Slashdot Mirror


Why Has Blu-ray Failed To Catch Hold?

Velcroman1 writes "My VCR is stashed in a closet, right next to a couple of CD-ROM players, a laser disc player, and other forgotten electronics. Is my Blu-ray player about to join them? Blu-ray really hasn't caught on — and probably never will. 'I'm surprised DVDs have continued to hang on,' said King, referring to the fact that player sales of over 20 million units in the US last year were pretty much evenly split between DVD and Blu-ray models. Blu-ray discs and players are clearly superior to DVDs, offering more features and a better picture overall. So why haven't shoppers been impressed?"

45 of 1,162 comments (clear)

  1. Not bothered by aedan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suspect most people aren't that bothered by picture quality.

    DVDs are handier than tapes, you don't need to rewind.

    1. Re:Not bothered by DataDiddler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hole in one. Past a certain point, most people just won't care. This is why most people listen to music on cheap, crappy speakers; the gains in paying an extra $X aren't worth it to them. Plus, people are naturally conservative by nature and won't change anything unless they're forced to or see enough of a benefit in doing so.

      --
      Working...
    2. Re:Not bothered by Hatta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly. I don't even bother to put on my glasses for SD TV. Why would I spend money on a TV with a better picture I can't even see without the glasses I don't want to wear?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Not bothered by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are also (non quality related) advantages to DVDs, to this day:

      As with USB vs. Firewire(where Firewire is absolutely better; but modestly more expensive and much less common), the Blu-ray premium isn't nearly as crushing as it was back in the bad old days(TFA mentions a $70 Blu-Ray deck, albeit probably lacking support for some of the fancy features; but a DVD player can be purchased at just about any pharmacy for about as much as dinner and a drink...); but it is still the case that DVD is absolutely ubiquitous, while Blue-ray cannot be assumed.

      Want a disk that will play at your house, on your laptop(s)/desktop(s), at a friend's house during movie night, etc, etc? Blu-ray still can't promise that. DVD drives have, essentially, replaced CD drives in everything but dedicated CD players. You have to look to buy CD-ROM only devices(DVD burners aren't quite as ubiquitous; but DVD read/CD R/W is pretty much baseline). Blu-ray, by contrast, isn't wildly expensive; but you still have to ask for it, every kiddie going to college whose "TV" is a 17 inch macbook doesn't have it, most cheapy PCs don't have it.

      Then there's the fact that the user experience with some Blu-ray players has been almost hilariously hostile. DVD players, with comparatively rare and usually irrelevant exceptions, don't have firmware updates. Blu-ray, not always something that can be relied on to avoid that.

    4. Re:Not bothered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That and the issue that not everyone has a huge LCD panel for a TV. Sure, some people have 50" 1080p TV's, but some have 20-30" 720p sets (where the difference between dvd and bluray is small), and some still have CRTs (where the difference between dvd and bluray is non-existant).

      I, for one, still have a CRT, and I've heard various horror stories of bluray players not outputing any picture at all to a set that didn't support HDCP (such as my s-video/component/composite connections). On my computer, where I do have a bluray-rom drive, I found out that my video cards (two) and monitors (three) didn't support HDCP. The idea of replacing so much hardware to watch a movie is just ridiculous.

      Plus, I have reservations about the Internet-connectivity on these discs. I buy a disc because I want the content forever. Is that content really forever if I have to download it from Sony each time I want to watch it? Can they use the connectivity to violate my privacy?

      Plus, and I'm sure this has been fixed on the new high end players, but the original bluray players took 60-90 seconds to play a disc. My dvd player takes less than 10. Why would anyone want to sit around and wait for a player to boot?

      Furthermore, the ever-changing DRM environment on Bluray discs is in perpetual upheaval. Many older players won't play newer discs. Some older players will, but only with firmware updates. But again, this is more hassle than I'm willing to deal with.

