my TV to enable your HDCP-enabled dreams of complete consumer control.
Also, I could care less about your game console, so you won't be able to use me as a marketing statistic showing the success of Blu-Ray there either.
Recession + DVDs-are-good-enough = Slow adaptation of new technology.
I'd much rather see a good story with crappy special effects than a crappy story with good special effects.
Don't Rely on the Market?
Yeah, Washington DC says that all the time.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
DVDs are inexpensive and gets the job done fine. I'm more interested in the story than the oooopretty.
I don't need to enjoy super high resolution movies, and in this time of economic crisis I'd rather just buy the DVD version and put the rest of the cash in my gas tank.
what the hell does blu-ray offer that DVD doesn't?
oh a super high resolution that MOST people won't notice on their old CRT Television sets and only few would actually notice on their Hi-Def TVs. DVD for me thanks.
-- Sex is the antonym of pringles. Once you pop it's time to stop.
HD-DVD lost, clearly, but that doesn't mean Blu-Ray won. DVD is winning; and if it can hold onto a lead for several more years, long enough for a substantially better technology to go along, Blu-Ray will fade away just like LaserDisk.
Blu-Ray is better than DVD, but I don't know if it is enough better to survive and conquer.
In the latest issue of Wired, I got one of those "Trial" Blu-Ray discs. I would have loved to check out the movie and disc, except: a.) I don't own a Blu-Ray player. b.) I don't know anyone who owns a Blu-Ray Player. c.) I don't have interest in said movie. I mean, why the -hell- would I spend $200 on something I got in a magazine that I pay $15 for? If I do own the Blu-Ray player to play it, then why good does it do to tell me all the benefits of Blu-Ray when I'm already sold on it?
With DVRs to record stuff off the air, NetFlix Online to download stuff, and USB sticks to replace tapes and burnable discs, why bother with BlueRay?
Maybe if it were DRM-free for purchased media, under $10 for a blank recordable disk, and under $100 for a recorder, I'd go for it, but why bother?
Copy-protection has one valid place: The rental market. And even then, nothing says "we don't trust our customers" like a ball and chain attached to the product.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I have a PS3 which upscales DVD and plays Blu-Ray. Most of the time, upscaling is just fine for an action flick on my HD TV. I thought I'd be buying Blu-ray discs but I find myself just wanting to spend 20 bucks on a DVD rather than 32 bucks for the Blu-Ray version.
Some things just plain need competition to work. When HD-DVD was around, Blu-Ray providers had incentive to win the format war. Now, there's no need to spend marketing dollars on "I'm better than you!" campaigns, they're just going to grow at the rate of HD adoption... and the public seems to have a big "don't care" about that one.
Blu-ray delivers an increment to picture quality for those with the equipment to take advantage of it. It delivers a crippled experience in the form of increased Digital Restrictions Management to everybody. Add it all up and it is a backward step for consumers (but a leap forward for producers). Consumers aren't stupid and will not pay for their own handcuffs.
Boy, I wish there was a class you could take in Highschool or College that would explain how the market works. We could call it something like "Economy 101" or even something obscure like "Consumer Behavior 231."
* I don't have a HD TV, so what would be the point right now?
* It's my (probably uninformed as heck) impression that not that many movies are out on Blu-Ray. I'm more into documentaries (which would look superb in HD) -- are they available and affordable?
* The players are not cheap -- and judging from the pattern of all similar tech devices, in a year or three, they'll be under $100 or so -- and eventually be downright cheap, once the thrift stores have switched from selling VHS players to DVD players.
* Finally, I have a substantial DVD collection and am in no hurry to re-spend all that money (especially since, until I get used to HD quality, DVDs look fine to me.)
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Just lower the price of movies that come on BD. It's simply too expensive. Because of this, I buy most movies on DVD and only buy special movies on BD. For example, I just got Transformers. But my last BD purchase before that was about 5 months ago, but I bought a lot of DVDs in the meantime.
Twinstiq, game news
why would I pay 2x or more for the same thing i can get and upscale?
If the brd was 15-20 I would actually be inclined to buy them....if they also had a dvd copy i could rip for my car...and 1/2 dozen other dvd players i own....see the problem here?
Discs that are more expensive than DVDs? Having to buy new type of player? Limited selections? Difference noticeable only on HD TV sets? Gee...seems like the perfect combination to me.
...for me and my HT it's the best and only option. While everyone else bickers about this I'll be enjoying dozens and dozens of movies in 1080p with lossless audio while everyone is watching compressed video with DD over cable.
In 5 years, when a better solution comes along, I'll have been satisfied in the meantime with BluRay.
cheap Blu-ray players that cost less than $200
Keep going. I can still get a no-name DVD player for $30, region free as well.
for years to come. Everyone has a huge collection of DVD's, and no one is going to spend a fortune upgrading to Blu Ray, except an elite few. Besides, with a quality DVD Upconverting player (DVD Upconvert), most people can't tell the difference.
I won't install or use a BD system.
on principle.
sony: you lost a LOT of money on people like me who BOYCOTT you for all your various evil ways.
note to industry: upscaled dvd's are JUST FINE on any modern day video player or streamer (I use a 'popcorn hour' box which upscales just fine and is fanless and instant-on).
BD can die for all I care. I'll never fund your poor products with my money.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Here's what they'll need to do to get me, a regular Joe consumer, to even consider "upgrading": 1. Remove DRM restrictions, including anything requiring firmware upgrades to support the latest schemes 2. Related to 1: ensure any disc can play in any player any time 3. Drop the price to $99 or less. That's what I'm willing to pay 4. Make sure that $99 player has all the features available 5. Drop the price of discs to something close to current dvd prices. I know you need to recoup your investment, but you're just going to have to do it over 10 years instead of 2
I wonder if downloadable movies are going to make optical media obsolete before Blu Ray gets a chance to become ubiquitous. Speaking for myself, I've barely touched my DVD player since I got my Roku Netflix download box, and I'm curious about how many other people are thinking along the same lines.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
I already picked the superior format (HD-DVD) and Sony purchased its demise... The absolute last thing I'm going to do is purchase the Sony format.
That's like... Someone brings out a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle for $15,000 brand new that runs well, handles well, and is an all-around great car. You go ahead and make a purchase. Then, some conglomerate comes to market with a car that runs on cat shit for $10k and puts the fuel cell company out of business.
I'll walk, thanks.
You can throw in all the free cats and laxative kitty treats you want, I'm not buying.
Careful, someone in Hollywood heard you.
You'll get remakes which will be nothing like those movies. Don't worry, they'll make the Great Space Coaster and Different Strokes first.
What do the manufacturers want, instant gratification? They only got the standards issue settled a few months ago. Get the player price down below $100, and over time, people will buy players with Blu-Ray capability.
Meanwhile, the $99 DVD players with image rescaling to 1020p and HDMI output are pretty good. There's a significant improvement in image quality to big LCD screens when the analog cabling is eliminated. All the ringing and vertical edge blurring goes away. Compare HDMI DVD and HDMI Blu-Ray, and the differences aren't that big until you get quite close to the display.
Instead, maybe Blu-ray turns out to be the next Laserdisc.
I'm still finding it bizarre the industry settled on Blu-ray over HD DVD. While the latter would have been struggling at this point too, it at least had a future - online downloads weren't a rival to HD DVD, the entire technology was intended to be the center of an online downloads world in the longer term.
Blu-ray offers little over DVD other than improved quality. For many, that quality is imperceptible. For 90% of the population, whether it is or isn't is neither here nor there because they don't have the equipment necessary to view the difference. This is unlike DVD, where DVD had immediate benefits even if your primary viewing device was a 14" Black and White TV.
The jump to a new format will happen when the new format has compelling advantages over DVD, as DVD had over VHS. Had Blu-ray been designed with just a little more thought (just copying the principles behind HD DVD rather than trying to match it on a bulleted list) it might have been that format. It isn't. It's dead. What a waste.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Bought my Blu-Ray player a few weeks ago and was all pumped to pick up a copy of Saving Private Ryan and... nope. Well, I'll just go to Blockbuster and rent something at least... nadda. There was all of 12 movies available, none of them worth renting let alone purchasing. We settled on Fantastic Four I and II. God awful movies. Shamefully bad. I'm surprised they're not churning out movies faster than this; there's barely any titles worth getting that have been released yet.
body massage!
I've been kind of wanting to get a Blu-Ray machine. But I've been waiting for a title that I can get excited about.
Can anyone recommend a movie - that when you watch it on blu-ray you say "awesome ... that was worth it!"
When I look at the BluRay section - I see movies like "SuperBad" and the latest chick flicks
Who the fuck cares about these on BLURAY - @$30 a pop no less
I figure if the re-master Pink Floyd's Delicate Sound of Thunder from the original AGFA film masters, I will be all over that format. ... but until then .... *yawn*
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
This isn't a bad sign for Blu-Ray at all, it is just taking sales numbers out of context and hoping people don't notice. I think this is just someone looking for page hits, but that's no surprise.
I've been watching the Nielsen VideoScan numbers on occasion. The share goes up and down every week, it really depends on what is released that week. Last year at this time, both HD formats fought for about 1% combined share, right now it's at 8% for this week, bumping between 6% and 12% over the past few months. I think it's a sustainable volume, and may very well grow, it's only been around for just over two years, and that's actually a decent uptake for a new media format.
I don't doubt there is some consideration in pushing for a $200 player, that's when the format might get mainstream notice.
Show a normal/casual consumer a DVD movie and then a Blu-Ray movie. Technically, it may be better, but seeing with your own eyes shows little difference. Is a normal person capable of paying 3 o 4 times the price of a DVD to watch something that looks a little better? I don't think so.
I also feel the Blu-Ray is not a great step forward as DVD was from CD. 50GB is already not too much for many.
Personally, I wouldn't buy a Blu-Ray now, for the reasons I said and because I'm sure there's a 'better' technology about to appear [Holographic?].
Minti: What's that huge shuriken in your back?! Kin: It's the instrument of my victory.
Seriously, I had a loan of a PS3 for a while, so figured I'd grab a Blu-Ray disk to see what the fuss was about. Spent 20 or so minutes going through the collection of disks at one of the larger multimedia retail chains (JB HiFi for Australians in the audience) and there was just nothing there of interest. Just the latest bunch of half assed Hollywood crapola. The things that were almost interesting to me were :
1) Things I already had.
2) Not worth spending the money on to watch in HD.
If I'm going to watch something in HD, it's got to be something big and atmospheric. Knocked up is not something you get HD for.
While we can be quick to claim hot topics as 'DRM' or 'Poor Economy' for the cause, it's more likely the simple fact that the difference between BluRay and DVD is negligible. DVD from VHS brought 5.1 surround sound and full digital picture. There was also the elimination of over-use causing damage to your tapes and of course the dreaded RE-WIND. BluRay brings nothing spectacular or revolutionary to the table aside from slightly higher resolution for an excessively higher price. Consumers don't need/want it. Myself included.
0110100100100000011000010110110100100000011000100
People won't buy players while there are only a few overpriced titles in stores and the titles won't be cheap and plentiful until lots of people have players.
They really should have seen this problem coming and planned from day one on making flippies. Origionally a lot of DVDs had widescreen/fullscreen on opposite sides because that was a problem at one time. Stores didn't want to stock both formats. So now what we need is DVD on one side and BlueRay on the other. Yes the BD copy could be a shovelware edition on most back catalog and the A features could support two SKUs to allow the BD version to sell for enough more to justify the extra expenses in mastering the additional BD exclusive bonus features.
The other option is really cheap players. And it looks like they are finally realizing they need the players to sell for less. They need a 'bridge' player that optimizes the experience with component to sell to all those folks who bought big TVs before HDMI was finalized. Then they need really cheap ones that perhaps only does S-Video/Composite for second rooms. Forget the super picture quality, just lemme play my damned discs in the back bedroom or kids room without paying a crapload for a player or having to buy both DVD and BD copies. Especially since the copy restrictions prevent duping off a spare copy myself.
Democrat delenda est
There exist at least two legal caching DVD player systems: Kaleidescape, and RealDVD. IANAL but I have heard that these are possible because, when the original contract for a legal DVD player was drawn up, no-one thought to include a clause forbidding caching or requiring the disc be present in the drive whilst being played.
I have heard that for both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, the contracts do in fact specify no caching, so the convenience of caching is legally impossible.
I'm not rich enough for a Kaleidescape but I plan to get RealDVD once available. The hi def disc formats need to wake up and smell the coffee.
At our local Borders, my wife happily picked up a "dvd" from the dvd shelf. She bought it and had the outer packaging off by the time she realized that it was blu-ray. We went back into the store and found that out of an entire wall of dvds, the movie she had picked was the only blu-ray title. Since the outer packaging was off, Borders initially refused an exchange for a dvd of the same title (which they had displayed somewhere else entirely, instead of on the dvd wall). They claimed (probably truthfully) that even though we had bought it five minutes previously, with the packaging off, they couldn't "return" it or resell it. I politely refused to budge and they eventually let us exchange - their solution for themselves was simply to put the blu-ray version on the "defective shelf."
Boo blu-ray.
Why on earth would I want to buy a blu-ray player? Our dvds work fine and look great on our crappy, ancient TV.
People don't like DRM... there's nothing on it and DVD although inferior fills the needs of most people who are not videophiles.
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
I was waiting for drives that could run both HD-DVD and BluRay that were reasonably priced. Now that there is only BluRay I an going to skip the whole thing.
So Sony lost by winning.
Those of you claiming that upscaled 480p looks as good as native 1080p have probably never compared them side by side.
That said, I bought an HD-DVD player, and while I'm rather pragmatic about the results of the format war, I'm not going to spend twice as much for a player with half the features.
Remember, when the format war ended, Blu player prices went up. And cheap 2.0 spec players are still a myth.
I believe that other factors have been significant as well.
What you will not hear any Sony executives say: "Gee, maybe if we hadn't insisted on a long and drawn-out format war and did whatever we had to do to come up with a single standard early on, perhaps the market for high-definition DVDs would be doing better right now."
I agree that DRM is an abomination but whether I like it or not, it seems that most "consumers" don't understand it and don't see why it's such a bad thing. "Another Betamax vs. VHS" and "I don't want to invest in the loser" however, is something that most people do understand. Because of the way digital downloads (legal and otherwise) are becoming more and more prevalent and are obviously here to stay, the idiots behind the format wars should have seen that time as their one chance to establish themselves and gain some marketshare before people lost interest in purchasing physical media.
The Blu-ray format will be useful as a replacement for DVD-R/RW and DVD+R/RW, since more space is always useful for data storage. But I really think the days of buying physical media from a brick-and-mortar store in order to watch movies are numbered.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Just clicking a few of the links for the history show that DVD and Blu-Ray sales are poorly corrolated, this is per week so unless the releases are exactly alike that's a big factor, plus important DVD-only releases have a huge impact on a weekly scale. My conclusion is that Blu-Ray is pretty much flat, as in those that have Blu-Ray players are buying them but there's no huge uptake. Given the current happenings on the stock markets and elsewhere, WTF do you expect? For most people this isn't exactly the time to invest in a HDTV & Blu-Ray player.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Are you also refusing to use DVDs because of the DRM and do you request you computer to be equipped with a CD burner AND ONLY a CD burner.
Or do you still use floppies for your daily data disk needs?
You do realize that in about a year or two a BD burner will be as common as a DVD burner was a year or two ago?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
now if you could pickup a 40" 1080p lcd for $500 i think you'd find it a different situation. come on china i know you can find a way!
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
I've been waiting for HD content for YEARS. I remember thinking that NTSC was crap back in the early 90s and wishing for something better. I just thought it was disgusting that we had been relying on ancient technology for so long.
I finally broke down and picked up a decent TV and a ps3 earlier in the year and it's been like a breath of fresh air. The quality bottleneck in the bluray movies is finally the video source, not the format.
Check out the Dark Knight teaser on the Batman Begins bluray on a decent 1080p tv. It was literally jaw dropping for my friends and I. The thing is we should have been watching video like this 10 years ago.
I just don't understand it when people say DVD is "good enough". You can see the compression artifacts! (and that's on a low resolution display)
Oh and the DRM is annoying.... I suspect it will only be a matter of time before I'll be ripping the movies to watch on my portable devices just like I do with DVD. Just crack it and get on with your life.
