[mbriant]

Blu-ray is dead - heckuva job, Sony! | Storage Bits | ZDNet.com

I'd like to think this isn't true, but this guy's got a point. Perhaps this holiday season will tell all. There should be a lot of HDTVs sold ... lets hope this infuses new life into Blu-Ray sales.

 

[EyeAmEye]

I'd like to think it is true. I don't see the big difference between Blu-Ray and an upsampled DVD that should account for the price difference. There is a point where enough is simply enough.

 

[subtle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyeAmEye /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd like to think it is true. I don't see the big difference between Blu-Ray and an upsampled DVD that should account for the price difference. There is a point where enough is simply enough.

The big difference is obviously in storage capacity, and being able to put these silly 4 disc regular DVD "special edition" releases on to one blu-ray disc. As far as visual quality, it's clearly there but right now the difference only matters to enthusiasts.

Blu-ray isn't dead IMO, far from it. It was just released too early because Sony was pushing to get the PS3 released asap in order to compete with the Xbox. The demand will eventually catch up, it will just take a year or two more. Once the digital conversion takes place in February, and more people invest in an HDTV for the first time, we will start to see Blu-ray sales increase.

 

[The Actual]

hm, I still think Blu Rays time is coming. People (based on unscientific polling/spying-on of my friends and family) are slow to upgrade televisions, so most don't have good enough high definition sets to both with blu ray....


on the other hand, with financial times like these people will be even less willing/motivated to keep up with the cutting edge gear.




Sony, I am rooting for you! (and still wistfully holding out for SACD revival)

 

[Ttvetjanu]

Remember how slow dvd was in the beginning? I'm pretty sure that blue ray will have it's time.

 

[gloco]

As the proud owner of a 65" DLP HDTV, I'm still happy with SD DVD's....why?

1. Price of players. Still too darn expensive for me. I'll wait until I can buy a Blu-Ray player for $100 or less.

The average consumer doesn't care about lines of resolution, price is what counts. Also, the media hasn't changed, its still the same size of a CD/DVD, so most consumers will feel like their not getting anything that's remotely different from DVD's at this point in time. If anyone thought Blu-Ray was going to become the next DVD in terms of sales and quick market penetration is kidding themselves. Most consumers are content with DVD's for the time being. Blu-ray will be one of those technologies that consumers slowly adopt to as prices of players drop and manufacturers discontinue sales of SD dvd players in the future and just let Blu-ray decks take over.

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ttvetjanu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Remember how slow dvd was in the beginning? I'm pretty sure that blue ray will have it's time.

No, it was pretty quick actually. I worked in sales in a video and music dept and the changeover was actually pretty quick and consumers were hip to the technology because it was vastly superior to VHS.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Are there enough videophiles to keep Blu-Ray alive? I'm not into video and barely know the market. Anecdotally, however, I don't see videophiles made from the same cloth as those nutty, obsessive audiophiles. Like those who insist on listening to 1930s vacuum tube technology and refusing to give up obsolete formats like vinyl and SACD. For whatever reason, audiophiles keep that stuff alive. However, when was the last time you saw a videophile fussing over a 1950s black-and-white all tube television, trying to get an analog signal over the air? That's the kind of person you need to keep niche formats alive.

 

[Nocturnal310]

Its not yet a mass market technology and thats because it has some issues for consumers:

1. A new dedicated player has to be bought to play it.

its like having to buy a new Computer just to run a Program


2. Almost Double the selling price of DVD

3. Advantage only realised in 42" or greater LCD screens and that too when sitting damn close.

4. 50 GB but with DRM.


there's no way i am buying a Blu ray..i would rather go n watch the movie 5 times in theatre.

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik when was the last time you saw a videophile fussing over a 1950s black-and-white all tube television, trying to get an analog signal over the air?

Funny you should ask.

http://photos.imageevent.com/mbriant...conversion.wmv


..

 

[archosman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyeAmEye /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd like to think it is true. I don't see the big difference between Blu-Ray and an upsampled DVD that should account for the price difference. There is a point where enough is simply enough.

Don't take this as a slam, but if you can't see the difference then you don't have very good eyes.

I'm pretty spoiled. I work in the post production industry and have access to broadcast quality monitors and equipment.

I've watched SD dvds on my playstation and they've looked pretty good. OTOH Blu-Ray is a far superior picture.

Part of the problem is the format is still in it's infancy so it's going to be a pretty expensive upgrade early on.

 

[Gatto]

As someone who has worked in tech retail including TVs, normal DVDs and Blu-Ray, I must agree that for a long time blu-ray will only be for videophiles, the people who came in looking for blu-ray absolutely knew their stuff and were the type with $100 bills falling out of their wallets all over the store. The only way blu-ray disks were moving more then 1-2 a day is when people came in to steal big piles of them.

 

[EyeAmEye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't take this as a slam, but if you can't see the difference then you don't have very good eyes. I'm pretty spoiled. I work in the post production industry and have access to broadcast quality monitors and equipment. I've watched SD dvds on my playstation and they've looked pretty good. OTOH Blu-Ray is a far superior picture. Part of the problem is the format is still in it's infancy so it's going to be a pretty expensive upgrade early on.

I can read a road sign from 1,000 feet, I can...

By playstation, do you mean PS3, and was it upsampled? There is a difference, as I noted, but not enough to warrant the price differences. Paying double the price to see the blackheads on Angelina Jolie's nose isn't worth it. Upsampled SD gives you a great picture as it is.

 

[archosman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyeAmEye /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can read a road sign from 1,000 feet, I can... By playstation, do you mean PS3, and was it upsampled?

Yes...

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyeAmEye /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is a difference, as I noted, but not enough to warrant the price differences. Paying double the price to see the blackheads on Angelina Jolie's nose isn't worth it. Upsampled SD gives you a great picture as it is.

I kind of disagree. I see a huge difference in image quality.

I may be a poor judge of character due to the fact I'm in television. We always strive for the best picture and are critical of everything.

 

[Al4x]

we had hd dvd player, not my choice, my step dads, thought it was a waste before i saw the picture,

after watching it, i thought meh, not worth it, on my laptop, the hd videos you get do look alot better than dvds, my 17inch screen has a silly huge 1920x1200 resolution,

but, with the cost on media thaat high, and the player, nah, ill pass, i have many other things on my to buy list before that

oh yeah, id never buy a playstaion so thats out of the question [hate the controllers]
i think the only thing id do is get a BR drive, but its not gonna happen in the near ffuture