      Once I finally upgrade my TV and monitors, I'll probably take a more serious look at Bluray, but as it stands there are too many issues (many created by DRM-happy studios). I wish the upgrade to Bluray had been more about fixing what was wrong with DVDs, making it a defacto DVD-2.0, rather than the creation of a new format with a whole new set of problems.

    5. Re:Not bothered by ottothecow · · Score: 4, Insightful
      +1

      The people who write about this kind of stuff usually fail to understand this. As a tech writer, it is probable that you and everybody you know has everything fancy things like HDTVs and you are naturally invested and interested in new tech.

      The truth is, a lot of people don't even have TVs where blu-ray would matter, even if they did care about the difference between really good (DVD) and super good (blu-ray). My parents only bought an HDTV last year, which made everything look better already...so until they get used to that, why go blu-ray? When I come home at night and see people in my apartment building's windows, I see quite a lot of tube TVs still going strong (remember, analog broadcast is dead but the cable companies are keeping it alive and well).

      Sure, all of my friends have HDTVs but I am young, tech savvy, and by the time we graduated college and moved into new apartments, you couldn't buy anything else. However, judging by the number of people content with pretty mediocre panels and crappy built in speakers--I wouldn't guess any of them care about quality all that much (not to mention the people who watch stretch-to-fit content without thinking anything looks wrong).

      --
      Bottles.
    6. Re:Not bothered by toastar · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are also (non quality related) advantages to DVDs, to this day:

      Well that and a dvd burner is 20 bucks whereas a bluray burner is about $100

    7. Re:Not bothered by Stormthirst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I disagree with your analogy of black and white to color TVs. Color has an obvious and immediate difference.

      The same was true of DVDs over VHS
      1) No need to rewind
      2) No chance of the tape getting chewed
      3) No overall degradation of image quality over time which we saw with VHS.
      4) No chance of you accidentally over writing a DVD by mistake. (Aside from vindictive siblings, which happened to me once)

      What do you get on BluRay that you don't get on DVD?
      Sure it's higher definition - which is only any good if you've spent the money on an HDTV.
      Sure it's got extra features on the disk - but how often do you actually watch the additional features? Once, maybe twice?

      Personally, I'm happy with my CRT TVs. When they finally break, I'll buy an HDTV. Until then I have better things to spend my money on.

    8. Re:Not bothered by TheLink · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's another difference which makes DVDs more easily playable.

      You can easily buy _cheap_ multi-region DVD players.

      It's still not easy to find cheap multi zone Blu-ray players.

      I know some guy who buys lots of original stuff (especially shelves of anime) and he lives in NZ.

      The trouble is most english sub-titled bluray anime releases are in the wrong zone for NZ blu-ray players!

      So he had to go to a different country to buy a bluray player and take it back... I told him he shouldn't support such idiocy, but he just had to buy one.

      Who gets hurt by this bullshit? Good customers like him. Those people downloading MKVs aren't hurt :).

      --
    9. Re:Not bothered by wjousts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is exactly it, it isn't about (marginal) gains in picture quality, it's about convenience. DVD beat VCR because disk don't need rewinding, they don't get mangled by your tape player, they don't degrade each time you play them, you can skip straight to the bit you want to watch, oh and they happen to have better picture and sound, but that last point is pretty far down the list of selling points. Blu-ray offers nothing except better quality picture and sound. To displace DVD, it's not enough to be a better DVD (DVDs are pretty good as it is, and good enough for most people), you have to offer something new.

      This is why CDs weren't displaced by a better CD format (although they exist), they were displaced by downloads, because downloads are more convenient. It will be downloads that displace DVDs too, because the convenience of having movies available on-demand is hugely more convenient that going to a store to rent or buy a physical disk. People will even accept slightly lower quality for the convenience of downloading.

    10. Re:Not bothered by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the per-disk cost, of course(both with blanks and with commercial media). DVD blanks are basically disposable, blu-ray rather less so(but still not large enough or stability-tested enough to be a viable alternative to the really pricey tape, for smaller users). Then, when you hit the store, you find that the DVD is ~50% the price of the BD, except under special circumstances.