Rats would be more funny if they could fart.
...or rename HD-DVD "blu-ray 2" and forget the unneeded expensive to manufacture lasers and discs of blu-ray. Consumers like better picture, but don't give a crap if one format can hold twice as much data when its not needed.
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were products for the Technocrats with money to blow. The average movie consumer isn't going to throw down $200 for a "bottom of the line" Blu-Ray player and $30 a piece for all the movies they just bought on DVD. Yeah the quality of Blu-Ray maybe better but I can't say I have any complaints about the quality of DVDs, though. I don't see how SONY could have predicted people to go gongho for Blu-Ray when HD-DVD died. BUT THEY'RE SONY, F*#K PANTS!!!
That's nearly as worrying as seeing "Eraser" at the top of the sales chart in the article.
No sig today...
I'll switch to Blu-Ray when the price comes down to about double a cheap DVD player and a Blu-Ray disc costs the same as a DVD.
Until then I'll simply download DRM free 1080p files to the PC hooked up to my 1080p tv.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I really don't think "the masses" are worried about DRM. They don't care - as long as it is not in their face.
DVDs all contain DRM, no-one has a problem with that. Only the geeks, who insisted on playing DVDs on unsupported platforms, until the DRM was broken of course.
Then there is something like, what's it called, HDCM or so? To prevent high-def content being sent to displays that do not support that standard. That is also something that doesn't seem to take off, and from what I hear here has a lot of problems. It gets in your face, it blocks people from playing their content, and then and only then the DRM becomes an issue. But that's for small numbers only now, most can't afford that.
All in all I think blu-ray may be nice but there is no need for ordinary people to upgrade. You only see an increase in image quality if you also invest in a large, decent quality HDTV. And that is a big investment, too big for most people, even when the economy were in good shape.
It is the law of diminishing returns. The step from VHS to DVD was great in both convenience and quality, and small in terms of cost: only a new, inexpensive player was needed. Same for vinyl to CD, all that was needed was a CD player to have the better quality.
Now to get really better quality (there is no increase in convenience I believe, decrease maybe due to the digital restrictions included), one not only needs an (inexpensive) blu-ray player, also a new (expensive) display is required. The existing TV just doesn't do it, no difference between normal DVD and blu-ray.
Blu-Ray is failing due to pricing vs. benefit.
When it came to DVD, it won over VHS and Laserdisc because on the VHS side, wear and smeared playback and eaten tapes came to an end; take care of a DVD and it will last virtually forever. It won over laserdisc because DVDs are not 12" in diameter and don't need to be swapped one to three times for a movie (yeah it's true some single-layer DVDs might have needed to be flipped but I have never seen one).
However, early adopters got screwed; buyers of early $300+ high-end DVD players were the victims of bad runs, and manufacturers (read:Sony) denied issues existed. I replaced a high-end Sony player with a no-name Apex player, and the Apex player was vastly superior (not to mention region-free and macrovision-free). People who bought into DIVX got equally screwed, by paying as much as or more than a "Basic DVD" player and then losing access to all of their movies.
With Blu-Ray, players are overpriced, and people have to pay more for the same content. Why bother when upsampling DVD players work pretty darn well to make the difference indistinguishable for casual viewers at 720p, noticeable only to pixel peepers? Not only that but a lot of content (old TV shows, older movies, etc.) were either videotaped at NTSC resolution or are on old, grainy film, where encoding at 1080i or 1080p would actually create distractions from actually enjoying the story.
Lastly, what the hell is up with HDCP? If you are an early HDTV adopter and have a DVI flat screen that doesn't talk HDCP or has an early HDCP device which doesn't like to handshake properly with players, you're locked out of the content. You have to turn to either composite, S-video, or if you're lucky, component (if you invested in a large monitor-only device with only DVI and VGA, no YPbPr, you're screwed).
Bring the players down to $125 to $150 or so and limit the Blu-Ray content premium to 10% or so over DVD, and you'll see uptake quickly increase.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Lets try free Blu-ray players bundled into magazines and cheap discs that cost less than $200.
Have gnu, will travel.
There is absolutely no compelling reason to get a Blue-ray player. None. Zero.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
It's the cost of the content. Content is king and always will be. Consumers will pay more for a disc player which offers more features and functionality. They won't pay $30 per blueray disc when they are used to paying $14-20 for decent quality movie on DVD. Add DRM to that and ya it's doomed to a early demise and they were fools for thinking they could succeed so.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
Clearly the high price of the players, and the lack of a significant, big reason to upgrade, has slowed acceptance. I think its just too expensive and especially with a flaky economy we have right now, people are reluctant to spend that kind of money on it. Maybe when prices come down to $100 there will be more sales. I think as well a big potential part of the market, computer storage, is probably not being emphasized very well. It could also be that consumers are just fed up with DRM, wasting their money on these stupid discs and not being able to play them on their computer or to make a backup copy. So perhaps the consumer avoidance of the technology is a good thing if it is being done to send a message we wont tolerate brain damaged DRMed technology, where we fork over such large sums of money to have to put up with this insulting treatment, being told we cant use this technology for private use how we see fit, having a corporation dictate to us how we can play it like this is some sort of police state.
Nonsense. Most consumers don't even know what DRM is, or if they do they don't care all that much. They already can't copy their DVDs (without some special software), and I don't see that harming the market acceptance of DVD players or DVD movies. Most consumers probably have no idea what DRM Blu-Ray uses.
Blu-Ray's problem is that it's a solution in search of a problem. VHS looked lousy (and progressively lossy) and was clunky to use; the DVD solved those problems by being a higher quality digital disk, so it was successful in the market. So... what's the consumer problem with DVDs that Blu-Ray is supposed to solve? "The resolution could be higher," just isn't that compelling a reason to upgrade.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
> However with blu-ray disks, i cannot picture the average consumer, or even
> the less common nerder consumer giving a damn over the inability to copy
> 40gig movies to their computer or to where ever.
Forget the nerds, the problem is the people who casually copy DVDs, often for sensible reasons like CHILDREN. DVDs and children are a sure fire way to lose titles. So a lot of people make copies for the kids. Others make copies for their portable media players. As soon as a potential BD customer realizes they will have to buy a BD copy (at a premium) and a DVD print of the same movie they ain't going to be all that interested unless they are the sort of hard core video quality freak that has a bunch of laserdiscs already. (assuming they are old enough)
Democrat delenda est
While 1080 looks better than 480, it is not worth the extra cost and hassle. I can rip the DVDs that we own to our server's HD, making them easily available to any of our televisions using MythTV. In addition, when I rip them, I can remove the delays caused by the FBI warnings and commercials. When you have two young children, easy access and reduced delay are worth much more than improved visual quality.
I'll get one when they sell a $100 or less player that also plays AVCHD (the format for HD camcorders).
Fact is, the current price is representative of nothing more than greed- they're trying to slowly lower the price so they can hit all values of the economic curve. They still aren't targeting the mainstream.
Remember when portable DVD players were over 1000 bucks? Now they are $120. Everyone remembers this kind of price drop. We're just waiting. We can wait, most BD disks are overpriced upscaled DVDs to begin with.
And whats up with Sony's obsession with making their DVD / BD players take up so much space?
Sony has not been able to convince people that their DVD players are "broken" (obsolete, etc...)
This falls into the same category as satellite radio -- XM/Sirius have not been able to convince radio listeners their radio is "broken" and needs replacement, upgrade, etc...
Both are just novelties and will never go beyond just that, a new toy. DVDs/CDs fixed something that was "broken" stretched/worn-out/broken media tape. Ah the hiss of a worn-out cassette, and remember the cassette that you tried to play that sat in a 120f vehicle all day --- strrreeetch! Or the one you tried to play before the interior of your car warmed-up in the midst of winter --- snnnaaapp! etc... DVDs/CDs "fixed" these problems, not to mention quality... folks said, "I have to get one of these!"
With Blue-Ray... folks think it is "neat", but are perfectly content with their current digital media and they still remember how bad those analog tapes were in comparison. And in the case of satallite radio the feeling is mutual, "my favorite radio station still comes in loud-and-clear... why should I pay for something that is free?"
[apologies in advance for the satellite radio tangent, but it is somewhat relevant]
I assume thi is the same one from Google Video search. I watched two episodes and they were boring. Nothing pretty from what I saw. I don't know if BR version is all episodes or what.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
thats when I'll buy into something new but only because no new stuff is coming out on DVD. Untill then DVD is perfect and dacades ahead of what VHS tapes were.
Cheap movies
Cheap dvd players
???????
I just saved a lot of cash plus I didn't even have to contact Geico
Oh and being a Sony creation I can't support it.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I took my blue ray player back; it took over a minute for the device to turn on. Do these things run windows?
It's not rocket science here. There aren't that many people with HDTV's yet (although the number is growing). Once you actually get your HDTV, then your choice of buying a blue-ray player/blue ray discs becomes another issue. Most blue ray discs are freaking expensive and the quality just isn't that noticeable. I own a PS3 and a few blue ray discs (ALL of which I bought on sale on Amazon for reasonable prices or got for free with the PS3), but it stinks having these discs that I can ONLY play on the TV in the living room where the PS3 is hooked up. DVD's I can play practically anywhere. There are literally ten different devices in my house that will play them and if the TV in the living room is taken, then I can watch something somewhere else. Add to that a limited selection of movies and you have a product that moves like molasses. The advantages just don't outweigh the disadvantages for the majority of consumers. I think if they could get the price of blue-ray discs drop to the sub-$20 level or even less, then sales might pick up more. $30 to $40 for a movie is way more than I am willing to pay in almost all cases no matter how high the resolution.
I didn't read the whole reply chain, but I'm surprised I didn't see digital distribution brought up as a competitor. I have a 61" HD-ILA HDTV in my livingroom, and no hardware capable of HD output except for my XBOX 360. I rent a ton of HD movies on my 360 and watch them for what, $5? I do not plan on buying a Bluray player at all. My DVDs look hot as hell played off of the 360 as well. I think optical media is reaching a close.
The only way Blu-Ray could have a chance would be if the price of the player mechanism dropped to the point where the price differential between a DVD player and a DVD-and-Blu-Ray player becomes negligible... so negligible that a consumer walking into Wal*Mart to buy "a DVD player" almost accidentally gets Blu-Ray too.
If I were Sony I'd heavily subsidize the cost of the players to make that happen, giving away the Blu-Ray player razor in hopes of selling some Blu-Ray disk blades.
Oh, yeah, and the price differential between DVD and Blu-Ray disks would need to narrow almost to nothing, as well.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Look, my entertainment system consists of a 1998 vintage 27" RCA CRT TV, a $20 Walmart DVD player, a $100 tuner, and a DLink Media Player for playing my ripped DVD collection (which conveniently skips all ads, FBI warnings, etc. etc.).
Amazon shows a single 32" LCD HDTV for $667, but most of them are $1000+.
At $500 I might consider buying an HDTV, but I'm not spending $1000 on one.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Sorry Blu-ray, but when VHS and DVD came out, it didn't really REQUIRE me to justify my "THIS is MUCH better!" purchase with another $3000+ worth of 1080p-enabled, 7.1-surround-encircled, HDMI-connected, UPS-protected, digitally-fed crap.
And after all that crap is bought, you still get to watch your high-speed action sequences in peanut-butter modes. You get creamy or chunky digitized goodness...
It's the expense of upgrading to a HD (1080P) TV that is I'm sure holding most people back. There is no point buying blu-ray unless you have a HD set. 1080P sets are expensive. Crisis solved, no need to hock your blu-ray player yet.
I have an "old" 36" CRT that can display 480p and 1080i (though the later flickers too much for my taste) and has component as the best input option. So why would I want Blu-Ray, I won't even be able to tell the difference on my current TV anyway.
Not to mention that Blu-Ray movies are more expensive than regular DVDs. For me to switch to Blu-Ray, first the movies themselves have to reach price parity with regular DVDs. The fact that my TV is too old wouldn't even enter into the equation, HD movie vs SD movie at the same price = I buy the HD movie.
And all of that doesn't take DRM into account. If I buy a movie I need to be able to play the content on any device that I choose.
"I don't have a HD TV, so what would be the point right now?"
I noticed no one's discussing Blu-ray as a viable backup for hard drives.
I love my blu-ray, but I am totally unwilling to pay up to 200% of the price of a DVD just for a little bit of added quality. I've been shopping for those "buy one get one free" or Amazon specials to round out mine. If the Blu-Ray were the same cost as the DVD, I think more people would be buying the blu-ray.
because of the economy....duh!
I would rather download a movie on xbox live (soon netflix!) than pay 30+ dollars for a movie that I have to buy a player for and watch once and that they will change the format of a few months later and require me to buy a different player for the HD+++ new cool version. Yeah, I had to pay for the xbox but I got a gaming machine also. Sure I could have spent a bit more on a PS3 and gotten blueray but I still wouldn't have bought blueray media. Let's move past this media format war and just access it all digitally online.
From what i've seen demo'd in the stores, I really really want a bluray player but there's a couple reasons i have not yet. first, of course, is price. i do my research on products before i buy so it seems like the quality bluray players all cost $400+. Bluray is still pretty new so when I found out there's different profiles, of course i want the newest one but it's not readily available yet. so i have to wait for that. reviews also show that many of the bluray players have long load times so now i have to wait for that to improve. i don't want to buy a bluray player just to have a bluray player. i want to make sure it's something that's current and won't annoy the heck out of me.
The players cost $300+
The movies cost $25+
The TV to display everything in native resolution is $800+
It's too expensive you dumb shits!
player should be $150
movies should be $15
The TV should cost much less than it does.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Well that's easy. Drop the price of the machines and the discs and release some descent movies: Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Gladiator, Braveheart, Bourne. Why would people want to pay $35 for a BRD when they can pay half that much for the DVD. At the high prices and limited availability of the most beloved films, there is little incentive to go BRD.
The week before, market share of BluRay was WAY up. BluRay sales were up 16% despite DVD sales being down 10%.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/09/13/nielsen-videoscan-high-def-market-share-for-week-ending-septembe/
And selling players for cheaper is a bad thing? Sales accelerate when prices drop. DVD players are $35, it must be a complete flop!
It's about time for these ridiculous slanted anti-BluRay articles to end. BluRay is having a tough enough time without slashdot airing repeated hit pieces.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Give me a break. These are week over week numbers. For a smaller market, release schedule matters. What was the biggest seller? Baby Mama? Who here would buy that title on any media?
Fucking slashdot. Poorly source blog entries designed to pump page views aren't news for anybody, much less nerds.
Yeah, it's struggling to gain consumer acceptance. It can't possibly have anything to do failing economy in the US, it must be consumer acceptance.
BR players cost 250+ from a reputable (non referbd) dealer...
This is because DVD titles gets release first most of the time compare to their Blu counterparts.
First come, first win.
-Anon Man
1. Money is an issue. Best blu-ray player, and a plasma screen with 1080p output display. Whats the point of seeing blu-ray on lcd? Plasma is better BY FAR! I want to see BLACK. Not white-washed black on lcd's. Even CRT's have better blacks than lcd. Any CRT, even from the 1980's.
2. Blu-ray titles are expensive. I don't think DRM is an issue. Slysoft FTW!
3. I would rather get a pc with blu-ray. You pay about the same total price, and you can do a LOT more with it. I haven't found a way to hook up a pc to a plasma with DVI yet. But I will tolerate LCD if its hooked up to a PC.
4. Hard drives are better per $/gb than blu-ray.
Prices will go down for blu-ray, eventually.
But as I see it, HDD density is just getting better. HDD are the better option for storage.
5. When the internet gets to fiber optic speeds, blu-ray is virtually over. Just buy and download. Gigabyte wireless is coming. Then terabyte wireless. Physical media is becoming a moot point, except for backup.
6. Most people don't care about blu-ray. They don't care about 1080p, hdmi, DRM, etc. People are stupid. Press play. DONE. That's it.
7. In the future, movies won't be put on Hard drives, blu-ray, etc. Think DNA pills. Swallow the pill. Watch and experience the movie in your mind, literally. Sound, picture, smell, etc.
The brain is a literal hologram machine anyway. Why not use what you got?
