Slashdot Mirror


Blu-ray Adoption Soft, More Still Own HD DVD

MojoKid writes "A new study by Harris Interactive notes that currently, one in ten Americans (10%) own an HD DVD player, while just 7% own a Blu-ray player. Crazy, right? More Americans own HD DVD right now than the 'winning' format, Blu-ray. If you think about it, that statistic isn't that shocking. When HD DVD was around, it was far and away the 'budget' format for high-def. The players were cheaper, the films were cheaper. In other words, it was a format more ready to thrive in a down economy. Blu-ray was always viewed as a niche format for those absorbed in A/V, not the common man's format. The survey also found that on average, consumers purchased approximately six standard format DVDs in the last six months, compared with one in HD DVD format."

6 of 685 comments (clear)

  1. It's all about the names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you had no format knowledge, and someone told you you could have HD DVD or Blu-Ray, which would you pick? Probably the one you thought you knew, High Definition DVD. You might even think it was more compatible with your existing DVD stuff. Blu Ray? What's that?

  2. really? by notgm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    more people own hd-dvd players than own ps3s? really?

  3. Re:I always maintained blue ray was moot by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The first HD movie I watched was "300" on my mates' PS3 linked to a 46" Hi-Def TV (full 1080p). I'll never watch another Hi-Def movie again.

    The definition was so good that I could see the seperations around the actors and knew exactly when they were in front of a green screen and no on set. Totally ruined the visuals (which is, in all honesty, the only reason to watch that movie).

    Total waste of money. I'm happy with my 24" monitor and DVD drive in my PC (which actually runs up to 1920x1200, higher than Hi-Def).

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  4. Don't buy into that lie by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That was how Sony convinced the producers that they had won, by counting PS3's instead of stand alone players. This is no different than some of the Apple people claiming 10% market share but failing to state that it included phones!

    Personal account, only one of the circle of friends who has a PS3 have more than two blu ray movies. Most don't even use it to play regular DVDs, it is the "KIDS MACHINE".

    HD-DVD loaded faster, have less expensive players, and less expensive movies. It also had some great shows/movies out early that Blu Ray did not. I have both players now, I would have loved HD-DVD to have won. Why? Because of the G-D ads that too many Blu-Ray movies force you to sit through. See, that AD thing is probably another reason movie producers would favor Sony over HD. They could force you to watch their ads for other products because HD stated that that feature was not allowed - not so in Blu-Ray

    Well with http://red2blu.com/ I could get the blu-ray versions fairly cheap, but my HD-DVD player is again, faster and less prone to abuse by the dvd creator.

    Sony screwed the consumer over by lies and buying off the movie producers. They are getting exactly what they deserve, flat to falling sales. The players are overpriced and worse the movies border on extortionist in pricing. I do not buy new Blu-Ray movies, I rent them on occasion, but if they are higher than standard DVD I will just wait till the price goes down. This has two effects, by the time the price comes down the movie may no longer be interesting to me meaning I didn't need it anyway, the second being that perhaps one day they will get the hint.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  5. Artifacts in a theater near you? by tepples · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The definition was so good that I could see the seperations around the actors and knew exactly when they were in front of a green screen and no on set. Totally ruined the visuals

    Movie theaters nowadays use a 1080p or bigger format with an even higher bitrate than Blu-ray Disc. Had you seen the film in a movie theater, might you have noticed the same compositing failures?

    1. Re:Artifacts in a theater near you? by terjeber · · Score: 5, Interesting

      they have a much higher effective resolution than 1920x1080

      For various technical, biological and other reasons, they do not. Remember, what was shot on analog is not what you see in the analog theater. All movies today go from analog to digital (for editing) and back to analog. The "resolution" of the end product is determined not by the amount of grain on the celluloid (obviously better resolution than 1920x1080) but the resolution and printing capabilities of the film printer. This is exacerbated by a repeated duplication of said celluloid. Most movie theaters today will show films of less quality than a good 1080p TV with an HD source.

      The crucial point when it comes to quality is not the resolution but the number of scan lines that can be perceived. With a movie going through a number of processes, film to digital, then digital to film, then duplication round after duplication round, a 1080p movie on a good screen might well be of higher quality than an "analog" movie in the movie theater.

      So, what is the quality of a typical movie theater you ask (or at least you should). According to an international study named "Image Resolution of 35mm Film in Theatrical Presentation" a typical theater has a 750 scan lines resolution. A very good HD set will typically be about there or a little higher, depending on where you sit.

      You can even read about it here.. I am SO looking forward to a TV with 4520 scan lines of resolution.