      Given that people are willing to watch streaming video in the under-5mb/s range, quite happily if the price is right, the quality bump just isn't worth the extra cost.

      The one that I would like to see more of; but is basically certain to not happen outside of pirate circles, is greater adoption of the dubiously standard; but quite convenient, intermediate format of MP4 video recorded on DVDs. All the cheapness of DVD production; but better quality than MPEG-2 for the same size. Some DVD players support it, and computers have no trouble; but it is totally informal.

    11. Re:Not bothered by SQLGuru · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why are you people still reading the comments to this article? I read this far and every point worth making has already been made.

      * People don't care enough about better quality (in visuals and audio -- they do care about better quality in content)
      * The price vs improvement isn't worth it to those that don't care
      * DVDs can be copied by the pirates much easier (so why would they want to upgrade)
      * Equipment compatibility issues (older vs newer DRM may or may not work with your player)
      * Slower load times
      * Better portability to "anywhere" -- even computers pretty much have DVD readers in the base model
      * When you stream your content, you don't really care about Bluray (physical media isn't as important)

    12. Re:Not bothered by peragrin · · Score: 4, Informative

      well that is it is shelf life. for most people TV's represent a 10-20 year investment. If you bought an HDTV 10 years ago, your not thinking of replacing it for another 5-10 years.

      Ultimately Blue ray has a major design flaw. it forces people to update hardware that shouldn't need to be updated ever. google(or Bing) Blue Ray update problems. you get 80 million results.

      James cameron's Avatar is the best example of it. something like 1/3 of the blue ray players had to receive a firmware update to play it.some took only 5-6 days to come out others took months.

      when you finally got your update, you had o then hook your player up to the internet. for most people that means disassembling the tv stand moving the player to your computer desk and hooking it up there, along with a cheap tv so you can see what you are doing. Or making a really long patch cable and stringing through the house to hook up the player long enough to get the update.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    13. Re:Not bothered by Beardydog · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can basically stick a DVD drive in a badger and get its best possible picture out the other end.

      If I stick a Blu-Ray drive in my mom's computer, her 1080p TV will get 720p, at best, I think. If I stick it in my computer, with HDCP, but plug it into my iz3d monitor, I get 720p, at best ( no HDCP support ). If I plug it into my TV with VGA, because Westinghouse TV's apparently forget how to receive HDMI for weeks at a time, I get 720p, at best. Or if I accidentally leave the iz3D drivers running, thereby breaking the video chain of trust. Or if the wind blows.

      People buy DVDs to play on -all- of their devices. Even old people watch DVDs through computers now. Getting Blu-Ray to work doesn't involve buying Blu-Ray discs, it involves upgrading every goddamned component you have, then crossing your fingers.

      And the software. JESUS CHRIST.

      I get to choose between CyberLink something or other and PowerDVD something or other... the only two options... both cost money. The OEM that came with the drive installs fine, but fails to install an update without it which it can play no Blu-Ray discs. When it finally runs, it's visibly horrible software, littered with stock photos and upsell messages. It enforces every no-skip, no-fast-forward, no-screenshot, no-noting rule to the hilt until you just wish Flanders was dead.

      I love the picture, and now that I've got it all working, it's worth having the Netflix Blu-ray option.... but I'm not going to pay money to own discs that do their level best to thwart me at every opportunity, and if fell through a wormhole into the past, I would probably skip the whole thing and pirate my HD content. 720p only? Fuck, that's probably all I get half the time, anyway.

    14. Re:Not bothered by bughunter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So I've read thru most of the active, non-troll, non-joke threads here, and the union set of all of the discussions seems to be:

      • DRM is limiting Blu-Ray adoption. DRM makes for a pain in the ass to setup, to watch, and to place-shift. Many (if not most) people are willing to tradeoff DVD quality for ease of use. And more than a few people are driven to bypass DRM in order to get what they want (e.g., control over playback, access to full-res content, etc.).