People were willing to upgrade from VCR tapes to DVD because of the range of advantages - smaller, better quality, you didn't have to rewind it, it almost never jams, if the machine *is* goofed up it doesn't shred your DVD, they have some rather nice special features like directors commentary.
Only the "Better Quality" option applies to Blue Ray - and the difference between DVD and Blue Ray *or* HD DVD is a *lot* less than the difference between DVD and VHS.
If it were just the quality issue, laserdisk would have beaten VHS a long time before DVD's were around. DVD's were superior on a number of fronts, and are 'good enuff' on anything for the moment.
One doesn't really need to be able to read the writing on the One Ring while Frodo's wearing the damn thing to enjoy LOTR - {G}.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
- No real advantage over DVD. Sure, it looks better in theory, but it takes a side-by-side comparison to see the difference. You don't look at the screen and go "Wow, that's blu-ray"
- Expensive players make people think twice. 20$ DVD player, or 200$ blu-ray player? No to difficult for Joe Consumer.
- Each blu-ray disk costs more then a DVD. Why pay more money for something that offers little benefit. Make them the same cost and sales will go up.
- HD compliancy nonsense. "No sir, this player won't work with your TV, you need to hand over another thousand bucks for a new TV. Oh, the regular DVD players are over there. Yes, they work with your TV."
- Buying everything again. Nobody is interested in buying a movie on blu-ray when they allready have it on DVD. Heck, people are relucatant to buy the DVD when they have the VHS.
- Content. Release every movie on Blu-ray at the same as the DVD, and do it everywhere. If nobody sees the things in store, nobody will buy it.
You'd think this would be covered in Sales 101....
I have owned a PS3 for well over a year now but I only bought my first two Blu-Ray DVDs two weeks ago because it was the first time that I saw movies I wanted for a price I wanted to pay ($12.99 per disc). I don't care that there's DRM on them at all, but I'm not missing any information that would allow me to follow a movie if I buy the cheaper, inferior old format, so I'll be damned if I'm going to pay more for a Blu-Ray disc. The only production I would want to buy on an HD format would be BBC's Planet Earth, and, perhaps, Koyaanisqatsi. But that's it. Got nothing to do with DRM
And nobody ask you to fix it. Nobody is clamering to buy two new devices just because you want me to. I don't have HD TV, so I don't need BLUERAY. I don't have BLUERAY, so I don't need HDTV (okay, so I want it, I almost lied).
This is a chicken egg problem.
And you know what, a regular DVD looks WAY better on HDTVs than standard TVs. And the wide screen is just fantastic, from what I've seen.
Now, I predict that in three years or so, a new format will come out that will be even better, and replace BRD. AND that tech will win. It will probably be a reworked version of HD-DVD with a "New Catchy Name"(tm). Super Blue Disk (SBD for short).
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I have a decent home theater. However, I do not have a Blu-Ray player and I don't intend to get one anytime soon.
The cost is just too high. I can already play upscaled to 1080p DVDs on my HTPC. Blu-Ray really doesn't offer anything that compels me to spend another $200+. Each disc contains more of the same crap I don't watch on my DVDs - special features, deleted scenes, interviews, whatever. The format itself is certainly higher quality and I can tell the difference in picture quality, I don't hear a difference. Of course, most in-store demo centers aren't configured properly anyway. Regardless of that, upscaled DVD looks "good enough" for most movies.
Maybe if I could buy a single disc with *all* the movies in a series, like all three Indiana Jones, or all six Star Wars, Matrix, LOTR, etc, Blu-Ray might be compelling.
Someone else said it quite well. Blu-Ray is a solution that is missing a problem.
You are applying technologist thinking to a consumer product (a fatal flaw common to many slashdot posters).
It's not that consumers do not like DRM. They do not, because it has implications on what they can do. But from a consumers standpoint, Blu-Ray has less DRM - because there are fewer regions. The biggest one is that we are in the same region as Japan.
Furthermore, many more Blu-Ray discs have chosen to eschew DRM - the main example there being a number of British TV shows. No more need for a region free player.
That Blu-Ray DRM is bad and annoying and stops you from doing interesting things is without doubt. But that didn't stop DVD's from prospering.
The fact that you and lots of other people overlook is that the question of Blu-Ray marketshare is frankly, a stupid point to ponder. Blu-Ray slowly becomes cheaper to produce. Players become more common and also cheaper. Over time, you'll only see Blu-Ray players - after all, they can also play DVD's so who cares if you don't want or need Blu-Ray?
Blu-Ray players win by attrition, and nothing will offset them. If you think Blu-Ray sales are not great consider they long ago eclipsed the entire downloaded video market and have a greater rate of adoption.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Regardless of the price of the player, why would Joe/Jane Consumer buy into a new format where the movies are usually twice as expensive as the old format?
Does anyone think they _look_ twice as good?
I dunno who Ian is trying to fool, but recent weeks have been up, not down. Last week was because, quite honestly, there was nothing worth buying on Blu-ray Disc. However, the previous week set a record for Blu-ray vs. DVD (the week Transformers was finally put out on BD). Taking a down week and saying "oh look, it's failing" is just the ultimate in silliness.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
Why would we buy a blu-ray? We have DVD players in our SUVs, we have hand-held DVD players for $99. We have DVD players/burners in our computers. A DVD is the media we can use where we want to use it.
Blu-Rays are expensive, need an expensive player, and can't be used with all our devices.
The only "advantage" beyond new and shiny bling appeal for techy nerds, is dubiously better picture quality on an HDTV for new movie releases.
It isn't good enough to be worth it.
If the concept of $10-20 movie for DVD (Players for $40) vs $40-50 movie in Blu-Ray (players for $300-400) is puzzling corporations, on why Blu-Ray is not selling...
I really cannot help them.
Internet Retail spaces are wonderful. Get over it!
All I can say is that the price of a blu-ray movie is horrible...
I have 6 Blu-ray movies that I watch with my ps3. I would have many more if the price of the movies would come down in line with DVDs. But when Blu-ray movies cost $25-$30 I cannot justify spending that much. $20... maybe, $15 sure...
The entire group of Blu-Ray haters (the bastard child of Sony Haters and HD-DVD fanboys) simply will not give up, trying to use a SINGLE WEEK of video sales in a totally off-peak sales time to point to Blu-Ray failing.
Much like the confederates who yearned for the south to rise again and never accepted the victory of the Union army, some people simply cannot wake up to the fact of the inevitability of Blu-Ray.
This was of course true well before HD-DVD failed, for those who cared to think. But it should be rather obvious to anyone technical now - Blu-Ray has already won.
Over time blu-ray prices will fall, blu-ray player prices will fall. Eventually trying to find a DVD player will be like trying to find a VCR - they simply will not be carried. And with good reason, why buy a DVD player when generally a Blu-Ray player will upsample quite well and play all your old DVD's just fine?
From there DVD's are sold less and less as there is less reason to buy them as Blu-Ray prices fall due to manufacturing costs declining (and they will decline if for no other reason than PS3 games are pressed on Blu-Ray).
Those that think video sales will overtake Blu-Ray of course ignore things like the recent Comcast bandwidth cap and the practical reality of the internet providers infrastructure to most people's homes, not to mention the simple fact that humans like to own and share stuff - and a physical disc can be shared in ways downloaded video cannot be, at least until content providers wake up and smell the sales potential.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There is no reason at all for any hand held media like CDs/DVDs to exist anymore. If I want to rent a movie, I buy the 24 hour license from Comcast digital cable - I can get it in HD and it's fine resolution. If I want a song, I either get it from a friend's CD or iPod or pony up the $0.99 to iTunes. Blu-Ray is technology looking for a home, and there will never be a home.
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
Well one of the bigger reasons why HD-DVD bowed out was because of all the big corporate backing of Blu-Ray, everyone wanting to jump on Sony's good side. If the "bake off" was actually fair and not biased, I don't think HD-DVD would have lost by a landslide like all the Sony executives were talking about. As usual, Sony gives kickbacks (or whatever you call it) to those who publicly support Sony and Blu-Ray, denouncing any competitors, then try to corner the market on their proprietary (and quite clunky IMO) format.
Get Microsoft (or insert big $$$$ corporation here) to back HD-DVD now, and it'll be back in the race yet again, but who dares to stand up to Sony?
And they said zombies weren't real!
People want to download the content and view it on a PVR type device. I think BluRay has the fundamental problem of it is trying to solve the wrong problem. Media is not as important in the market as delivery anymore. Solve the HD delivery problem and customers will accept that over any new whizbang media infrastructure.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
DRM isn't what's holding it back, because at the end of the day the general public doesn't care (or are too ignorant) about DRM restrictions. When will home video distributors realize that the only way to sell a high end product is by wrapping it into high end packaging. Collectors have a fetish for package design. These days, when most everything is available online (legally or illegally), the one thing you can't download is beautiful package design for the fetishistic collector who wants pride of ownership. Instead, you get the ugliest cheap-plastic blue-box nightmare. Who wants to collect that?! I'd rather have a virtual product with no packaging design than that crap cluttering up my shelves. What good is a high end player without high end product packaged in high end packaging?
Some figures from my local Sam Goody:
- Typical Blu-ray title: $30 (limited selection, new releases often even more expensive)
- Used or marked down Blu-ray: $16 to $24 (very limited selection)
- Typical used DVD (very broad selection): $8-$12 (some as low as $4 to $6)
For the same price as a single Blu-ray, I can walk home with three (or four, with their 4 for price of 3 special) DVD's. Given that I generally only want to buy "good" movies, and most "good" movies are just as good on regular DVD, it's a no-brainer why I keep buying DVD's, even though I own a new PS3. The limited selection of Blu-ray vs. DVD only swings me further toward DVD.
In australia, to get one of the full hd blue rays, we are paying 50-60$ off the shelf, that's almost triple it costs to buy a dvd, what do they expect, comsumers aren't tech's, they don't know the difference inbetween dvd and blue ray, they'll see the massive prices on the players, and then the massive prices on the movies themselves, and pretty much flee in terror, why pay more for the same thing?
people don't want to pay 30 bucks a movie.
shit i don't even buy 20 dollar dvds anymore, i just pay 20 bucks a month for netflix.
and upconvert is just as good to most people.
i work in an audio/video department in a department store, we generally sell lower-end gear, but today we got in some Sony 40" Bravia LCDs and Sony BluRay disk players.
immediately i set them up together (with an HDMI cable) and was amazed by the quality -- because it was barely better than a DVD (the Bravia TVs are great though). maybe you need a 52"+ sized tv to really appreciate it?
the sad truth is, when technology plateaus and consumer purchases come to a slowdown, these companies will do anything to convince you your shit is outdated and you need to upgrade (vista anyone?). sure the resolution is better, but is it noticeable enough to lay down a few hundred for a player that you will have to patch every few months if you want it to work because of the draconian DRM, and pay 150-200% more for movies?
did it really enhance your movie watching experience to see every detail of woody allen's face? get all the facts you can before you dive in to this one.
I bought my PS3 for gaming, but the blu-ray player has seen lots of use since my old 32" sony xbr (circa 1998) died. The replacement I bought - 52" sony bravia xbr lcd - is fricking awesome, so I decided to start renting bd movies from blockbuster via moviepass, which allows the rental of any number of dvd or bd for any length of time (2 out at a time) for a monthly fee.
At first, the bd section was miniscule, but it is slowly expanding. Many of the new releases are available on bd as well as dvd, so it gives me a choice at the time I'm picking out movies.
For me, blu-ray adoption has really been an as-convenient process. Nothing and noone is forcing me, but considering I now have an appropriate tv, audio system and bd player I may as well take advantage of the bd movie quality for no additional charge.
"In the end, there is simply no weapon more devastating than the truth, delivered in just the right way." - tnk1
We get it. You want to screw us. You NEED to screw us. Really we get it. But we're not going to take it anymore. Goddamnit you won the format war and you RAISED prices. Screw you burn in hell and I hope all of you and your kids all get ass cancer and die.
Anyone following DRM and Sony knows that Sony considers their customers to be scum, not worth a bit of consideration. Sorry, but I don't buy motherboards with Sony technology if I can avoid it. I won't by Sony equipment, music, movies, or other IP if I can possibly avoid it.
I do not now, nor do I ever expect to own Blue-Ray as long as the only source is Sony. I guess it's a Good Thing that I find even the most boring book to be more interesting than any Blue-ray HD movie.
I do have a HD-DVD player. It's also an upconverting DVD player. I'm happy with it. My DVD's really pop out for me on HD.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
You need a $1500-$4000 television? My 32" Sharp 1080p HDTV is $800. Not big, but nice for a moderate size apartment where the screen is 6-10 feet from the couch. However, when compared to an $800 TV that $400 player seems outrageous. Let me know when there's a solid, future-proof player under $200.
DVD cost of production = $.50
BluRay cost of production = $1.25
DVD cost to consumer = $15
BluRay cost to consumer = $27
The MPAA doesn't understand that a movie isn't worth $27, and there's no justification for the price.
In fact, I'm buying no Bluray movies, and furthermore, I'm buying less DVD's now because I know I'll want to buy them as Bluray once the price becomes reasonable.
Bluray player and media sales and profits would triple if Best Buy would lead the charge with the following policy: All Bluray titles will be priced exactly $2 more than the corresponding DVD prices. There would be an avalanche of newly converted Bluray buyers. In the meantime, there are going to be less Bluray and less DVD sales. Hell, there are 20 different ways to get DVD quality movies on demand for less than $5 each.
$27 average price make BRD's uncollectable. Give the collectors a reason to open their wallets.
I have a PS3 and have been getting a bunch of Blu-ray movies via Netflix. The PS3 is connected to a 5.1 surround system and a hi-def projector that projects on to a 100" screen (so I can see every pixel ;) ). Here are some of my observations:
- Older movies, like "The Usual Suspects", don't look that much better in Blu-ray than on upscaled DVD. I thought I was watching the DVD version of until after I hit the eject button and realized that Netflix gave me the blu-ray version. Oddly enough, some low-budget movies like Juno looked better than big-budget film like Batman Begins. Most of the older movies are really not worth seeing again in Blu-ray.
- Most Blu-ray movies do not take advantage of the extra interactive features that it can offer. No biggie since I never use them anyway.
- Sound is not that much better. Even with a 5.1 system, its hard to tell the difference between 5.1 from a DVD vs. 5.1 or 7.1 from a blu-ray. Sure, some audiophile could probably tell the difference, but I am in the higher end of the spectrum of people and I really couldn't tell the difference.
Actually, I think the parent has hit the nail on the head. As an early adopter (PS3 from day one), I've bought a lot of Blue ray disks, but far less than I would have if they didn't ask for $30 each.
I'd be happy to eventually replace my entire DVD collection at $10...$15; but not at thirty. As it is, we only purchase the movies that we like the very best; if it is so-so or just a popcorn flick (light humor, yet-another-sequel, etc.) we don't get it on Blue ray, even if we don't already have it -- we'll just get a DVD.
I really love the hi-res, too (and can see it, too: 204" screen); but ten disks x $30 is $300, and a hundred is three grand; I have *many* hundreds of DVDs, and there's no way I'm going to replace them just as a matter of course.
As more good movies come out, or let's at least say movies that appeal to my family, we'll slowly build up a considerable collection in the hidef format. But a mass replacement... no. Not until they stop charging so much.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Maybe if they didn't cost 3x the price of DVD people would actually consider buying them.
I see this over and over. They release something out a price no one is willing to buy it at and then whine when no one buys it. It killed of dual layer DVD+R, and hundreds of other amazing technologies.
Are you telling me no one saw that coming? DRM notwithstanding, price may be the one issue holding it back. There are no $100 players out there and people sure the hell will not be investing to replace their DVD collection, sure Blu-ray can upconvert but for that they will just buy an upconvert DVD player for $40 not a $300+ player. What kills me is that all of a sudden everyone is a video expert and can tell the most mundane differences in 720p,1080i and 1080p which is complete bullshit. Most people watch movies for enjoyment not to sit there and examine which compression techniques they used. DVDs will be here for a while until Blu-ray or another tech comes along that will be affordable. Another last problem is slow PC adoption which is pretty abysmal.