      I'm with the majority on that. I torrent or record all of my HD programs. The rest is DVD movies from Netflix, or in the case of childrens' content, DVDs purchased and stashed with toys. I have one drive capable of playing Blu-Ray content, and I've never been impressed with the few Blu-Ray discs I've borrowed -- not enough to purchase a single one myself, anyway. But then I don't buy DVDs except for those with titles like "Thomas the Tank Engine" and "Justice League Unlimited," for which the extraordinary expense and headache of 1080p playback is entirely unnecessary, and probably would go unappreciated.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    15. Re:Not bothered by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think Blank Media cost is the big mover here.
      If BD_Rom blanks were the same price or even price/gig as DVD media the adoption rate would be much higher. The content creators have ensured this won't happen. What they don't realize is this has also greatly hurt the general adoption rate of the format.
      If disks were cheap, people would use them for their home movies, what with 720p cameras being commonplace now.

      I recently had to explain to someone that my sony* DCR-96 was DVD quality even though it wasn't 1080p/720p etc. they really didn't get it. It wasn't until I shot identical scenes on both the DCR and a FlipUltraHD 720p camera and mastered them to a DVD, then played it on a 1080p TV did it sink in that raw pixel counts don't help in consumer video. You're better off buying based on low light performance and SNR than on resolution.
      -nB

      * I hate Sony's antics, and I shopped around for days to find an alternative camera in the same cost range, nada.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    16. Re:Not bothered by w3woody · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, and given the angular resolution of most people's eyes, honestly unless you have a very large big-screen TV and plan to sit very close to it, most people won't notice the difference at all. The human eye can differentiate to around 1 minute of arc, which at 14 feet (the width of my living room) translates to 1.24 millimeters, or about 20 pixels/inch. An HDTV has a resolution of 1920 pixels wide; at 20 pixels/inch this yields 96 inches--which means for a TV set smaller than 8 feet wide, the pixels don't contribute anything when I'm sitting 14 feet away, unless I have exceptionally good eyes. (I don't.) Even at 480i, with 720 pixels horizontally, at 14 feet distance, a 42inch monitor will have roughly 20 pixels/inch, which is right at the hairy edge of many people's perceptions.

      Now if you stand right in front of the monitor (or have a 23" computer monitor with a resolution of 1920 by 1080), you can see the pixels. But you're not staring at the thing from 14 feet away.

      So it's not just a matter of the average person not caring. The extra pixels are also being wasted on most people.

    17. Re:Not bothered by riegel · · Score: 3, Informative

      and mastered them to a DVD...

      Your point is correct, but your test was flawed.

      --
      http://p8ste.com - Web based Clipboard
    18. Re:Not bothered by BoberFett · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I watch movies and TV shows for quality of writing and acting, not resolution and sound quality. Maybe you need to improve what you're actually watching, rather than what format it's in.

  2. It's simple by Deathnerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DVDs still work just fine.

    1. Re:It's simple by Abstrackt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's exactly it. CDs were a major improvement over cassette tapes and DVDs were a major improvement over VHS, no more rewinding and they took up way less space, so there was a compelling reason to switch. Now the motivation is gone; the form factor is the same, the picture isn't that much better, and Bluray players and discs are still relatively expensive compared to DVDs.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
  3. "Good Enough" is the enemy of "Better" by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For 99+% of what I or my wife watches on DVD we couldn't care less about a better resolution or extra features. That really eliminates motivation to get a Blu-ray player.

    1. Re:"Good Enough" is the enemy of "Better" by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Exactly. It's also hurt by early adopters to Blu-Ray which had horrible mastering. I believe Talledega Nights was worse on Blu-Ray than DVD (and not just extras - picture quality too!).

      Upscaling DVD players do a remarkable job these days (and if you got one of the old discounted HD-DVD players back in the day, wow it's hard to tell).

      And Blu-Ray really only benefits new movies. Catalog movies often suffer worse on Blu-Ray due to poor mastering. (Compare the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray releases of Apollo 13 - yikes. The Blu-Ray has blown highlights, extensive DNR and other crap that despite a 66% increase in available storage capacity, it has less details than the HD-DVD version - at times it's so bad signs in the background are blurry).

      Blu-Ray doesn't offer much these days - in the early days they were often worse than DVDs (if you're an extras buff like me the Blu-Ray would be 50% more expensive for just the movie alone) when they were mastered well, and for the vast majority of people, a DVD is far more convenient because there are players everywhere - cars, portable (there are a few Blu-Ray portable players, but there are far more DVD ones), computers, and attached to practically every TV in the household. A Blu-Ray player is rarer, can probably only be watched on the "good" TV, and doesn't offer much more for most people.

      Even though I have both players, even I have to sit down and figure out if the extras are worth the extra cost, see if the mastering is any good (avsforum.com is good for this), etc. Even then I often buy DVD copies and reserve the Blu-Ray for movies I want (unless the differential is small).

      DVDs plus DVRs replaced inconvenient VHS. Blu-Ray doesn't add as much value to the mix these days for its cost.

  4. Price! by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because "regular price" for many blu-ray movie is $29.99 compaired to $17.99 for a DVD. The only times I buy blu-ray over DVD are for action movies that I really enjoyed (and that the improved picture quality is actually noticeable) or deep discount sales when I can get them for under $15.

  5. I used to collect DVDs by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Until my DVDs started to give me disc read errors. I'm tired of wasting money on planned obsolescence, I'm not replacing that collection with BluRays just to have them crap out on me in 5 years. Anyway, a better format will be out by then... I'm skipping this cycle.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  6. interwebs by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sony finally won the standards war but is almost irrelevant because people now watch stuff on-demand via streaming.

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
  7. Why have CD's held on so long by DaveInAustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and are being replaced with lower-quality .mp3's? Because most folks care about content more then they care about sound or picture quality.

    --
    --- http://davidnehme.blogspot.com
  8. Because... by the_one_wesp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...the economy is in the toilet, and people aren't rushing out to improve their video quality when they don't have the money to do so (or maybe they just don't care to do so).

  9. Not worth it by Fulminata · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because it's a substantial price increase for an incremental upgrade in quality and often a downgrade in convenience.

  10. It's caught on with me by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My biggest problem with blu-ray early on was that the first generation of players was awful. They were slow as Christmas (WAY slower than the first generation of DVD players) for one thing. Newer players are considerably faster and come with a lot more features. Unfortunately, it doesn't help that blu-ray discs still come with forced trailers (way more common with blu-rays than with DVD's) from most studios (Universal and a few others being notable exceptions).

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  11. Lets see by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The viewing experience is only marginally different unless you are watching on a big hi-def screen.
    The movies cost more
    the players cost more
    and what is the point of rereleasing old movies on Blu-Ray - like theres gonna be more shades of black and white?

  12. Blu-Ray isn't mainstream? by 0x15e · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is the first I've heard of it.

    Seems to me that someone at Fox just decided Blu-Ray was failing and wanted to write an article about it.

    1. Re:Blu-Ray isn't mainstream? by profplump · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or just read the article summary, where it says 50% of new player sales were Blu-Ray. That seems fairly mainstream.

      The headline-grabbing premise of the article claims "Blu-Ray is failing", but the actual argument being made to convince us of that is "Blu-Ray has not entirely replaced DVD in the first few years", which most people would not consider to be the same. There's absolutely no argument stated that even tried to convince us that Blu-Ray sales are on the decline or that Blu-Rays won't continue to grow and eventually supplant DVDs just like most incremental, backward-compatible upgrades.

  13. One-word answer: by amliebsch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Netflix

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    1. Re:One-word answer: by BagOBones · · Score: 4, Informative

      I purchased a BlureRay player specifically because it was cheap and had Netflix built in..
      Months later the ONLY BlureRay I have is the one that came with it, the content I watch with the device is all Netflix and my own media streamed via a DLNA server.