Joe User pops the disc in his player and it works. He never sees the DRM on Blue-Ray. The problem with Blue now is the price. Even I find myself being very selective about what I buy because the price for them is a bit outrageous. Especially when compared to DVD and with the economy like it is. What I've found myself doing is just not buying anything on DVD and only buying my favorites on Blue. It's no surprise that sales have dropped considering the price of everything has gone up.
Most average Joe doesn't care about neither DRM (don't know what it is) or the increased resolution (DVDs good enough).
The people who care about the increased resolution is mainly us geeks, but as we don't buy that DRM shit it implies that no-one buys Blu-Ray.
I have several hundred (around 600) DVDs in my collection. I didn't bother with DVDs at all from the beginning due to the stupid region coding, bought my first player when I saw an ad for region free player 1998, but still didn't bother much due to the DRM, but later DeCSS arrived and I felt like DVDs would be a safe buy.
Blu-Ray contains a shitload of DRM garbage so there is quite unlikely that I could make a safe purchase. There are several systems which all need to be cracked before I would get the slightest interest in Blu-Ray.
If HD-DVD had been the elected format, then I would have invested, because that had mostly been made safe already (that is cracked) so it was useful, but those shitty Blu-Rays contains several layers of DRM shit more.
To save the Blu-Ray format, please remove the DRM, (and the stupid stupid region coding) otherwise put it up yours ...
I hate DRM as much as the next slashdotter, but I think Blu-Ray (and HDDVD) were doomed from the beginning because the need for the technology just wasn't there in the numbers to justify its existence.
HD-DVD and Blue-Ray are mostly a marketing-driven creation. The tech doesn't actually do much that DVD's do not do. The jump from VHS (past laser disc) to DVD as the mainstream format was an evolutionary step forward. No matter how many marketing people tried to say otherwise, it just wasn't a significant step forward. Sure early adopters, rich people, and the like would buy it, but the wider market just wasn't there.
HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will go down as a big waste of money.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Joe six pack may not know *why* his Blu-ray player is so finicky - refusing to play for mysterious reasons having something to do with authorization failures and missing fallbacks, but he doesn't like it. Instead of uselessly ranting against DRM (or stupidly defending it), he just takes the defective equipment back to the store and cusses about the time wasted.
If media companies want their DRM accepted by Joe Sixpack - it can't get in his way. Blu-ray (and much of the HD DRM hierarchy) doesn't cut it.
The DRM on Bluray discs, and HDCP in particular, makes the format a real headache for the technically savvy, and a total non-starter for anyone else. Guess what? If people can't play your discs, they won't buy them! Clearly, it's got to go.
DRM is, unfortunately, a part of the bluray format. Due to the complexity of the legal arrangements worked out with Hollywood I'm sure it's not going to be easy to just drop it. So, if Sony had any brains at all, they'd go find some Danish script kiddie and give him all the dirt on how to crack AACS. Get it out in the open DeCSS style. Currently, the only AACS removal tool that works worth a darn is from Slysoft, and it's priced to sodomize. If there were free AACS-cracking tools out there then PC adoption would sky-rocket, and the users of other OS's, like Linux, might buy discs too if they could actually play them!
The same thing goes for leaking ways to easily hack the PS3 to bypass HDCP restrictions. This is just plain smart. If the PS3 were the only easily hackable set-top Bluray player on the market it would sell like hotcakes!
Finally, price the software to move. Good deals could be had during the format war, but they are few and far between these days. Some genius at Sony basically stated that Bluray software prices would be kept high because the sales volume wasn't high enough to justify lowering them. Where in the name of flaming-in-a-manger baby jesus did that guy take economics? Your product isn't selling as well as you hoped, so sit on your thumbs and blame consumers for not buying enough of it? Well played sir. Well played.
By definition, people who buy Blu Ray right now are early adopters. Early adopters on average will have higher EQ which means they realize that it's pointless to buy a movie that you will only watch once, particularly if it's $25+, and Netflix offers Blu Ray rentals for the same exact price as normal DVDs. I have a Blu Ray 1080p setup with 7.1 sound, and the only BDs I buy are cartoons, because my kid watches them every day, a hundred times in a row. Everything else comes from Netflix. I have sold off most of my DVD collection on half.com, too. I don't know why I bought all those DVDs in the first place.
DVD quality is more than adequate, it's better than I ever expected.
There are other technologies i'd like to see long before a 'higher-res DVD' tech.
More convenience would be nice -- like being able to view any item from my movie collection at the press of a button; ability to seamlessly transfer my movies around without having to deal with bulky disks or DRM restrictions.
It is not the Blue Ray DRM itself so much as the DRM between HD components in general. The fact that BluRay movies are HD tickles the nastiness in HD monitors and sound equipment. (Refusing to play because some HD component is not authorized or incompatible and the lodef fallback is missing or broken.)
I can't really add anything that hasn't already been mentioned. The two things that I did notice though and I couldn't agree more with (with some of my own views);
1: HDCP is a big part of it (we all know it's pointless anyway, movies aren't ripped and distributed via a capture card, so way to go to the idiots at intel who developed it, and the ignoramuses that wanted it developed. Not to mention the money that went into developing it.)
2: $30 a movie is also a big part. A lot of people say it's worth it because it's the best quality, but technology is always giving us the best quality that's available at the time. It's just that with the storage capacity of Blu-ray disc, for the first time it's possible to distribute the movies with practically the same quality as theaters (for the 2M pixel projectors) or really close (for the 4m pixel projectors and 4m pixel movies [are any movies 4M?]). Either way, it's always been the best possible, so even though it's several times better this time, it doesn't excuse the 30 dollars a movie price tag. And if nothing else, it's definitly been keeping me from starting my Blu-Ray collection.
The solution to the problem lies in;
1: Dropping HDCP (again, it's useless anyway, any torrent site or newsgroup will prove this)
2: Drop prices of the movies to DVD price range (for quality freaks that easily give into "The Man" Blu-Ray is a no questions solution, but for the people that don't care much, in this case it would come down to "hell, it's the same price, why not?")
3: Cheaper blu-ray players (They're actually not bad, but the less they cost, the more inclined people will be to buy them)
Well, when you can pick a DVD up for $10-20 or opt for blu-ray at $35, which would you pick for a movie you may only watch once or twice?
DVD vs VHS: VHS was old, bulky and looked worse. DVD was priced very close to VHS, but just a bit higher.
BR vs DVD: Well, BR just looks/sounds better if you have the system for it. BR is 30-35% more expensive, for a movie you may only watch once or twice.
They need to drop the prices, or drop DVD.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned iTunes. For me, downloading movies is the future, not physical media. It's convenient, it takes up little physical space, and pair it with something like an Apple TV and you can get it on your TV--although I personally prefer to watch movies on my computer anyways.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Both formats are much better than redbook audio cd, both in terms of sound quality and format (multi-channel beyond stereo), but they were both DOA. Why? At the same time the engineers were trying to figure out how to make better sound, the market chose convenience with *worse* audio (mp3) instead.
I have a couple of HDTV sets in the house, and the picture is great for the HD channels and my old DVDs, but I still spend more time watching grainy videos on youtube because of the convenience.
Blu-ray and HD-DVD are, ultimately, the video versions of sacd and dvd-audio.
Do you have ESP?
I've had a PS3 for 6 months now excited about equally for its gaming and blu-ray capabilities. I currently own 2 blu-ray discs and 2 games. Why, because it costs a fortune!! I have a DVD library of about 50 DVDs and I acquired most of them because "hey that was an okay movie and its only $5". With my new blu-ray player, I have to really think "is this movie worth my money" and I can't get my self to buy normal DVDs now because I feel like I'm wasting my money. So all in all, I guess I'm saving a lot of money now because I'm not buying anything. Go figure. Make those summer blockbuster Blu-ray discs $17 new and you'll have a consumer w/ that "what the hell, I'll buy it" mentallity again.
Can do it with DVDs and my iPhone - can't do it with Blu-Ray. Guess which one I'll continue buying?
And the latest ones don't appear to have Blu-ray, either, and since I watch all my movies on my computer, I won't be using Blu-ray until it comes standard with my computer.
Discs, even blanks cost too much.
Burners cost way too much, especially since with all the data that needs to be written on a Blu-Ray disc means room for lots of errors. Should an error occur, you're right back to the expensive blank discs.
Hence, burners and discs are too expensive since trying to store all MY movies on as few discs as possible would make the discs cost more than the burner itself.
Blu-Ray fails because Sony wants it to fail. If this were not true, why wouldn't it be more competitively priced? I can get 100 DVDs, almost 5gb a disc, for 500GB's total storage at the same cost of 1 Blu-Ray disc, 50GB.
The cost of production is really that much higher? No, Sony is just fucking stupid thinking a patent means they can overcharge on the $/GB rate.
If they made Blu-Ray movies as cheap as buying DVD versions then it would be a viable choice.I have a blu-ray burner in my PC, but pack of 3 blank dual-layer BDRW discs is still about $120!!! That HAS to be as a result of the MPAA fixing ludicrous pricing on media to discourage movie piracy, rather than actually justifiable as disc production costs. If so its particularly unfair as you still have to pay the MPAA tax even if you just want the discs to store your own data on.
Most people actually don't care about the higher res. of blu-ray for 3 reasons:
1) The price difference between the same movie on BD and DVD is a total rip=off.
2) They are not releasing that many new BDs when compared to DVDs, and are also trying to maximse sales of less popular movies on BD by holding back releasing even older blockbuster movies on BD such as Star Wars adnd Lord of the Rings. iThe point they don't get is that no-one wants to buy crap movies no matter how high resolution they are.
4)) The majority of people still dont even have the hardware to see the difference, even if they think they have bought a high def setup. THis is for two reasons: There's lots of non-technical consumers who still connect up even their HD equipment such as blu-ray players with RGB or SVGA cables, and because they see some kind of picture they think that it must be working properly.
Also significant extra confusion was caused by purposely misleading marketing of HDTV by tv manufacturers: There are still new digital TVs being sold that actually have native screen resolutions (pixel counts) so low that are phyiscally incapable of displaying a 720p (broadcast res HD) picture in full definition, let alone a 1080p (blu-ray res HD) one. Yet those same TVs are being sold with criminally misleading "HD-Ready" stickers all over them.
As far as I can make out, "HD-Ready" just means the TV will display some kind of a downscaled picture when plugged into an HD signal. It certainly doesn;t mean what you would reasonably think, that if given an HD signal it will actually display an HD picture. Unfortunately lots of buyers make the wrong assumption about those weasel words and of course the kid at Best Buy who gets paid based on sales performance isn't going to make any effort to correct them.
Consequently you can't blame people when they incorrectly conclude there's actually no difference between DVD quality and Blu-Ray quality, because in many cases they're not actually seeing any difference.
High definition big screen vacation video will make everybody sea sick. Who wants to lug along a tripod on their vacation?
I'm arguing this from the perspective of the average consumer, but I'll share my own reasons for not caring about Blu-Ray at the end of my post.
Firstly, why is it worth so much more? My eyesight isn't 20/20, so differences in resolution mean less to me. Or I'm not perceptive enough to notice them. Even then, why is it worth THAT much more? I've seen Blu-Ray movies in the store that cost nearly double that of the same movie on DVD, surely they're not nearly twice as great of a viewing experience on most people's televisions? Not to mention the players -- $300 gets you an entry level player. That's for 1080P resolution. You can get an 1080P Upconverting player for about $50-100 now, and a Progressive Scan player for about $30. For most movies, is the difference between upscaling and "natively" being in 1080P on the disc that big of a difference in quality? (Most movies, I imagine they just software-upscale before mastering the discs.)
Honestly, the resolution issue is part of why I haven't upgraded yet. I get complimented on my cable box outputting 480i to a front-projector (max resolution 1024x768) and being displayed where a pixel is about the size of a quarter, and people compliment me on my fine HDTV. I haven't bothered to spend the $50 for a special pigtail combination to get native component inputs on the thing with that in mind, I just don't see that much of a difference from when I *did* have it hooked up HD before I moved and lost the cables. The player costs about three days of work for me, and the movies so much more that I'd probably only rent them -- I don't even buy DVDs now because of their price, preferring to use Blockbuster for one-offs. Why should I invest that kind of money into something when the benefit isn't really that big?
One day you'll wake up and you won't remember that BTTF wasn't on HD-DVD, because it will always have been. Get it?
A pound is a unit of force, as you said. However, a unit of mass is a lb mass, which equals 1/32.2 slug.
(Consistent metric units are so much nicer.)
The average consumer may not understand DRM - but they do understand "I need to buy a new TV" and "It won't even play on my next PC unless I buy a new monitor as well".
I saw my first sub GBP 20 HD movie (UK prices are a ripoff) in HMV the other day. I'd have considered buying it - if I didn't also need a new drive (understandable) AND a new monitor for my PC (inexcusable). Not going to replace my 26", no-HDCP monitor any time soon.
Paul "Say no to feeping creaturism"
To most people that don;t have an HDTV yet or have gotten a DVD player that upconverts to *basically* HD quality, they see no need to upgrade their entire movie collection /again/ after they have already done it once in their lifetime from VHS to DVD.
However unlike that transition DVDs are still a viable media that will not degrade as quickly over time and with multiple uses.
How about they tried something different for a change, like for instance lowering the price on the discs for a change?
Blu-ray's are over priced, in that people are not willing to pay that high a premium for the added resolution.
They should try and see what would happen if they sold BD's at the same price as DVD's, sacrifice a little bit of profit to save the format.
Besides, what good is a Blu-ray if you don't have a HD screen, which are only really coming down in price now.
DVD = $15
HD-DVD = $25
BD with competition = $25
BD without competition = $35
And they wonder why we dont want to play their game.
and so far no BlueRay movies.
Why? Well a premiere DVD movie costs 200DKR ($40), a premiere BlueRay costs 300DKR - playing a DVD on my PS3 on my 40" TV looks absolutely beautiful - BlueRay would probably look nicer, but definitely not 50% better.
Also the BlueRay market is very limited around here, even shops specializing in music and movies carry a very limited set of BlueRay movies.
When the prices for BlueRay starts to drop below 150DKR then I'll be buying, but I wont even pay the 200 for a premiere movie, so there is no way I'd ever pay 300 for one.
Yeah I see a lot of moaning and groaning, but not really any ATTEMPTS to find the cheaper Blu-Ray stuff.
Have any of you tried amazon.com? If not do so, because I get my blu-ray stuff there and cheaper. I pay the EXACT same amount as it came out for DVD back then, so I really don't see the reason to fuss. Many of you probably have HDTVs, many of you don't. I personally like a physical copy over digital downloads, and I hope to god that Blu-ray and Internet downloads stay co-existant.
As usual, broader issues are not examined, like what releases have come out in the past few weeks to a month.
There are lots of customers waiting to buy Blu-Ray discs, but we also won't buy just anything just because it's released on BD.
"upscaled dvd's are JUST FINE"
Yeah, if you have macular degeneration or perhaps you jabbed a pencil in your eye.
I'm not saying BluRay is the answer, but saying upscaled DVD's looks good makes you either blind or you're on a religious war.
The real answer is for sony to drop the prices of the movies, but Sony is stupid and would rather go out of business on principle than do right by consumers and make money. It's just not their way.
I have a BluRay player and a TrueHD telly; I just don't see the point in buying all the stuff I have on DVD again on BluRay, not unless it's something I really like and the HD version would be worth it - everything else just upscales fine.
I think the only DVD/BluRay duplicate I've done so far is Bladerunner - I'm losing track of the number of copies of that I have. Star Wars I'd probably buy as well, if they ever release them on BluRay.
So really the only things I'm interested in buying are new films on BluRay; there's only a limited number of those I actually like enough to want to buy them. Otherwise I shall just rent them from LoveFilm. Same as for DVDs, really.
Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
Blu-Ray discs and players are much too expensive. They should be only slightly more costly than DVD.
You have completely forgotten to mention the ultimate reason for us Blu-Ray haters to hate Blu-Ray, it's named DRM, Digital Restrictions Management!
Nope, covered that in a different post.
I guess your point is by decreasing the price average Joe, who doesn't know about the DRM shit, will be fooled to buy Blu-Ray, and we Blu-Ray haters loose.
I am saying nothing about price. I am saying everything about cost. And availaiblity. I am saying that in three years Blu-Ray "wins" because the only disc player you can buy is a Blu-Ray player, or a used DVD player. When everyone has blu-ray players it's pretty obvious it has won.
Then discs will naturally follow, because companies will eventually ship all movies on Blu-Ray when the costs are the same. Why wouldn't they? Thus in five years all discs you buy are Blu-Ray discs. There is no "battle" like with HD-DVD (though again there was hardly a battle there to begin with anyway) because the result is already obvious.
And DRM haters (like myself, which is why I did not include that group) can be thankful because with Blu-Ray, the DRM is going the right way for once. There are fewer regions. And there are mainstream titles shipping with no region control at all (in fact after a year a movie is not supposed to inlcude it). If you hate DRM, welcome some semblance of sense into the video market with Blu-Ray.
This is all better than DVD which had way too many regions and thus made getting a region free player so mandatory. With Blu-Ray it doesn't matter as much.
Sure it has some new super duper protection on the disc - that's already been cracked, just as all such protections always are. It seems pretty pointless to me to get upset over something that has no effect on my life, and a cracked DRM is one of those things. The guys who should be upset are the idiots that paid for all that to be developed. You think they would have learned with DVD. Just wait until you see whatever scheme they have cocked up (mispelling or not? You decide) for holographic storage....
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I think for region 1 ( BR region A) people this is not an issue, but to other it's quite a problem. I live in europe, but I'm used to shop movies from region 1 webshops. Now I have to give it up or buy second player for region A. I'm not even sure, can i watch my reg 1 DVD-s with my brand new shiny region B blu-ray player? Our country was in region 5. Dammit, now its in region B. I'm afraid that now i have to keep even my region free dvd-player. I can live somehow with DRM, but the region stuff is EVIL.
You guys seem to forget that area when DVD players were expensive too. It was only after the DRM was cracked and region locking was cracked and the players were mass produced in china for tiny sums did player prices plumet. I don't get it all these people complaining about The jump isnt that big, downloads are the future. firstly, baing that download quota is limited for me, it would annoy me to have to have hidden costs in purchasing something and then having to download it. The ability for me to have physical media is a bonus for me, wanna watch a movie at a mates? take the disc or spend time downloading the content from my account etc etc secondly blu ray is progression its an incremental step into better quality. you didnt expect to be watching dvd quality things forever now did you?
...where can I download it?
Do not trust this signature.
Sony's problem here is one of branding. Bear with me for a minute.
They have world class engineers that expand the scope of human knowlege. They invent stuff. They embed their technology into products. And then they slap the "Sony" brand on them.
Their problem is that there's no more reliable brand for failure of a new medium than "Sony". You can't engineer your way out of this social problem. Because we've all been burned so many times by buying our content on the new Sony format, only to have to buy it again in the format that's become the standard, the "Sony" brand is certain death for a new content medium. They can fix this. I had hoped they'd offer me a few mil for this wisdom, but they didn't offer now I'll give it for free. They can pay for the next one.
For the next medium, they need to take their engineers working on a new media format and assign them to a product group. Then they need to isolate that group and spin it off into a wholly owned subsidiary. Then they need to create the usual three-times indirect shield of layers of corporate ownership that wind up with an untraceable "investment group" that buys the subsidiary. Then they need to release the new medium with no mention of the Sony origins or ownership.
By careful press they can pretend to compete against the new medium with their usual lame efforts with their hardware arm, while licensing content for it with their media arm.
Finally, once the new medium is fully accepted in the marketplace they can "buy" their subsidiary and take ownership of the related hardware IP. Perhaps in time they can admit that it was all a sham.
This is the only way they're going to get people to buy content on a new format they invent.
Oh, and they can forget the DRM... or they can buy my awesome and customer friendly DRM technology that people will accept. (work with me here.... Don't spoil the joke.)
Help stamp out iliturcy.
They made a Fantastic Four II? Wow! That producer must have some major Cajones!
Did it make you blind?
Hey, watch it buddy! I'm not ancient, yet!
Damn whippersnapper kids! No respect!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-VHS Quote from wikipedia: "Despite its designation as the logical successor to VHS, S-VHS did not come close to replacing VHS. In the home market, S-VHS failed to gain significant market share; for various reasons, consumers were not interested in paying more for an improved picture. Likewise, S-VHS rentals and movie sales did very poorly." I think what the industry failed to learn from S-VHS was that you need a true quantum leap to lure consumers away from an established standard media (be that DVD or VHS). Alternatively, if you can make it both compatible and equal in price or cheaper, people may eventually upgrade.
Short-term they should just sell it for the same price as a DVD. Or move all the Extra Features to the Blu-ray so there's more "value" to be gained by buying that version. This is a screw the customer move, but you'd expect that. But all this HD stuff is way over priced for the general consumer and is a luxury product.
Th percentage of the market that even cares about DRM so long as they can insert a disc into the player and watch the film is minimal. On the other hand, probably 20% of Slashdot readers actually care, but the remaining 80% have one program or another to crack it anyway.
DRM is certainly not the problem. If anything, it helps the format since movie studios won't even release films for a format if they don't believe they have at least some protection. It's a stupid argument of course. It's like saying the studios won't use buy a new fire proof vault unless it has a lock on it which 80% of the people likely to want to break into it had a master key for it.
The studios are torn between either not supporting the format at all or supporting a format which at least "keeps the honest people honest".
The studios are not naive, they already know that every film they release will in fact be ripped and pirated every which way but loose, but the shareholders of their companies aren't quite so bright and thanks to organizations like the MPAA crying that studio profit growth is only 8% per annum instead of 50% because of piracy as opposed to the real arguments such as :
- Less than 10% of new films each year don't suck
- Every breathing person on the planet has already purchased all the older movies they're actually interested in.
- The consumer actually only has $XXX.XX to spend on DVDs in a year.
believe that film studio investments are less lucrative than they should be. Therefore, the shareholders are demanding that the studios at least make an attempt to protect their property.
The only real fear attached to DRM is that it will require a phone home system in the future which will make it so that players don't actually contain the decryption keys needed to play the films.
This is not a great fear yet since unless the studios include some sort of GSM or other wireless modem in every single portable player, a phone home system is not likely to work.
Can anyone say DRM? Consumers do not like DRM and thus are not buying Blu-Ray. The poor economy is also a factor.
Why are they buying DVD then?
I don't "invest" in movies anymore. No point in buying them if I'll only watch them once. Music, on the other hand, is something I will not tolerate any DRM on, precisely because I buy it and listen to it many, many times.
Everything was great up until recession. I worked in a film company for a few years and they're banking on the recession to make BluRay happen.
Here's why....
Jim Bob, your average Walmart employee is actually their #1 sales target. In fact, they depend on Jim Bob for quite a few reasons :
- He couldn't figure out how to pirate a film even if you gave him incentives like threatening to break his beer fridge on his porch.
- He places strange values on entertainment. After all he spent $200 on his new truck, $500 on his fake chrome wheels, $99 on his new paint job, but $1500 on his high end audiovox stereo system with three 18" subwoofers.
- He's lost his job to those [insert derogatory name for a minority group here] and now that he's receiving his pay checks from the unemployment office once a month instead of every week, he gets much bigger amounts in each payment. So, now he finally has enough money in one go to buy that 42" plasma and BluRay combo which will free up nearly 2/3s of his living room in his trailer, so he might be able to fit a couch next to his lay-z-boy imatation recliner. So he can even invite friends over to play XBox and drink beer.
- He realized that he can be the hottest thing at the local bar when he says "I just watched that at home on my new HIGH.... DEF... TV and Blu-Ray". When the other guys then say things like "Yeh, I heard about them things... I heard the movie is like much better on that".
I can go on and on like that forever, but the company I worked for knows one thing... it's only the middle class that spends less on entertainment budgets during recession, the lower class actually spends more since "It's too expensive to go out to the bar right now, I'll just (rent|buy) a new movie and a 6-pack for the house".
Make the blu-rays a little bit cheaper than DVDs, now now now. I much rather buy blu-ray, but like most of us I'm not a rich person, can't have those kind of blu-ray prices.
If I want to go to buy a new BD in the UK at a shop it is £25. 'Nuff said.
If you don't see people buying movies - maybe you should release some good movies?
Star Wars Trilogy (the original one): No
Lord of the Rings Trilogy: No
Indiana Jones: No
How many good movies you see on this list:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates_historical.html
Start releasing the good stuff, and people might actually buy your movies. I don't quite feel like running to the store and paying premium to get my hands on Gigi when it comes out.
They took up a lot of shelf space and it was annoying me. SO I bought a NAS box and ripped all the decent ones onto it. The physical DVDs then got moved to ebay or the loft.
Now whenever I want to watch a film I just click it from any of my PCs on desks, under my TV, on my old XBMC'd xbox etc. If I'm going on a plane I just have a browse of what I fancy and then drag it onto my ipod.
Basically I have my films - and a load of devices I can play any of them on. I'm happy.
I am quite tempted by BR. HD does look a lot better, but I'll be damned if I'm going to start filling my shelves again or rebuy the missing pixels from my favourite films.
Next point is that when DVD came out the picture on my TV was better than anything I'd seen before. If I wanted that picture, or anything like it, I had to buy a DVD player and DVDS. PC attached to my TV cost $500ish and has HDMI/TOS outputs and is a PC to boot. It'll happily crunch through 1080p x264 video. It does it for me every day. So why would I be tempted to spend pretty much the same again on a decent BR/PS3 player and then buy all those locked down BR disks to give me pretty much the same effect?
In addition my cable operator lets me stream HD on demand to my PVR. *browse menu* *watches animals running about planet earth in 1080*
To summarize I see BR units on demo cycle in shops and I go "Oh yes, isn't that pretty - but I can already do that on my TV." With that realization the urge to throw money over the counter is massively reduced.
I agree. In the UK you see the price climb to about 20-25 pounds for a blue-ray. It is really not worth it, I won't buy a disc at that price. Period. If they lower the price to about 5-10 pounds then I will.
Find a job you love, and never work a day in your life.
the problem is that dvd players are £20, and blu-ray players are £200. nobody is going to spend 10x as much on a player, then spend nearly 3x as much on the disks to play in that player when you cant play them on a non-hd tv, and if you spend £40 on a new upscalling hdmi dvd player, you generally cant tell the difference between the £6 dvd and the £22 blu-ray disk.
portfolio
High definition video is a DRM-clogged thicket and statistically negligible. It's all in low-res these days - YouTube and so on. That's because convenience wins, every time.
Someone must be making a fortune telling executives that consumers will buy what the execs want instead of what the consumers want.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
The problem is that DVD is good enough for most people except a small minority of technomasturbaters. It has excellent sound, pretty good framerate and nice resolution.
HD content adds very little to the overall experience if you dont read plate numbers on cars a hundred yards behind the actors.
HTTP/1.1 400
It isn't perfect. It always defaults to language 1 and no subtitles and occasionally some avis randomly stop 10 seconds in unless I re-encode them but I'm really impressed.
Well, I just bought 360 HDDVD player and some movies(Batman Begins,BladeRunner) and they were dirt cheap! I got weird looks from people when I was buying HDDVD player! I'm one those people that like old tech(Laser Disc), also my first car was a 79 Impala and it still had the 8 track deck, so i went to a hand me down store and bought a box full of 8 tracks for a couple bucks!
... especially right now when lots of people all over the industrialised countries are worried about their savings and mortgages.
People don't know and don't care about the DRM. What they care about is that DVD is pretty good and:
DVD player: ~ GBP 20
Blu-ray player: GBP 200
DVD movie: GBP 5-10 (and sometimes real bargains)
Blu-ray movie: GBP 15-25 (no good bargains)
Is it any wonder Blu-ray is struggling?
I have a HDTV and I really do fancy a Blu-ray player but I can't justify this cost to the wife at the moment when our cheap mortgage deal is just about to expire and all of our bills have increased.
Disclaimer: I own a PS3 and originally 'hated' blue-ray, I am now a convert.
The factors influencing this are many, for one the crazy deals on discs are (to my knowledge) not as good as they were during the war, competition makes for good bargains.
Also the economy is going down the gurgler, while it may not be disctinctively apparent to all people, things are slowly but surely changing, as well as media attention to the bottom dollar and credit debt, people are slowly (and finally!) becoming aware that blowing money is not smart.
I also believe blu-ray does not offer a vastly superior experience to DVD, it's superior in my mind, no questions asked but it requires (IMHO) at least a 42" HD television and ideally 50" or more to truely gain the benefits of the format.
Ultimately I am quite confident blu-ray will succeed however.
I do not, in any way want OR believe that downloadable movies will win (yet). The facts of the matter are that until very high speed internet is as common as a power socket in the wall, internationally - it simply won't occur.
Blu ray is a minor upgrade to DVD and it's currently too pricey but I do however believe, much like the HD TV sets required, it will slowly but surely be adopted as simply a replacement for existing 'broken' DVD players or as an upgrade, 'maybe one day' - it's not a "MUST HAVE" that DVD clearly was.
Sony (and the other companies involved with blu-ray) simply need to be patient, much like the PS3, this is going to be a long term investment which eventually pays off.
In 5 years time DVD may be 40% of the market, in 10 years time I believe it'll be 75% or 90% of the market, long time to make their money back but it will become (again IMHO) the final optical disc format.
In a full 10 years time, when (if) the economy and technology get over the large bump we're about to face, then and only then may downloadable movies truely replace a simple, easy piece of plastic.
Note: this piece of plastic can be sold anywhere, Kmart Texas, Safeway Sydney, Airport Singapore and it'll work anywhere you have the infrastructure to play it (television, blu-ray player)
Downloadable stuff requires an internet connected device which is authorised to be on the internet (ISP) to speak with a server that's authorised to download the content (account on server) - setting this up internationally, with all the movie houses and their laws, copyright crap, region coding rubbish and release date bullshit is going to be a nightmare, it will happen but this alone will cause blu-ray to go well.
So to summarise, blu-ray will dominate but it's going to be a very slow process and I do believe ultimately profitable.
When looking at my favorite mailorder shop, Blu-Ray media start at 6.49 Euros for 25 GByte. At the same time, they offer the Seagate FreeAgent Desktop Drive 500 GB (external hard disk) for 77 Euros. So you get more GByte/Euro with the external hard disk, and in a more convenient package too.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Isn't the real problem that with a million TV channels on cable/satellite now and dozens of video streaming options, there just aren't enough hours in the day to watch it all. As the technology gets better for streaming from computer to TV - maybe the next incarnation of Windows Home Server, or similar - people will be playing direct from hard drive more and there will be no need for DVD-R, much less a HD replacement like BluRay.
Real happiness lies in the completion of work using your own brains and skills.
MP3 killed the CD. I think you all know what is killing blu ray AND the DVD.
Once there is an "itunes" for movies that offers non-drm hi-def movies (and there WILL be one, it's just a matter of time), then the transition will be complete.
Personally, if I have to leave my desk to get a movie, I don't bother.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Most people have a home PC capable of displaying HD content, at least 720p, but DRM makes it impossible to play back blue ray on most PC's.
A lot of people own HD camera's but DRM makes it impossible to play back their HD content on a Blue ray set.
A lot of people have media center setups, but DRM makes blu ray useless there.
A lot of people have video projectors with DVI vga or svga connectors capable of displaying HD content, but DRM makes blu ray useless for them.
Why not just take the cheap road as I have done..
I aint buying a BD standalone player, but I have an old-ish PC kicking about, so I have hooked that upto my TV through VGA which gives me 1080i and then im going to pick up an LG Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drive for £60...
That way I get to watch my HD-DVD's that i got before they fell over without using my 360, and i can pick up the odd movie on blu-ray that would be worth watching in hi-def.. and ive only dropped £60 for it... not too bad.
really - you mean "I couldn't care less".
Jaso
> Consumers are for the most part too ignorant to care about dvd based DRM. However with blu-ray disks, i cannot picture the average consumer ...
Had a buddy who bought a massive Plasma TV screen and a media centre PC runnning Vista. He said the DRM was a real pain, because Vista only accepts certain drivers as 'DRM secure'. I remember one night we were trying to watch a legal BluRay movie on a legal Vista distro with legal drivers on a MCPC he owned, and not being able to do it. Media Companies and Microsoft who serves them (not us) went a bridge too far on this one.
Watching him I figured better to stick with DVDs.