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
  14. Featuritis by PvtVoid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA:

    Blu-ray players connected to the Web can offer games, extra movie features, and additional bonus materials online that DVD players generally can't. And the latest Blu-ray players can handle 3D discs, something no DVD player can do.

    I don't want any of that shit, especially if I have to pay extra for it. I just want to watch a movie.

  15. DVDs are better. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 5, Informative

    DVDs don't crash because some jag-off decided to run Java code between frames of my movie. DVDs don't make me worry about version numbers, patching my player, or any of that jazz. And that's just technical.

    I have a DVD player in every computer, and connected to each TV - meaning portability. All my friends have DVD players. It's easier to find movies on DVD.

    DVDs are cheaper.

    I have a huge collection of DVD's. I'm not going to repurchase everything.

    Next will be going back to solid state non-spinning media. People don't change formats for picture quality (see: Betamax). They change for convenience/durability.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  16. Too good by Gorkamecha · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Honestly, the quality is too good - You can see the wizard behind the curtain. Real life example: My geeks friends and I were all standing around watching Iron man 2 on a super huge LCD screen at best buy. It was the scene where Tony escapes his captors in the clunky MKI armor. We all noted that the suit looked like plastic, not metal. That you could see where the joints didn't quite connect. In short, the illusion was shattered. I haven't bought a blue ray video since. (I have a PS3, I own a few blueray films that I got for the extra features - But I prefer to watch plain old DVDs.)

  17. I have many BluRay Discs since... by Assmasher · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...I have a home theater but there are several reasons why people aren't interested.

    (1)If you don't have a home theater and a giant screen to display movies on, you probably couldn't care less about the difference in quality between DVD and BluRay (plus, I've seen some crap BluRay transfers that were no improvement over DVD.)

    (2)Until mini-vans start coming with BluRay players by default, my wife will continue to buy DVDs to zombify the kids on car trips.

    (3)My personal hatred of BluRay - Taking several minutes to startup due to the DRM and HDCP handshaking, key updating, communication, et cetera.

    It is utterly ridiculous that putting a DVD in my Sony BluRay player versus a BluRay means a playback difference of 3 minutes (and I have a fast BluRay player.) Note that some BluRay Discs do not exhibit this behavior but all are still sloooooow compared to DVD.

    --
    Loading...
  18. Because for most people DVDs are "good enough" by Chas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Plain and simple. Most people aren't looking to play in high definition on Frank's 2000 inch TV.

    And for screens 60" and smaller high def, while noticeable just isn't enough of an improvement to merit the switchover.

    That and the huge install base of DVD players and drives out there is just an 800 lb gorilla that Blu-Ray has to struggle to overcome.

    And the capper.

    If there had NOT been a credible format war between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, we'd probably have seen better adoption by now. The format war completely crippled uptake of the format for YEARS. As such, neither HD platform gained the critical early traction necessary to overtake DVD. Now, this late in the game, since it has to now compete with streaming/downloadable content as well, it's going to continue to stumble.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  19. Re:DRM by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    unless the DRM is a lot worse

    all DRM is eventually defeated (region free playing, sharpie on the inner ring, etc), but if BluRay makes you jump through more hoops, and spend more money, for less rights, it's a turn off

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  20. 50% isn't that bad. by Fr05t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    50% market share isn't that bad is it? For a long time after DVDs came out VHS was still selling and renting well. Most people I know (including my parents) upgraded to Blu-Ray shortly after getting a >40" LCD.

  21. So ... who read the article? by librarybob · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The article states that Blu-ray player shipments are about to outstrip plain DVD. It's not like Blu-ray has failed. It *has* taken a while to capture the people who are still moving to HD. It *may* have a problem in competition with streaming (if you live in an area where there's sufficient bandwidth). I suppose the biggest issue is: will people continue to want to "own" content in physical form? The case is still out on that one (and even a minority position might be a very large market). Personally I think Blu-ray is still the only way to go if you've got/built a home theater.