Not only that, the $30 noname DVD player has a USB connector and can play MPEG4/XviD/DivX files from a USB hard disk.
So I can free, open media, or be locked into a SONY manager's utopia? Not a hard decision.
No sig today...
My DVD purchasing has actually declined due to blu-ray. Ill still pick up the cheap "interesting" stuff from the bargain bin's but ill actually avoid buying certain films on DVD as my thought process "That's a film id rather own when it comes out on Blu-Ray". Over here (UK) the blu-ray selection even in places like HMV is pretty minimal.
Lets face it - the economies are pretty screwed at the moment and we are all feeling it. Id say blu-ray isnt the only thing that's been seeing a decline in sales...
N.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
I'm thinking the $25-$30 per disc is keeping more Average Joes away from Blu Ray than DRM is.
I go to places that sell Blu-Ray disks as well as DVDs, and I see lots of DVDs for $15, and the same exact movies on Blu-Ray are over $25. No way Jose.
There are maybe just a very small handful of movies that I'd pay $25 for, but I've bought hundreds of movies on DVD for an average of $15 each or so.
I agree with the other comments. An upsampled DVD looks pretty darn good, and the improvement with Blu-Ray isn't worth an extra $10 per disk, not when you buy as many movies as I do. I couldn't afford my collection of movies at Blu-Ray prices.
They need relatively cheap (sub-$200) players, and a Blu-Ray premium of no more than $1-2 per disk over the price of a DVD, or this format will die and fade into obscurity. You cannot grow a format like this while pricing the consumables so high customers just shake their head and walk away.
Ironically, I'm better off downloading movies than buying Bluray movies. I can put movies bought on iTunes on my iPod; I can only play Bluray movies in my PS3. So tell me again: Why would I want to own a physical copy?
Personally, I have bought two Bluray discs. They're both hand-drawn animated movies I ordered online because no store had them. In my opinion, these are the only types of movies where the improvement in visual quality actually warrants the price and hassle of Bluray.
I've gone to the store with the intention of buying a Bluray movie a ton of times. After walking down the aisles of crappy movies released on Bluray, I've eventually bought the cheaper, rippable DVD each time.
Paprika and Tekkonkinkreet. For live-action movies, the difference in visual quality isn't worth the price of Bluray.
Woa. It's almost as if consumers still have some power. Although, one would expect that back-room power-deals would be able to dictate consumer behavior, wouldn't one?
Requiem for the American Dream
I just bought a 46" LCD TV the other day, my first HDTV. It will do 1080p resolution, though I've never seen a 1080p signal. All of my HD cable channels are either 720p or 1080i. They look amazing compared to standard definition TV. I don't think that I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080i when viewing from 8 feet away, let alone 1080p.
When I was buying the TV I wanted to get another DVD player so that the old DVD player could move upstairs to my bedroom with the old CRT television. The salespeople steer me to the Blue-Ray players (obviously). I look at the $399 price tag and laugh. He says "Well, we have this less expensive model over here" and points to a $379 player. I laugh even harder. I honestly haven't looked at the different Blu-Ray players to see what's what, but I find it odd that all of them are exactly $399. There's no price differentiation except for the "store brand" model. I ended up quickly picking up an upconverting DVD player for $70 instead.
Why? Well, it's $330 cheaper for starters. Secondly, upconverted content looks really good. It may not be the same quality as Blu-Ray, but the difference wasn't that discernible from the in-store displays, and watching upconverted DVD content on my TV looks as good as most of the HD cable content that I watch. Then of course there's the movie prices, they're twice what DVD's cost for only a minor improvement in quality. It's odd, but after 2 years of being out Blu-Ray still feels very "bleeding edge" at the moment. Especially after HD-DVD folded I expected Blu-Ray adoption to increase, and I hoped (perhaps against reason) that the increase the production quantity would bring prices down. I was wrong there.
One other thing that really bothers me is that the $399 price seems "fixed" or artificial. You can buy a PS3 for $399, and it includes a Blu-Ray player. Or you can buy a Blu-Ray player for $399. Doesn't it seem like the stand-alone player should be cheaper than the PS3? It's almost like Sony wants to keep the prices higher so that people opt for the PS3 instead, but I'm not really a gamer. I'm not really much of a fan of Sony either, to be honest. All of their DRM infected CDs and other nonsense that they go through to try to force monopolistic, proprietary standards on people really rubs me the wrong way.
I can't help but think its a matter of standardisation. Why do most people listen to music in mp3? There are formats with better quality sound and compression but at the end of the day mp3 has become a standard that will play on just about any modern media device. Ditto for DVD--you can play them on your DVD player, laptop, PC, xbox, PS2/3, car system etc etc. There are better ways to get movies, sure, but DVD is the most likely to work.
And don't discount the ease of copying DVDs. I know a LOT of people who 'back-up' their DVDs and many of them know jack shit about computers--they just bought a program on the internet or overseas and it does it all for them. Easy, cheap, effective. Thats what people want at the end of the day.
Is this from the Rick Romero newsdesk of the "bleeding obvious"?
Putting crap on Blu-Ray doesn't turn it into a masterpiece, it's still crap. How much is a blu-ray movie disc these days?
It never fails to amaze me how exec's still seem to believe they can push crap into the marketplace and people will buy it like sheep simply because it has a new name and a cool logo attached to it.
Wake me up when the hd tv format wars have ended and some stations actually broadcast full hd 24x7 outside of some indefinite beta trial phase, then I might think again about ditching good old PAL and my dvd player.
Ever wondered whats wrong with the world? http://www.ishmael.org/
Just yesterday I was at a consumer electronics store and there was this full HD big TV hooked-up to a bluray player. The demo disc at one point showed a "side by side" look of what a DVD-quality and a "blueray-quality" version of the same scene looked like.
Problem is, you could tell that DVD version was clearly just a gaussian blur, and the bluray one had maybe a bit too much sharpening applied.
No way a really sharp, uncompressed DVD-quality scene would look that bad, that was just a bad tactic to lure the sheep ...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have a BluRay player (PS3).
I own two BluRay movies.
I can honestly tell you that the reason I don't buy more movies on BluRay is directly related to the idiotic sales practices involved. The moment that HD-DVD died, my local Fry's increased the price of BluRay movies from $18-22 to $22-29.
Why bother adopting a new format if it costs that much more than the existing format?
The lead time between VHS/Beta and DVD was very long indeed by today's standards. Joe Public just gets settled into DVD, $2.99 cheap movies from CostCo and then the vendors want to pump Blu-Ray into the home and get us to replace out large libraries. The other problem is that to the average person, the difference between VHS and DVD is massive, however, given the cost the difference between DVD and BR, is just not worth it!
I refused to buy them.
Blar.
Blu-ray sucks, sony sucks, and the players and content are way overpriced. DRM is just a bonus, in the way that getting AIDS from a prostitute is a bonus. Good riddance. Im a sad panda that HD-DVD lost the format war...
You might have noticed that a lot of network television shows have gone to widescreen format. Same thing for lots of movies on DVD. On your 27" 4:3 clunker you have black bars at the top and bottom of the screen, leaving the people 6" tall. On my 32" 16:9 HDTV that show fills the properly shaped screen, covering about four times the area.
Like I said, 32" isn't big. I specifically chose that size to match the 16" screen height of my old 27" standard definition CRT. Anything bigger would overwhelm my modest apartment. What I gained was a few inches of horizontal space (making the whole screen useable for widescreen sources) and six times the pixels.
It's the principle. I don't like my equipment being empowered to stop me from using it's features because it 'thinks' I'm infringing on someone's copyright.
Maybe I'm a minority, but as guy with over 300 DVDs...they'd love to have me as a customer.
Blar.
Every one knows, even the average consumer, that optical storage is a thing of the past. No moving parts is the next thing. Blu-ray makes no sense. It's a slight upgrade of yesterday's technology at tomorrow's prices. And don't forget, in order to get true image quality, you have to upgrade your screen, wires, video card, and monitor (assuming you want to watch on the computer. Makes no sense. You can buy a 500 gig drive for the price of three blu-ray discs. A 500 gig drive coupled with a hot swappable 30 dollar enclosure and you've saved your self hundreds of dollars on storage. But even spinning hard discs will soon be on their way out as solid-state drives take over. Buying into blu-ray technology now is as dumb as buying a stereo cassette deck 5 years ago or an LP record player 10 years ago. Also the average consumer may not know what drm is, but they know that there are too many restrictions. The DRM only screws up paying customers, where as the the limewire, bittorrent crowd can play their movies anywhere, anytime, in any country, and on any computer or home theater without the need for expensive and costly upgrades.
Too.
Fucking.
Expensive.
I have a PS3, and *one* blu-ray disc, "300", which Amazon had for $15, which is the absolute upper limit I'll pay. Never saw anything again at that price, and coincidentally, I never bought another disc.
$30 for a blu-ray? Yeah. No thanks. Keep it. My ordinary DVDs look just fine to me, especially when upconverted on the PS3/HDMI.
-- http://frobnosticate.com
"Can anyone recommend a movie - that when you watch it on blu-ray you say "awesome ... that was worth it!"
Planet Earth It is an AMAZING series and is glorious in HD. The Video is stunning, and has many jaw dropping moments / scenes. I would hightly recommend the BluRay (or HD-DVD as they are from the same master) over the DVD. As a point of comparison I linked the Amazon search so you could see the "Premium" that's charged on a new set is $4. (Used on the other hand has a much larger gap).
...and really, with the economy the way it is, and everyone having to modify their TV's, do we really need another format change?
I think not.
teleny, friend of cats.
I recall when every 5th article on Slashdot was another "Bluetooth is dying, Bluetooth is dead" article. So it was limited and slow to adapt but it's still far from dead.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
I'm a minority in this area, in that I wouldn't mind re-buying my movies to get a boost in video quality. (Well, at least the titles that are worth it.)
But I STILL won't buy Blu-ray, because it's more than just buying a player, like it was with all other formats. My projector won't do HDCP shit, and I'm not about to shell out another $8,000 for an equivalent projector. The one I have is 4 years old, and I don't think I'm quite ready to get a new one.
So it's no doubt why Blu-ray isn't getting wide acceptance! It just won't work short of re-buying EVERYTHING. It will eventually pick up, as people finally buy a new TV or projector or what not, but that's gonna be a long time.
The original animated one is special, it was true to the characters of the TV shows and the models of the toys.
The new movie? It's a fucking car commercial.
Blar.
It is now possible to buy a DVDR/VHS combo unit with HDMI output and upconversion/scaling capability for $89.00 - and the video output looks pretty damn good.
Sure, it doesn't look as good as my friend's PS3 on his 50" Pioneer Kuro - but those very same DVDs play in my car, on my portable unit, and can easily be extracted and put on my AppleTVs.
Why would I spend much more for a format that has a bit better picture quality, but a lot LESS functionality?
-ted
I don't know what the latest #'s are but after this past holiday/superbowl season, HDTV penetration was only 25% in the US. Which means that the consumer base for blu-ray disks is only a quarter of the market for DVDs.
The real question is whether blu-ray will entrench itself prior to downloadable HD movies becoming popular. Yes, I know blu-ray is a much better quality than downloadable HD right now. But its not always about quality, sometimes it is simply about "good enough". That is why people are currently satisfied with upscaled DVDs.
Compared to Bluray, upscaled DVD looks like crap on a big HD set and I have a VERY good upscaling player not some $30 crap. If you have an HDTV then get a Bluray player and join Netflix. It's the ONLY way to go. I've seen about 30 Bluray titles for $60 bucks.
"Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
Can anyone say DRM? Consumers do not like DRM and thus are not buying Blu-Ray. The poor economy is also a factor.
That is one issue, but for me the biggest killer is region encoding. As long as I can buy my disk in any country I like and play it in the player of any other country, then I am happy. For me the defeating of CSS on DVDs meant that software applications could be written to ignore the region encoding. The fact I could copy the DVD didn't really rank that high on my list of wants.
With regards to Blu-ray, I have other stuff I want to spend my money on. I have a nice 27" flat screen TV and the DVDs play quite nicely. I will join the Blu-ray generation when the prices make it a no brainer and the market has already shifted. The other thing to take into account is that there are other optical disks, with higher storage capacity just round the corner, in the form of 'holographic disks'.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Lower the price so that's it's the same cost as DVD's or less and people will buy. I don't buy them unless I get them from Amazon when they have a 50% off sale on Blu-Ray, no way will I pay a premium for a movie just because of the format, higher resolution or not (which lots of the older movies actually look WORSE on Blu Ray).
There's really no reason to buy a old movie on the blu-ray format when you can get it on DVD. The image quality can only be improved so much before you have to obey the garbage in, garbage out principles.
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
the majority (mass market) of consumers don't care about DRM. they care about features like extras, and high def audio and video quality.
the problem is price. the players are stupid expensive. it's quite obvious why bluray isn't selling. getting sub $200 players is a start. but it's still about 3-4x too much. they need to compete with all the other methods of video playback - including DVD, which is of similar quality to most people (since people either can't tell, or have small TVs).
price.
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
if they were serious about bluray they'd make it cost the same as DVD, and phase out DVD a few years later.
instead they gouge with the price. $600 players and $30 disks. they're smoking crack if they don't know why no one's buying this.
another way to sell bluray to the public is to offer free (or cheap) replacement of existing DVD collections. this would get people moved over, and thus dependent, on the format.
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
> "... and cheap Blu-ray players that cost
> less than $200."
Cheap... cheap compared to what? Cheap compared to a standard DVD player that you can get for £17 ($34). BlueRay as a format is failing because BluRay players are still expensive compared to DVD players.
Concerning the DRM issue. Most people (non slashdotters) don't care about DRM. They want to buy a DVD and play it on thier DVD player.
In our house, we have three DVD players.... before I start buying BluRay discs as the default, ALL three players will have to be BluRay capable. Cost is still the main issue.
return 0; }
It has component video inputs, I have helios labs h4000 dvd player that upscales to 1080i over component video. I'll wait until I need a new tv set to upgrade. Maybe when they come out with a blu-ray player with a tru2way tuner for digital cable tv. Give me something I dont already have.
I have a reasonably nice TV (720p Sony Bravia) and a PS3 as a blu-ray player. I have a nice little collection of blu-ray movies. I LOVE the increased fidelity of the image. It isn't just the resolution - it is the lack of compression artifacts, increased color depth (no banding), etc. that makes watching a blu-ray movie so much more satisfying and enjoyable than watching the same movie on DVD.
Watch Dark City on DVD and on Blu-Ray -- the difference is startling. I am at the point now where I am getting increasingly reluctant to watch a movie on DVD - the image is just so soft and filled with distracting image artifacts.
Now, I would buy more blu-ray movies, but here is the problem for me: There have not been any really GOOD movies coming out this whole summer. What a long dry spell for the home movie enthusiast. Just about every new film released this summer has been awful dreck - insipid teen movies, bad comedies, crappy "paycheck" dramas, etc. I keep going every week, wanting to get a new movie, and I keep coming away empty handed because I just cannot bring myself to buy the junk that keeps getting released. The high point of this month is going to be "Iron Man". I bet the sales of that blu-ray release go through the roof.
planet texture maps and more
I agree with most of the community here and I will not get BluRay player. If there is a movie with great effects I will go to the theater. If I want to see a movie because of the "content" - the deep idea of the movie - then the DVD quality is enough for me and I will prefer the cosy environment at home.
Where does the BluRay fit?
Let's see - I have a 32" TV. It's probably 10 years old, but works fine. I don't see any real need to upgrade, so Blu-Ray (or heck, Upscaling) does nothing for me. I wonder how many people are in the same boat?
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
I was an early-ish adopter of HDTV, getting a rear projection screen in 2002. The TV served me well, but only served up 480i, 480p, 1080i signals. It only had component inputs (2 of them) and a bunch of standard non HD inputs. I had already hooked up my Xbox and cable box to the HD inputs. I wasn't about to buy a new receiver that could switch the inputs. I didn't even consider Blu-Ray because my TV wasn't 1080p and the Xbox 360 does a decent job of rendering typical DVDs.
However, just today, my TV finally broke - completely. 6 years in and the blue went all whacky for 3 days and now the picture is toast. Is it fixable? Probably, but given the typical repairs on a HDTV, probably would take about two weeks and be about $600-$1000. So I went to NewEgg, got myself a nice Panasonic 42" Plasma (with wall mount and some HDMI cables and shipping) for less than $1500. This is not something I would normally do, but given that I only have one TV, and it's dead - it seemed like a good time to upgrade. I was waiting for this day - for the day the TV was completely "obsolete" so I could spend the cash. However, I wasn't going to just go out and buy a new TV. Why bother? The prices drop through the floor every February and again over the summer. The $1200 TV will be a $1000 TV next year.
Anyhow, back to the point: I am just now ready for a Blu-Ray player. I'll probably go grab one after the holidays when everything is cheap and start renting Blu-Ray movies (or buy a few favorites). However, look at me for an example, I was a early adopter of HDTV (when I could barely afford it) and I dragged my feet to Blu-Ray (when I could easily afford it). The incentives to go to Blu-Ray were so low, even for someone who is very sensitive to the video quality. It's not the DRM, or the technology, or Sony, it's just that it's a bad economic decision for most people. $x hundred or thousand in new equipment and media for a gain in video and audio? Probably not going to happen around here. Now, as the latest generation of TVs and DVD players crap out (give it until the end of the decade) I'm sure people will move to Blu-Ray. People like new stuff, even if they don't quite understand it. However, they're not going to run out and buy a $150 player when the current one works fine. Remember, many of these people (at least the people in this target market) just spent $x hundreds or thousands on upgrading to HDTV - kind of breaks the bank if you have to upgrade the TVs every 3 years.
In short, the one thing Blu-Ray has going for it is that this generation of electronics has the reliability far worse compared to what was built in the 70s and 80s. (Yes, much of this is due to the complexities of today's electronics.)
Nota bene: I wouldn't be surprised to see a really great holiday season with super low prices.
Disagreeing with me does not mean you get to mod me troll.
The market has spoken, and HD just isn't worth the price. Is there a difference? Sure, but it's not big enough for most people to care about.
Blu-Ray is more a casualty of this problem than the cause. The real problem is that HD sets in a size big enough for the resolution to matter much still aren't affordable. Of course, they can't get affordable unless more people buy them, but more people won't buy them until the price comes down, and so the cycle continues.
Well, I for one won't get a blu-ray player until my local library starts stocking many, many blu-ray titles. They have such a huge collection of DVDs, it made sense to get a DVD player. Just like VHS was before then. I don't really enjoy paying for movies that I'm only going to watch once, or even MAYBE up to three times.
The problem is the players. Check all the reviews, even the high end players suck. I'm not paying over 400 dollars for a player that can't even execute the "eject" command in under a minute.
Nice work on this post -- if you go back six months you'll see that the Blu-ray market share was 4 percent six months ago, and now it is 8 percent. But the more telling number is the market share on individual new releases, which is closer to 12 percent.
If they want Blu-Ray to succeed, they need to lower the disk prices. Who wants to pay $25 for a BD movie when the DVD version is $15 and looks almost as good with an upscaling DVD player???
o decent BD players need to be less than $200
o BD disks need to be same prices as DVD
o all BD players need to be able to play DVDs & upscale (don't want to throw away my DVDs....)
Then it will succeed, not until. It's not some religious problem over DRM, it's simple economics.
Nothing to do with DRM. The week HD DVD died, i bought a PS3. To date, I have about 10 BR movies compared to 900 or so DVD movies. The cost of BR movies isn't that bad if you shop around. I rarely pay more than $18 for BR. I also have netflix, yet for some reason, i don't find myself buying OR renting BR movies. I mean they look good when i watch them. mostly. and they sound good. mostly. I can't put a finger on the source of my apathy. i'm watching on a 65" DLP w/ 7.1 surround, so i don't think it's my setup at fault here.
It might be the ever increasing number of HD channels i get from Dish network. Some of them are crap, but HDNET Movies, MGM movies, UHD have some quality stuff. Is it as good as BR visually? Maybe not quite, but I find that the HD-ness of the movie matters less the more I enjoy the movie.
to add insult to injury, i never play ps3 games.
I've had a monitor capable of Blu-ray resolutions since the mid 1990s. Maybe in a decade, I might have a TV capable of those resolutions, but then again, maybe not. Normally, that wouldn't be a problem, but it is a problem for Blu-ray, because Blu-ray is designed to not work with common equipment.
There is one proprietary vendor who has made Blu-ray playable. When their technique leaks out and gets into xine/mplayer/etc (and if I'm sure it's future-proof and will remain compatible with BD+), then Blu-ray will be ready and truly on the market. Until then, Blu-ray equipment and movie vendors should expect zero revenue, and if/when I ever go HD, I'm going to start pirating. Playable HD movies just aren't on the market yet, except from pirates. They are the sole supplier of working content.
Sony management: Lose the DRM. It is directly contrary to your stockholders' interests.
Sony stockholders: why the hell haven't you divested or sued management yet? They are throwing your money away. Mismanagement can be one of those things for the common man to not have a clue is happening, but you know they are putting DRM on the content they sell, driving your potential customers to pirates. This is happening right in your face!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Better Format, too little, too expensive, too late. Sony doesn't learn too quickly.
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
I'm sure this has already been said, but I'm going to say it again to drive the point home:
PEOPLE WILL NOT PAY $25 - $30 FOR A MOVIE. Hell, we don't want to pay that much for a full season of our favorite TV show anymore.
The dramatic fall in price of DVD's might have been great for consumers, but its going to hurt sales of Blu-Ray until these prices fall back in line. I was at a Best Buy last weekend, saw the prices of their "on sale" movies, and wouldn't even look anymore. Its simply too expensive. You want us to buy them, drop the price.
Just look how much the players, media and rentals cost. Then take into consideration market conditions and you'll have people holding off on taking the plunge.
In addition you really need a TV 42" or larger to really see the difference in quality.
Lastly, most stores the employees can't really sell you on players. They don't know enough. Plus there is the confusion of profiles between BR 1.0 1.1 2.0.
First adopters are home theater enthusiasts and many of them are holding out for a full featured player.
Sorry if this appears twice, but 10 minutes later, its not showing that I posted anything.
The first article shows absolutely no facts that there is a decline in sales. In fact, it simply states it, and then offers an editorial about it. Hardly hard evidence to make a statement that Blu-Ray is in trouble.
The second seemed to show that sales have taken a dive this week compaired to last week. Gasp! How horrid! Sales drop one week, the end of the format is in sight!
Yet the exact same article also shows that sales of Blu-Ray counted for 8% of movie sales last week. That is a failure? If owning 8% of the market is a failure, then Apple should have gave up a long time ago.
Just Google Blu-Ray adoption rate. Blu-Ray adoption is almost 6 times greater in the UK than DVD was a decade ago, and 3 times that in the us (I actually had the URL in the original post I tried submitting, now I cannot find it to save my life). Memorex is releasing a $269 player in November, and Amazon is clearing out some of the older Sony models now for under $200.
Two years after its introduction, I have friends whom we lend Blu-Ray movies to, I can rent them off of any rental site, buy them at Wal-Mart, and find that the majority of people I talk to at least know what it is. I could not say the same two years after DVD's introduction. Two years after its introduction, most video stores were still VHS only, Netflix was a startup company, a DVD READER for your computer cost over $200, you then had to buy an adittional software or hardware card to decode them, writers were incredibly expensive, and most of the movies I had I had to buy online, or at special stores at the mall (ie Suncost).
Yes, Blu-Ray is in so much trouble!
"Noone" cares. Go tell him.
I was just talking to a friend about this 2 days ago. The problem for Blu-ray is that they have been putting an awful lot of newer films out, but half (or more) of that is crap. They need to find those cult films, those movies that people always buy for their collections, not the ones they rent, and put them out. Todd, the friend, mentioned that "The Nightmare Before Christmas" Blu-ray was stunning, and that he had finally seen a Blu-ray of "The Thing."
Some films that jumped to mind: The Wizard of Oz, The Dark Crystal, almost anything by Harryhausen, the original Star Wars trilogy, the Man with No Name trilogy, Saving Private Ryan, and any of the good Godzilla or Gamera films.
The format is fighting an uphill battle against the fact that DVD is great; DVD is what the consumer expects now. Blu-ray is higher definition, and the cases are a little smaller, but it needs the titles. Just like a gaming console: you can have a great console, but you need some great titles to get people to buy it.
Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters
What is the real reason this is not taking off? Not all of us TV viewers have jumped to HD. So purchasing blue ray makes no sense at all. When I have to replace a TV it will be high-def but I am not going to thrown out really good tube TVs for HD. The economy also has alot to do with it. I for one could care less about DRM because if I buy the CD I can play it at home. Seeding it on torrent... no thanks. I have better things to use my bandwidth for like gaming.
It's not really an issue of intelligence, it's an issue of ideology.
I think DRM is stupid, pointless, and generally only going to lose you customers, but I don't passionately hate it, because, to be honest life's too short.
It makes the studio execs feel better, it doesn't really inconvenience me, so why should I care, why should anyone care?
My main deal is just that I don't want hardware I've bought and own to act on someone else'e behalf. It's mine, it should do what I tell it to.
Bow-ties are cool.
I've had some of my friends who bought huge plasma's come and tell me about why I shouldn't buy Blu-Ray tech, and just use DVD. It's pretty funny that they don't know or can't articulate it well, but they feel the frustration and hate the restraint.
Well, you can always counter with "But playing a regular DVD on your HDTV is like driving a sports car... in first gear!" ...Seen way too much of that stupid promo video... Every fucking time I go to Target it's there blabbering at me with its retarded car analogies, the tired old Simpsons clip, etc...
Bow-ties are cool.
It's just as necessary as any TV.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
I think it's important to remember in this discussion that BD discs are expensive and difficult to manufacture, with constrained production for the dual-layer 50 GB discs. The production lines to make the discs are also more expensive and produce fewer discs per day, so the amortization of that takes up a bigger chunk of the price of each BD disc.
On of the big advantages of HD DVD was that it could use upgraded DVD replication lines, and so the cost per disc was lower.
Very broadly discussed on AVS Forum a few years ago.
My video compression blog
Four years is ridiculous. A TV set should last ten, fifteen years (depending on manufacturer). I won't buy an HD capable set (and thus no HD capable media) before my current 4:3 CRT dies and if that happens before 2015 I'm going to be pissed.
You sure?
'Cause HDTV is pretty nice, as it turns out... Spending $500 or more on a TV doesn't generally appeal to me (and I wouldn't have done it if it weren't a wedding gift) - but having used the thing... It really is a much better picture.
Bow-ties are cool.
Why pay 25-30 bucks to own it?
Because your single-digit-year-old child wants to watch the same animated movie once a week.
The last sentence in the definition you cite:
What has stopped people from buying Blue Ray? That is very easy to answer in just one word: "Cost."
If the BR discs cost the same as DVD and the plyers could be bought for under $100 then BR would take off.
Maybe sony could sell all their titles as duel sided discs with DVD on one side and BR on the other or just put a BR disc in free with every DVD then maybe people would buy the players.
I talk to peole about this and most of then say they think DVD is good enough and can't see the difference or if they can they don't think it is worth $200.
Most consumers probably don't even know what DRM is. For most people, they already have DVD's, they already have a DVD player. Both are cheaper than current blue-ray offerings, often by a large margin.
A smart idea for Sony and the big entertainment companies would be to have a trade in program where you could get a big discount on a Blu-Ray disk by trading in the same DVD, maybe even paying the difference only. Alas somehow I don't think they will go for that.
It's like the introduction of CD's all over again. What? I have to buy one of those expensive players? And replace all my trusty vinyl albums with those discs? For how much? Forget it; it'll never fly.
Anyone else here remember when a new CD cost $17, and the early CD players were $750? In 1982 dollars? *raises hand* I thought there was no way in hell I'd ever own one, but the prices fell precipitously within a couple years. Consumers will switch to Blu-ray when price drops bring the players, HDTV's and the discs within their budget. The electronics prices will come down, (and remember that PS3 owners already have a Blu-ray player), so the big barrier to entry will be the cost of the media. Even if they're still a bit more expensive than DVD's, Blu-ray will win. My brother the technophile bought one a couple weeks ago, and after watching a couple of movies on it, I have to say that I'm as impressed as hell. The differences in picture quality are breathtaking, and after you've watched it for a while regular DVD's look blurry by comparison. I used to say so what, why should the textures of the brick wall in the background, or of the fabric of peoples' clothing make any difference to the viewing experience? Guess what? They make a incredible difference. Go down to your local retailer and check out the demos.
Sometimes, but I hear that more often they're often found in IRC channels or on Usenet.
is not cheap.
I, like a lot of people, are waiting for the sub 100 dollar players.
Even then it will have to wait until I can afford a TV worth playing it on. IF you haven't noticed, there is an economic crisis going on in the US right now.
So, get China to start tosses these baby's out at a competitive rate to a DVD player, then you will see an explosion of sales..assuming the continue to be backwards compatible.
I wonder what restrictions SONY has on the player. It would be the first times the restrictions killed a decent SONY product.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I don't have HD-DVD or BlueRay yet.
I don't have a high-def TV either.
Welcome to the majority of us people with neither.
I have a nice 32 inch Panasonic TV, CRT mind you and it's very nice, barely 3 yrs old.
Works great, I get S-Video, etc...
Also have a nice JVC DVD/VHS Combo and a Philips DivX / DVD Recorder.
Now I know that the newer Blue Ray format, with the newer high Def TV give much crisper details, but the truth is, I don't care.
The view I get from my TV is great, for me anyways, and for anyone who has been watching movies with me at home. If the movie sucks, it's not because it's in DVD or Blue-Ray format.
Justifying the investment for this new tech is hard when you have bills to pay.
Sony would have to almost give out the players next to nothing and make their Blue-Ray discs the same cost as normal DVDs in order to make us cross over.
But still, I have over 600 DVDs in my collection, so, I've already spent a lot of money, I can't see myself repurchasing any of the movies I have in Blue Ray def.
Technically, Blue-Ray is better than DVD, but in the end, for most of us, it just doesn't justify the extra cost and bother. DVD movies are just as fun to watch, the minute image detail that you get from Blue-Ray, isn't for most of us, worth the investment.
Actually, it's funny that you mention it. I have a 40" (1080i/720p, so not full HD) TV. When I sit on the couch and watch it from across the living room, even tapes seem just fine. If I bother putting on my classes and watch closely I can see a little static, but even then it's hardly noticable.
And this is on VHS! DVD's will be just fine for me,thank you, even tapes do well enough.
I can rent hd movies on apple tv for 4.99 or standard widescreen for 3.99 I usually go with standard unless the movie is known for it's visuals. Why do I want to see "the bucket list" in hd?
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
But most people aren't claiming that one "looks as good" as the other. They're claiming that the one they have now is "good enough," especially at the price-point.
1) set the price of disks same as DVD's
2) release on BD before DVD
3) add extra content to BD discs
4) cheap players
5) allow piracy, supply empty discs for $0.5 !!
So, sales are declining, but there's also saturation of the market - people aren't throwing out old BD players and buying new. Though it may become another DVD-Audio if they don't set things straight (i.e. time to stop selling overpriced hw to enthusiasts and start competing with DVD).
hey.. I got a Toshiba HD DVD player last year to hook up to my Samsung 32" 1080p HD TV.It worked great. The first HD DVD movie was Transformers. A few months after that Sony started to strong arm all the big players, Paramount, Viacom, etc. Even though HD DVD format disks were selling well they were forced to switch to Blueray.
Well all I have got to say on behalf of all the Toshiba HD DVD player owners.. Up Yours Sony! The Toshiba HD DVD player does a great job on DVD upscaling. Granted it's not at 1080p but I can live with it.
First, the price of the discs have to go way down. If upscaled DVDs look nearly the same (not to me, but to most idiots apparently) then they should cost nearly the same.
Second, the price of players have to come way down, for the same logic above. There should be low end blu-ray players for under 50 bucks. (USD)
Third, stop mucking with the DRM. No one should ever be forced to update the firmware on consumer electronics. But yet with a updated DRM for Blu-ray every couple of months, consumers are forced to do so. Which they'll reject in a heartbeat. The first time that new Blu-ray player refuses to work because of DRM, the average consumer will take it back to the store and demand his money back. And let's face facts Sony, DRM does not stop piracy. Any Blu-ray movie you want is available via bittorrent. Your constantly changing DRM only annoys legitimate customers, not pirates!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
The way this has turned out was/is so foreseable. The studios got in bed with Sony because Sony promised to protect their content from those evil pirates. The choice to go Blu-ray was motivated by DRM issues. Sure, it's holds more data HD-DVD, but not significant. Now the studios are not making money at all...hahaha. They should have chosen HD-DVD...the economy would have been better for it!
Let's see... pay off competitor to stop their competing format. Competing format players get dumped at great prices. Sales people in stores in effort to dump merchandise DON'T tell customers the format is obsolete.
Gee, is it any surprise Blu Ray sales went down?
If I could buy a Samsung Blu-ray player for $149 I'll switch. However, I'd still get my discs from Netflix. But do renters help make a market for a new format?
Jim
The "best" BR player on the market is STILL the PS3. And the price point is too high.
When the MSRP for a decent BR device hits $199, I'll look at buying.
Until then, I'll keep upscaling standard DVDs with my current SD players (Sony, Panasonic).
I am my own gestalt.
I saw recently this Slashdot story that detailed the use of SD cards to distribute music. At that moment it hit me, the next physical media format is not going to be discs at all, it's going to be solid state memory cards. They have faster read times, are smaller, and more robust. The hardware to read such cards is cheap and ubiquitous. While currently a card is about 10x more, the prices continue to plummet, and by the time that movie studios really need more than a DVD space (~4GB) the price will likely be comparable. Like many others have said, Bluray just really doesn't offer any real benefit for people to spend their cash on.
My setup is a consequence of an confluence of opportunities. I already had projection equipment, but it was shoehorned into a small home. We were looking for a new home with a lot of space, but nothing was really coming on the market. Then this church became available (25k for 5000 sq ft on two lots!), and we agreed that we would buy it and build an interior into it. So during this process, I was standing in the middle of this huge, empty space when I noticed that the wall behind the pulpit and above the chair-rail looked exactly 16:9 to my eye. Turns out it's within just a couple of percent. So we decided to use that space, as it was, as the screen area. The only thing I ended up changing specifically to accommodate this was the projector, so as to get one that would throw a 17 foot diagonal image at 1080p (I picked an Optoma HD80, works great.)
As far as benefits, they are myriad; the big screen is really fun and very revealing of detail, and there's a huge list of why watching at home is better than watching in a theater, once you have an HD display. Do you need a list of those?
We've been "moved in" for about two years, but it'll be at least 2010 before we're done building the interior. Right now we're doing stained glass for the windows (secular themes) and a deck; there are still interior walls to be sheeted, etc, but it's coming along. I'm not sure if you can generalize such a situation to your case, but that's how it happened here. :) Some of the pics of the build are in this flickr set.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The format is not the issue here, the problem is really the economy which has people can't afford to buy new equipment.
"While we can be quick to claim hot topics as 'DRM' or 'Poor Economy' for the cause, it's more likely the simple fact that the difference between BluRay and DVD is negligible. "
You are wrong, and I say that with no qualifiers.
DVD sales have been down for what, 3 years running (including year to date)? DVD sales are decreasing faster than BD sales are increasing. Video games surpassed the lucky-to-be-flat DVD sales. Home video overall is still down. These are all "simple facts".
BD costing significantly more than DVDs, which are losing ground overall, and you want to blame something that is for the most part, irrelevant? Lest we forget, during the same period after the release of DVD, people were saying the same thing wrt. DVD vs. VHS. The difference in content and visual/audio quality between VHS and DVD is quite large, though not all true at first. Yet we saw the same pattern of lackluster DVD vs. VHS sales. If that much of a clear difference in quality - even w/o spending more on TVs and receivers to "get the most out of it" - saw the same pattern, then how the hell is an alleged "minor" bump in quality going to be the main cause or even a significant one? BD is more expensive than DVD, just as DVD was more expensive than VHS. Players were not cheap, and the movies were significantly higher priced.
DVDs had very distinct advantages in that it was going to get pull out and stuck in your player, permanently ruined - an advantage anyone who had VHS could easily appreciate and understand. Yet it took several years for DVD to "take off".
It is certainly true that there was, and is a lot of hype around "the new format", and that it is exceedingly rare that the reality lives up to the hype. But if you look at what people in the know have been saying, you'll see that this year is in line with what reasonable people have been expecting, At current rates, the BD sales will top over 1.3 billion dollars this year. [sarcasm] Year, that's a loss for a more expensive purchase, sure. [/sarcasm] By the end of the year BD sales will approach 50 million discs this year. Do DVD sales outshine that? Hell yes. DVD is established and has been around for many years.
We also have the hype of "the end of the war" with the death of HD-DVD. People with no knowledge claimed it would be a huge win for BD, and eventually it will be. But anyone with sense and reason knew it wouldn't be right away. That said, on big "recent" titles, BD sales account for 1 little more than 1 in 20, and in some cases even one in ten sales of that movie. On essentially re-releases to BD, the sales share for BD has reached 2 out of 3. Overall almost one in ten movie disc purchases are BD. The format wars didn't end until this year. That means in less than one year after the "end of HD-DVD vs BD", BD has hit almost one in 10 (8%) of video disc sales. Note these are dollar amounts, for both DVD vs. VHS and BD vs. DVD.
Consider these:
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2002/01/07/daily34.html and http://www.ce.org/Press/CEA_Pubs/929.asp
Note that public availability of movies on DVD began in 1997 (1996 in Japan), and this was after the digital disc format wars ended. It took almost 5 years for DVD sales to surpass VHS sales. And that was considered "a meteoric rise" at the time. At the current growth rates, BD will outsell DVD in less time than it took DVD to overtake VHS. And VHS is still available, more than 10 years after the release of DVD video. After 2 years of public availability of DVD-Video, it was predicted by market analysts that it would be 5 more years before DVD overtook VHS. It took "only" 3 more years. Today the analysts are predicting 4 years for BD to outsell DVD. So the analysts are more optimistic this time around.
I should also note that DVD rentals lagged behind sales, only overtaking VHS rentals in late 2003 - six years into DVD-Video.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
. . . don't see much real benefit from Blu-ray over properly upscaled DVD playback . . . DVD widescreen content is, frankly, plenty good enough. . .
There's the rub.
(1) DVD is good enough
(2) Blu-ray isn't better enough to justify the price
Also, people have $$ sunk into DVD libraries (though that wouldn't necessarily affect their new purchases).
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
I own 2 old Sony TV's, still working in mint condition.
I own 2 DVD players, one with RCA outs.
I rent my DVD's from the videotheque and buy DVD's when they are reasonably priced.
Reasonably priced is inbetween 7-15 euro; everything higher (like 30, 45 and higher) is UNREASONABLE!
I saw the difference between HD and SD, I'm not shocked with it; don't even want to spend money into that.
I've put more money in my vinyl and cd's, finding out later I've been royally f*cked by lots of companies including copy-protections on their cd's rendering normal-use as good as impossible.
I've always been honest and paid for all media which I've got in my house; although; the last few years have been a real burden for me needing to
1) buy the media
2) being impossible to use them in my Denon pro-cd players
3) needing to search and download THE SAME VERSION AS ON CD; just to get it working!
So .. who's actually screwing who... I might wonder!
From my perspective some of these bastards don't deserve my money; to grasp even more control in the market!...
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
I'm a geek, so in the late 80s or early 90s, I paid more for an SVHS VCR. 400 lines of resolution they advertised, it's so clear. You could only see the difference on an expensive projector with a $10k Faroudja line doubler on tapes that were usually copied from LaserDisc. What a waste of money.
It was expensive, there were no pre recorded titles, it didn't do anything much different from VHS. VHS was good enough for most people.
DVD replaced VHS because the medium was small & reliable. It was CHEAP. Oh and it looked good on ordinary TVs. Most of us still have ordinary TVs.
I'd love a 1080P LCD, but ain't gonna happen anytime soon unless they're under $400. $50 DVD player on my old boob tube TV looks good enough, so why buy a machine that only looks good on a $2,000+ TV that has a few titles which are more expensive. It all comes down to demand.
I've worked the Blu-Ray players, and most off the times when dealers install a system on high-end home theater systems, they just lave them on ALL the time. Why? Because the players have a nice Powered by Java sticker, and when you want to turn it on, it takes 1 or 2 mins to actually be ready to start playback. You don't have that with other formats.
Frankly, HD TV kinda sucks. Here in the USA, cable TV is highly compressed and is horrible. Our only options for high quality is Blu-Ray and uncompressed over-the-air broadcast.
Usually, I cannot stand to watch HDTV because I see all the compression artifacts and macro blocks. Most people donâ(TM)t realize anything is wrong. If I point out the macro blocks, they see them too and it spoils the experience for them. I believe most people donâ(TM)t know the difference between a SD signal, compressed HD and uncompressed HD. They buy a HD-TV and believe they are seeing HD.
Consumers donâ(TM)t know what Blu-Ray is, and given the above, how do you sell a higher priced player and media? They know what a higher price is, but the âoeadvantagesâ are invisible to them. So they are making the right decision â" for them.
But my SD TV just died, so itâ(TM)s time for me to make the jump to HDTV.
In 1982, I knew HD flat screens were coming, but would be expensive. I purchased an RCA 50â projection TV, hoping it would last long enough for things to stabilize and for prices to drop. I didnâ(TM)t expect it to take 26 years.
At that time, VHS ruled but was facing competition from RCAâ(TM)s video disk (non-optical) and LaserDisc. LDâ(TM)s were best, but really expensive. I went with RCAâ(TM)s video disk. LaserDisc won that battle, but lost the war when DVD appeared. I wonder if the Blu-Ray victory over HD-DVD will be the same.
When I made the jump to HD, I was thinking about the Oppo DVD player with its great upscaling to 1080p. But Panasonic has a Blu-Ray player that upscales and is only $160 more than the Oppo, so I went for it. I hope the upscaler works good enough, and I hope Blu-Ray disks drop in price.
I avoided Sony due to their policies and the whole rootkit issue. Besides, the Sony Blu-Ray players donâ(TM)t meet the final spec, and Panasonic does. How can Sony be so screwed up?
Since Blu-Ray supports MPEG-2, some Blu-Ray disks are actually MPEG-2 videos, and not using higher quality codecs. To me, this is peeing in the pool, and could hurt Blu-Ray in the long run. If a new competitor appears (and China is said to be developing one that doesnâ(TM)t require the high royalties of Blu-Ray) then we might see a new format kill Blu-Ray, just like DVD killed LaserDisc.
So the question becomes: Will Blu-Ray prices drop BEFORE the next competitor arrives with cheap players?
Place nail here >+
I think the main reason that you have people talking about how you can't tell the difference unless you're at such and such an angle is because they can sell 720p longer and make more money. I can instantly tell the difference in resolution, that is, provided the content being shown is in the higher resolution. Case in point.
I have a 15.4" wide screen laptop that I have had for almost three years. It has a resolution of 1920x1200. I bought this long before laptops were labeled as "OMG HD Display! +". Six years ago I was using a 15.4" 4:3 with 1600x1200.
After that the hi res LCDs disappeared for a while and are still pretty rare. Mine is perfectly reliable, so it can't be because of hardware issues. It was also very cheap. I can only believe that display makers are milking the lower res stuff as long as possible to squeeze every penny out of you before telling you that it's obsolete. Works just like most every other industry.
I'd love to own a 1080p TV of any size, but, well, I don't really have any need for one. I have hi res screens on my laptops because my eyes work well enough to see all the more data that fits on the screen!
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
In my mind there is no doubt that it you have a Full HD TV that Blue-Ray is vastly superior to DVD. The clarity is fantastic. The bigger your TV the more of a difference it makes too. Mine is 71" so the different between BR and DVD is like VHS to DVD for most.... However I still haven't taken the plunge as the costs are just too high.... Like others have said bring the cost to about $100 for a player and halve the price of discs and I would seriously consider buying one.
Down with that customer DRM Supported crap. I won't have any of it, the boycott is on!
they could be good for data backups. No DRM there...
there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
As pointed out further down this thread, I made a mistake in the above comment:
The two movies are Shark Tale and Madagascar.
Over The Hedge wasn't one of the forced trailers.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Most people don't have that problem because their hardware does what they want it to do(play movies).
I'm waiting for a standalone reasonably priced USB or Firewire connected Blu-Ray burner. Right now the densest storage media I have is a dual layer DVD so I've become an 8GB per day shooter. I say this because I shoot on 8GB SDHC cards and than make the transfer. Give me the burner and I'll go get some 32GB cards and a bunch of batteries for my digital cameras. Bob Kiger - Videography Lab - videographyblog.com
writer attempted:
This is irregardless of wether
I don't suppose you went to the same school as George Bush, did you?
Normally I let these things go, but "irregardless"? Followed by "wether"?
Geez...
I would add that most people don't have that problem because they agree with the manufacturer on what the device should do.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
another 10 million new hdtvs blu ray machines $125.00 movies $12.99-17.99. still limited hd download capabilities blu ray catches the wave and (replaces) dvd as hard movie media storage. Its inevitable. would you buy a $75 dvd player or a $125 blu ray player for your fancy new hdtv. There is a perceivable difference, not great but perceivable and when that price point comes dvd sales will dry up. As far as digital downloads. Sounds great, rent and watch but as long as the movie studios can grease up my favorite blu ray movies with special features and a fancy sound and video, i have a shelf for them.
Pirate bay + bandwidth > blu-ray LOL
Blu-ray will survive, not as a media storage format, but as a data storage format. I view Blu-ray as a stable way to back up large amounts of data for the long term(like an oldscholl tape drive). Dvd's will die off because of the ability to download media onto a htpc, an advanced game system,or Tv's with internet connectivity and storage capability. Anyway with the advent of 1.5Tb+ hard drives I see it's about time we need a bigger optical disk
And at least here in europe multi-region DVD players are pretty easy to get hold of but i've never seen a multi-region blue-ray player advertised.
Because as I've said, many titles are region free. That was very, very rare with DVD and pretty mcuh only included the most crappy titles like "Yoga With Jim" level crappy). With Blu-Ray brand new movies (note I did not say new releases) are pretty much the only thing to have region coding and they are supposed to drop it after a year or so.
And then there is HDCP which can be a major PITA in some setups.
I wouldn't know because I use 1080p component out from my PS3 for movie watching. And in fact I think all players currently made have component support. The only potential issue there is the ICT token which in theory would degrade the video to some lower resolution - but to my knowledge not a single movie has been released that uses it. And of course the reason is obvious, there are a ton of people with non-HDCP compliant sets and it would hurt sales to enable it. I frankly do not ever see that capabilitiy being used as it's more of a support headache than a gain.
And then there are all the people who use DVD copy software that relys on the fact that DVD drm was pretty thouroughly cracked some time ago (blue-ray DRM is still an arms race afaict)
Would 10 seconds with Google have been so hard?
Not to mention that DVD ripping is still hardly mainstream. Torrents are probably more mainstream than ripping.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Check out the Sony Electronics Blog. A recent post talks about why Sony thinks Blu-ray is here to stay, despite contrary reports.
~Jennifer
Jennifer Peterson
Sony Electronics Blog Moderator
Sony Electronics
www.Sony.com/ElectronicsBlog
I want just ONE box hooked up to my TV. It should meet the following requirements:
Is that too hard to ask? I called some silent HTPC manufacturer and they wanted to charge me $6000 for such a box.
No, I will not work for your startup
Doubled since HD-DVD's demise.
Again, a ridiculous hit piece article. And slashdot promulgated it.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/09/25/blu-rays-market-share-has-almost-doubled-since-hd-dvds-demise/
BluRay isn't a success yet, but this slashdot article is painting a misleading article of the situation.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
I think one of the big issues with BR adoption has to do with the fact that only a small percentage of households (those with HDTV's - like 14% in US) can even utilize blu-ray to its full capacity. Now there's no question that HDTV's are now the standard for new TV purchases, however, many people are still using older CRT TV's and don't have any intention on switching any time soon. However, once they finally come into the fray and switch to HD, they're going to want to see what the format can do and I think that's where Blu-ray comes into the equation. It'll take time, but it's still seeing steady overall growth. I've actually been working with WHV on some projects and they're really backing the format.