  22. Re:Real Reason: sony botched the launch by hazydave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The lack of Blu-ray support from Apple is entirely an Apple thing. They want people to support iTunes, not Blu-ray. The tiny bit of money they would have made on video professional who want Blu-ray support (which they can actually get, after-market, on the Mac ... Adobe tools support it) pales in comparison to the cash they're pulling in on iOS devices and products. In fact, just the iPad itself brought in as much revenue as the Mac last year... and it wasn't even launched until April.

    Sony won specifically because Blu-ray wasn't proprietary. Toshiba and Microsoft ran HD-DVD like a gaming console -- Toshiba sold every player at a loss, which they could, because they got a per-disc royalty. Blu-ray was rapidly licensed... other than the PS3, Sony wasn't even out with a BD player early on (they had to devote their supply of lasers to the PS3).

    Blu-ray in PCs wasn't a critical thing, just as DVD in PCs wasn't when DVD was new. PCs only adopt the new consumer formats once the drives hit a comfortable price point. Which is about where Blu-ray drives are these days.

    And this is the same evolution as other devices. The pundits do expect Blu-ray player sales to exceed DVD this year, for the simple reason that the CE industry has counted on new DVD features of some kind every year to drive new player sales. Particularly today, your best chance at a new sale is to someone who's already a DVD users. The premium player market was long ago established at around US$100. When 480p players hit the market, they were more expensive, but settled into the $100 niche. Then upscaling players took over that $100 slot. Now it's Blu-ray players... they are, after all, still fully functional DVD players. By Christmas, BD players will hit the $50 mark on sales, then pretty regularly into 2012 -- just as BD players first hit the $100 mark last Christmas, and now are readily available at around $100.

    Media sales are another thing... many discs are sold to people with multiple players. You may have that BD player in the livingroom, but DVD players in the car, the kids room, the portable player or PC for vacation use. This has many new BDs bundled with a DVD as well... they'll spend the extra $0.05 to make the BD sales. Disc sales were around 20% last year, depending on the film (films with geek appeal do a significantly higher share of BD sales than, say, chick flicks or kiddie films). This is expected to increase this year.

    That's not the whole story, though, because it's also keyed by retailer. Wal-Mart sells the most DVDs in the country, and they're still highly DVD oriented. Best Buy, on the other hand, went over 50% Blu-ray last year, and they continue to grow. DVD sales are skewing toward highly discounted older releases already, and probably keep moving that way. That's one big reason the studios are all about the Blu-ray, even though it hasn't dominated yet. Don't forget, it took quite some time for DVD to replace VHS, and that was without the backward compatibility.

    Another related factor: just try to find a standard definition television or camcorder any more. They essentially don't exist. Consumers are moving rapidly toward HD in all things, which starts to make DVD unacceptable, at least for certain films. Same reason I could imagine watching a small cast drama in SD, but wouldn't even bother to watch any pro sport in SD... just doesn't work anymore.

    --
    -Dave Haynie
  23. Re:Not bothered - or too much bother by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The one that I would like to see more of; but is basically certain to not happen outside of pirate circles, is greater adoption of the dubiously standard; but quite convenient, intermediate format of MP4 video recorded on DVDs. All the cheapness of DVD production; but better quality than MPEG-2 for the same size. Some DVD players support it, and computers have no trouble; but it is totally informal.

    This is something I'd like to see also. All of our movies have been ripped to mp4 format and put on a hard drive on the media server, but there is no room in the car for such an item. It would be nice to fit a few movies per DVD for the kids to watch on long car trips.

    Which leads to the other two pluses for DVDs: (i) ripping a DVD is mindlessly easy nowadays, while ripping a BluRay still takes some effort, and (ii) region-free DVD players are the norm in most of the world, while I have not encountered a region-free BluRay player. We have a few DVDs which are region 0 (i.e. no region), a larger number which are region 1, but most are region 2. This is OK with a region-free DVD player, but wanting to view disks from different regions would mean buying multiple BluRay players.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire