ESCA: Blu-ray will be 50% of market by 2012 [Text View] - Page 2

PSound

07-08-09, 06:12 PM

And no... Netflix is NOT using First Class BRM. They do not qualify.

On August 3, 2006, the Postal Service launched PRM to
replace BRM because DVD mailpieces were not well-suited
for the BRM classification. Mailers who use PRM are those
who have close to 100 percent returns, such as DVD rental
companies.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

From the same source (and regarding postage):

Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece.

I am going to really have a good laugh if people still try and dispute the original facts (Netflix gets a small discount on outbound mail and pays full first class on inbound mail).

bjmarchini

07-08-09, 06:27 PM

Ratman

07-08-09, 06:30 PM

And... as my return mailer denotes (in the attachment above), it's PRM.

xraffle

07-08-09, 09:45 PM

Yes, because there is a direct correlation between Netflix shipping and Blu-ray’s market share in 2012. It all has to do with Netflix raising BD prices in order to subsidize their streaming service, and also how they are forcing giant CE makers to support Netflix on their BD players (with pictures of CEO’s wives and stuff like that). If you ask Oliver Stone, he has more details.:D
Ok, whatever you say.

You would think people would look at the facts and say "Oh.. I did not know that. I guess I was wrong." Instead they want to hold onto their original assertion even though they obviously did not have the proper data when they made their original statement.
Not gonna happen. People are fixed on their opinions and will not change it, just like how people are not going to change their views on the death penalty. (Just an example, fellas. Please don't get this thread off on a tangent by talking about that now)

Kosty

07-08-09, 09:59 PM

And no... Netflix is NOT using First Class BRM. They do not qualify.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

From the same source (and regarding postage):

I am going to really have a good laugh if people still try and dispute the original facts (Netflix gets a small discount on outbound mail and pays full first class on inbound mail).

That looks definitive as it seems to be specifically written for Netflix and Blockbuster.

They do get a significant outbound carrier route pre sort discount and I seem to have read somewhere that they get some sort of a pickup discount or credit on the receiving end, but I'm not sure on that.

As a major category business partner for the USPS I think they have some additional discounts negotiated because of their carrier sort and mail ready packaging that USPS ready.

fpconvert

07-08-09, 10:27 PM

now I remember why I stopped posting in this part of the forum. so much spin.

The mods must be out having a few beers because this thread has lost all direction and relation to the original post.

In fact, this section has become a place to whine about the short comings of BD and is a magnet for the DL guys who don't get no respect in their own forum area.

When I thought BD might be having some delays in releases, it was a good place to come. Now, with the new titles coming on, this area has become a lot less interesting.
BD is here to stay and there is a lot more interesting news to read about it elsewhere on this forum and others.

xraffle

07-08-09, 11:53 PM

The mods must be out having a few beers because this thread has lost all direction and relation to the original post.
Why didn't they invite me to join them? I would like some beer as well. :D

xraffle

07-08-09, 11:56 PM

My comment about you only having 12 was not a dig in any way. I was just merely pointing out that there is a very limited selection of those titles and that's with a reason.
Make that 13 BDs now. Just bought "Cruel Intentions" today at J&R (http://www.jr.com) for $14.99.

PSound

07-09-09, 12:49 AM

That looks definitive as it seems to be specifically written for Netflix and Blockbuster.

They do get a significant outbound carrier route pre sort discount and I seem to have read somewhere that they get some sort of a pickup discount or credit on the receiving end, but I'm not sure on that.

As a major category business partner for the USPS I think they have some additional discounts negotiated because of their carrier sort and mail ready packaging that USPS ready.

Also look at the data analysis I posted. Based on the known amount of discs shipped (from USPS) and the revenue and percentage of revenue that goes to USPS (via Netflix), you can get a pretty decent estimate of the roundtrip postage that Netflix pays.

PSound

07-09-09, 12:53 AM

Not gonna happen. People are fixed on their opinions and will not change it, just like how people are not going to change their views on the death penalty. (Just an example, fellas. Please don't get this thread off on a tangent by talking about that now)

But this is not strictly opinion. This is taking known information to figure out additional data. The data itself is not an opinion, but good information to understand the underlying business conditions.

One of my most respected people in the world often states that "the thing is just the thing". What that means is that information is just that... information. Use it for knowledge. Use knowledge to base informed opinions.

Ignorance is the enemy of all. Why anyone would try and squelch good and known information does not make sense.

Wendell R. Breland

07-09-09, 01:06 AM

Can someone provide a link to pricing and information at USPS for PRM (Permit Reply Mail). When I do a search there it just pulls up information and links to BRM (Business Reply Mail). TIA.

xraffle

07-09-09, 01:16 AM

But this is not strictly opinion. This is taking known information to figure out additional data. The data itself is not an opinion, but good information to understand the underlying business conditions.

One of my most respected people in the world often states that "the thing is just the thing". What that means is that information is just that... information. Use it for knowledge. Use knowledge to base informed opinions.

Ignorance is the enemy of all. Why anyone would try and squelch good and known information does not make sense.
I'm sure, back in the day, people had "good information" to prove that Laserdisc would be successful. I'm also sure people even had information to prove DVD would fail. But look what happened. My point is: no one can predict the future. With Blu-ray, it's all speculation at this point.

Calamus

07-09-09, 09:20 AM

Make that 13 BDs now. Just bought "Cruel Intentions" today at J&R (http://www.jr.com) for $14.99.

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

How can this be!
Everyone knows BD's are super expensive and cost $40 each :D

Calamus

07-09-09, 09:40 AM

I'm sure, back in the day, people had "good information" to prove that Laserdisc would be successful. I'm also sure people even had information to prove DVD would fail. But look what happened. My point is: no one can predict the future. With Blu-ray, it's all speculation at this point.

I think Laserdisk was a success. It evolved into what became DVD. With BD players selling as low as $69 (for internal PC drives) the advantages will only grow. For example, my brother in law has migrated all his video gear to BD and HD video cameras. With smart shoppers paying $15 and less for the media and player prices continuing to fall, I belevie BD will become a commodity item

ack_bk

07-09-09, 11:41 AM

Honestly price is going to be the biggest barrier for Blu-Ray. People will get that it has better picture, sound, extras, etc. I think most people are willing to pay slightly more for something that is a superior product. But there is too big a gap in pricing for most day and date releases IMHO. Obviously the studios and retailers are not in a hurry to slash prices and they have a point when the hardware is still, on average, in the $200 or so range. I believe the whole industry is following a similar playbook as they did with DVD. Lower hardware prices will fuel ownership which will create a bigger pool of people for the studios to target with lower pricing. The question I have is will we see this happen by 2012? I think for hardware we will. But I think studios and retailers will be in for a rude awakening if day and date titles between DVD and Blu-Ray still have such a large price gap (you know when the barebones DVD at major stores is $15 and the Blu-Ray is $25). So this must be addressed as well if they truly want Blu-Ray to be the successor to DVD.

Ratman

07-09-09, 12:03 PM

Nosferax

07-09-09, 01:57 PM

As I've said before... price is the major factor, especially when legacy DVD's still look darned good and sound good with plain old DTS/DD.

IMHO, the "majority" of consumers do not care about the extras, enhanced audio, interactve, etc... They just want to watch a movie.

TV's are expensive enough let alone added expense for a BR player, BRD's, audio receiver (for newer hi-rez formats) and perhaps network/internet access.

Everything you said here was said when DVD came out.

You had to buy a new receiver for DD and DTS (even a new player for DTS since the first model didn't do DTS). And plenty of people also complain about the marginal difference with VHS and DVD on their old beat up CRT plugged via coaxial or composite. They used to complain about black bar a lot too.

And those player were expensive. I paid $1100 for my panny A310 in early 1998. DVDs were selling between $27.99 for a barebone movie only release to $38.99. Criterion were even more expensive then. Compare that with my PS3 at $399 and my BR at $15 to $30.

TV's are expensive but people have to buy a new one when their old set dies and they don't have a choice anymore, it's HDTV or nothing.

Everdog

07-09-09, 02:12 PM

Everything you said here was said when DVD came out.

You had to buy a new receiver for DD and DTS (even a new player for DTS since the first model didn't do DTS). And plenty of people also complain about the marginal difference with VHS and DVD on their old beat up CRT plugged via coaxial or composite. They used to complain about black bar a lot too.

And those player were expensive. I paid $1100 for my panny A310 in early 1998. DVDs were selling between $27.99 for a barebone movie only release to $38.99. Criterion were even more expensive then. Compare that with my PS3 at $399 and my BR at $15 to $30.

TV's are expensive but people have to buy a new one when their old set dies and they don't have a choice anymore, it's HDTV or nothing.

I bought an open box special DVD player that had no DD chip for $150 at CC in 1998. I quickly joined netflix because there was no place around to buy or rent DVDs. If you searched the Internet you sometimes could get them for under $20 from .com stores trying to drum up business. The great thing about DVD is that you could tell the difference on 90+% of all TVs!

Anyways, times are different. Now you have a bunch of competing tech via for your video watching time. People do not like paying $25+ for an HD movie when they can download HD content for free or just a couple bucks. Videophiles know there is a huge difference, but not the average consumer. Heck, don't most people still only have SD TVs? Aren't more than 70% of TVs still SD?

PSound

07-09-09, 02:24 PM

I'm sure, back in the day, people had "good information" to prove that Laserdisc would be successful. I'm also sure people even had information to prove DVD would fail. But look what happened. My point is: no one can predict the future. With Blu-ray, it's all speculation at this point.

Understood. But what has been argued is not whether Blu-ray (or anything else) will be a success of failure. It is simple facts... like shipping costs, and higher acquisition costs and breakage rates for Blu-ray. Neither of those is a clear indicator of success or failure. They are only pieces of information.

PSound

07-09-09, 02:26 PM

Can someone provide a link to pricing and information at USPS for PRM (Permit Reply Mail). When I do a search there it just pulls up information and links to BRM (Business Reply Mail). TIA.

Here:

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece.

PSound

07-09-09, 02:30 PM

Ratman

07-09-09, 02:53 PM

Everything you said here was said when DVD came out.

And you forgot...
8-track
Audio cassette
Elcaset
Disc-o-Vision
Laserdisc
Beta
Hi-8
VHS

It's not a question of "survival" of the format, it's "adoption" by the majority of the general consumer. That adoption will be based on price(s) and not features alone. Bluray will be here for a long time, just not in every household as long as legacy DVD remains.

The higher price for BR is an important consideration to J6P when their existing DVD player and AVR work just fine (or HDTV for that matter). The audio/video improvements don't justify the added expense.

Hell... how many years did it take for DVD player/media prices to drop enough to allow it to "overtake" VHS in 50% of the households? I'd bet it was longer than 3 years.

Everdog

07-09-09, 02:59 PM

The one thing I recall about DVD is that it really was a bargain.

The form factor (cheap shipping) and the .com boom made it ridiculously cheap to build a library. It really differentiated from VHS as a collectors format.

The .com boom really helped. You had lots of online stores trying to make a name for themselves by having huge sales because of so much competition.

Netflix really helped too. Not only did you have a format that you see an improvement with on virtually every TV, but you could also rent discs for just a few dollars a month.

Maltby

07-09-09, 04:37 PM

Everything you said here was said when DVD came out.

I am sure bluray will do fine in the future, as in much better SACD has, for example.

But no way will it be another DVD.

Even if you had a ten inch screen tv back in the day, you could still appreciate the thinner form factor and not needing to rewind them. Remember when people actually paid money for a machine that did just one thing, rewind the tape?

Remember pan and scan. DVD helped put that to rest and helped fuel HDTV growth. I remember buying my first 16x9 HDTV before cable was offering it in my area. The decision to buy was made easier because I could watch 16x9 DVDs on my new TV and they would look great. And they did, and still do.

My first DVD player was the Panny RP56 bought at Sears for 243.00. Man, that was a great value.

And the picture quality, for movies I'd only watched on TV, it was like watching them for the first time. Which made it easy to justify buying them.

Everdog

07-09-09, 05:08 PM

I am sure bluray will do fine in the future, as in much better SACD has, for example.

But no way will it be another DVD.

Even if you had a ten inch screen tv back in the day, you could still appreciate the thinner form factor and not needing to rewind them. Remember when people actually paid money for a machine that did just one thing, rewind the tape?

Remember pan and scan. DVD helped put that to rest and helped fuel HDTV growth. I remember buying my first 16x9 HDTV before cable was offering it in my area. The decision to buy was made easier because I could watch 16x9 DVDs on my new TV and they would look great. And they did, and still do.

My first DVD player was the Panny RP56 bought at Sears for 243.00. Man, that was a great value.

And the picture quality, for movies I'd only watched on TV, it was like watching them for the first time. Which made it easy to justify buying them.

Chapters, menus, extras, no quality loss per viewing...

Wendell R. Breland

07-09-09, 05:33 PM

Here:Was the request not clear? Do I need to redo the question? I will highlight the request.

Can someone provide a link to pricing and information at USPS for PRM (Permit Reply Mail). When I do a search there it just pulls up information and links to BRM (Business Reply Mail). TIA.

Wendell R. Breland

07-09-09, 05:38 PM

Aren't more than 70% of TVs still SD?The last info that I had said that HDTV penetration was a little above 50%.

Calamus

07-09-09, 05:43 PM

The one thing I recall about DVD is that it really was a bargain.

The form factor (cheap shipping) and the .com boom made it ridiculously cheap to build a library. It really differentiated from VHS as a collectors format.

Tell that to my wallet when I paid $700 for my first Toshiba DVD player. Keep in mind that this was many years ago so in 2009 dollars it was even more. I also got Twister that same day and it was around $30 so how much is that in 2009 dollars?

Wendell R. Breland

07-09-09, 05:50 PM

If you folks want to argue DVD title prices then I will provide you with List and Price Paid for about 250 titles. The place of purchase was Digital Eyes, Ken Cranes, Buy.com and Amazon. This spans a period from 1997 to 2005. My first player was more than $960.00 (List was $1200.00)

Some of you should take a closer look at new DVD title release prices. You will find they cost much more than the stuff found in the cutout bins at Wally World.

PSound

07-09-09, 07:08 PM

Was the request not clear? Do I need to redo the question? I will highlight the request.

Can someone provide a link to pricing and information at USPS for PRM (Permit Reply Mail). When I do a search there it just pulls up information and links to BRM (Business Reply Mail). TIA.

The information is clear. That site (and the document) come from the Office of Inspector General, United States Postal Service.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/images/header.png

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece.

Nosferax

07-09-09, 07:32 PM

I bought an open box special DVD player that had no DD chip for $150 at CC in 1998. I quickly joined netflix because there was no place around to buy or rent DVDs. If you searched the Internet you sometimes could get them for under $20 from .com stores trying to drum up business. The great thing about DVD is that you could tell the difference on 90+% of all TVs!

Anyways, times are different. Now you have a bunch of competing tech via for your video watching time. People do not like paying $25+ for an HD movie when they can download HD content for free or just a couple bucks. Videophiles know there is a huge difference, but not the average consumer. Heck, don't most people still only have SD TVs? Aren't more than 70% of TVs still SD?

Except for Ebay, in 1998 there wasn't that much e-commerce going on. At least not at the level you have now. People were still afraid of buying online and Paypal/Bidpay type services were only starting up. At the time Ebay was the biggest place to buy DVD online and it was hit and miss on those deal.

90% better on any TV! Come on. Where did you get that stat. People use to plug them into their TV with the yellow-red-white cable bundled with them. Some even used composite to coax adapter bought at the dollars store.

I was heavilly into usenet at the time and was a regular on alt.video.dvd. People were posting the same stuff about the lack of quality difference of dvd compared with their vhs or svhs deck. They were complaining about the fragility of the medium, the scratches, the fact that you had to buy a new player for DTS or the firmware update. Oh yes DVD had those too. Especially when The Matrix came out, some of the panny had to have an update to play it and it had to be done at a service center.

Maltby

07-09-09, 07:35 PM

Tell that to my wallet when I paid $700 for my first Toshiba DVD player. Keep in mind that this was many years ago so in 2009 dollars it was even more. I also got Twister that same day and it was around $30 so how much is that in 2009 dollars?

Sad state of affairs you are pointing out. Twister Blurray list price today is also about $30, after years of inflation (reported and unreported), and seems more expensive than the DVD.

Ask your wallet about the declining disposable income in the US over the same period.

Nosferax

07-09-09, 07:40 PM

The information is clear. That site (and the document) come from the Office of Inspector General, United States Postal Service.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/images/header.png

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

Mmmm...

The way I read this, the document only say that for those mailler that can't be processed by machine (not all of them) they'll ask for a 17 cents surcharge.

I can't find a reference to your text:

"Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece. "

in that pdf. Maybe you wanted to post another link.

Ratman

07-09-09, 08:27 PM

Page 2, 3rd paragraph

PSound

07-09-09, 09:17 PM

Mmmm...

The way I read this, the document only say that for those mailler that can't be processed by machine (not all of them) they'll ask for a 17 cents surcharge.

I can't find a reference to your text:

"Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece. "

in that pdf. Maybe you wanted to post another link.

No need. The text is there on the page marked 2 (4th page of the PDF). 3rd full paragraph on that page.

xraffle

07-09-09, 09:18 PM

Well let me put it this way, HD is here to stay and I'm sure we can all agree on that. Blu-ray is the only HD format available right now. Until Blu-ray is replaced by another HD format, it should be here to stay as well. DVD is not HD so it will not be the future format for HD. Personally, if Blu-ray were to be replaced by something, it'll be memory. In the future, they'll come up with some kind of player that has USB ports and you can just plug and play your movies. People will be storing their HD movies on USB sticks. Now, don't quote me on this. It's just my view of the future, but it sounds like the most logical replacement for BDs. I mean, look at music.

Wendell R. Breland

07-09-09, 09:32 PM

The way I read this, the document only say that for those mailler that can't be processed by machine (not all of them) they'll ask for a 17 cents surcharge.I read that document awhile back. My take, the folks recommended a 17¢ surcharge but the USPS management never implemented it. They apparently moved the DVD rental folks to PRM (Permit Reply Mail). It seems to be a version of BRM (Business Reply Mail) in that round trip cost are paid when the item is shipped rather than collecting return postage when the item is returned. They probably get another hefty discount for doing so.

I also find it strange there is virtually no information about PRM at the USPS site.

PSound

07-09-09, 09:53 PM

I read that document awhile back. My take, the folks recommended a 17¢ surcharge but the USPS management never implemented it. They apparently moved the DVD rental folks to PRM (Permit Reply Mail). It seems to be a version of BRM (Business Reply Mail) in that round trip cost are paid when the item is shipped rather than collecting return postage when the item is returned. They probably get another hefty discount for doing so.

I also find it strange there is virtually no information about PRM at the USPS site.

The doc explicitly states the pay full First-Class Mail rates on inbound, and receive a discount for how they bundle (pre-sort) on outbound.

"Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece. "

That lines up exactly with what Netflix discusses in their SEC filing:

Cost of Revenues

Postage and Packaging.

Postage and packaging expenses consist of the postage costs to mail DVDs to and from our paying subscribers and the packaging and label costs for the mailers. Between January 8, 2006 and May 13, 2007, the rate for first-class postage was $0.39. The U.S. Postal Service increased the rate of first class postage by 2 cents to $0.41 effective May 14, 2007 and by one cent to $0.42 effective May 12, 2008. We receive discounts on outbound postage costs related to our mail preparation practices.

It also matches data analysis based on other known information:

The Post Office has reported that they ship approximately 2 million DVDs out from Netflix a day.

Another customer success highlighted during the session was Netflix, which mails about 2 million DVDs each day — exclusively with the Postal Service.

http://www.usps.com/communications/pccinsider/2009/pcc_0519se.htm

Netflix ships First Class mail. Their CEO has repeatedly stated that 1/3 of subscriber revenue goes to the post office.

Hastings: No. In streaming, anyone can do the mechanics of it. It'd be a very competitive market. The difference is in the DVD world, of all our revenue -- a third of it goes to studios, a third of it goes to the post office and a third is for us. The gross margin is about 33%. In streaming, two-thirds will go to the studio, the post office will get none, and we'll get a third.

http://www.hackingnetflix.com/2009/04/hollywood-reporter-interviews-netflix-ceo-reed-hastings.html

Let's assume that Netflix ships 261 days a year (Monday-Friday) and not factor in holidays.

2,000,000 DVDs sent out a day. Assume the same number (on average) are returned a day. Let's use the roundtrip rate of $.80 (that factors in their discount for bundling the outbound discs).

2,000,000 * .8 = $1,600,000 USPS shipping costs per day.

$1,600,000 per day * 261 days = $417,600,000 in USPS shipping costs per year.

Netflix's 2008 Fiscal Year revenue was 1.364 billion.

$417.6 million / 1.364 billion = 30.6%

That is just about the 1/3 number that Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has repeated says goes to the Post Office (as a percentage of revenue).

I hope people note the people who seem unable to graciously accept clear documentation and ample evidence that counters their initial beliefs and statements. It should be noted that people who cannot look at facts and make a new informed decision are likely not basing any of their decisions on facts or logic.

42Plasmaman

07-09-09, 10:14 PM

PSound

07-09-09, 10:27 PM

Are we talking about Blu-ray and HIGH DEFINITION in this forum or discussing Netflix STANDARD DEFINITION streaming and their postal rates?

It is about correcting false information.

These should be relatively short (but valuable) side discussions to make sure the discussion is based on fact. The only reason these side discussions go on so long is that there are a couple of people who do not seem to value the truth.

fpconvert

07-09-09, 10:54 PM

It is about correcting false information.

These should be relatively short (but valuable) side discussions to make sure the discussion is based on fact. The only reason these side discussions go on so long is that there are a couple of people who do not seem to value the truth.

Seems it's more about hijacking the thread than anything else with bickering back and forth with reply after reply about postal rates...geez. What do postal rates have to do w/ Bd being 50% of the market by 2012???

xraffle

07-09-09, 11:06 PM

What do postal rates have to do w/ Bd being 50% of the market by 2012???
That's a darn good question.

PSound

07-09-09, 11:17 PM

Seems it's more about hijacking the thread than anything else with bickering back and forth with reply after reply about postal rates...geez. What do postal rates have to do w/ Bd being 50% of the market by 2012???

You should ask Wendell. He made this post:

http://forum.blu-ray.com/images/smilies/imported/rofl.gif
Some folks needs to do a little research into BRM (Business Reply Mail). If you believe that Netflix and Blockbuster is paying 88¢ for round trip postage then there is no help for you. IIRC, the BRM rate before the recent rate increase was about 6¢ each way (12¢ total). IMO, Netflix probably pays less than 10¢ round trip because of their volume. USPS site does not list volume rates that Netflix does.

The statement that Netflix pays less than $.10 round trip is incorrect. My first post that corrected him referenced a Netflix SEC filing. So did my second response. The only reason it went on was because he kept on pushing the false information.

You would think that if people really wanted to get the thread back in topic they would tell him that the facts support that Netflix pays a discounted First Class postage rate outbound, and full First-Class postage inbound.

Calamus

07-10-09, 12:49 AM

Media markets these days are more and more fragmented it will be very difficult for BD to reach 50%. IMHO, it will be a few years before they can even reach 50% of the physical media market.

So you agree with the original reason for this post where it was said " ESCA: Blu-ray will be 50% of market by 2012". Actually a few years could also equal to two since you did say a "few years"

Thanks, glad to see you are in complete agreement.:D

Hughmc

07-10-09, 12:58 AM

Are we talking about Blu-ray and HIGH DEFINITION in this forum or discussing Netflix STANDARD DEFINITION streaming and their postal rates?

I guess it's one way to keep a thread alive by bumping it with waaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic discussion to push an agenda. :rolleyes:

And Ratman, thanks for coming in to the blu-ray sub-forum to add your 2cents about something in which you are not experiencing in your own home.

I have been here before in these threads in this sub forum and have asked what is the intent of the posters. Several of us that are Blu Ray owners and SUPPORTERS (because we enjoy the format) know that about a half dozen or so posters were or I should say ARE hardcore HD DVD zealots and they know who they are. I could call them out by name, but the point is they don't own Blu Ray, seemingly have no intention of owning BD, but yet come into these threads over and over to tout the demise of BD. WHy? What is their intent? It makes no sense to me. It is one thing to be supportive of a type of format, technology etc, but why would anyone be against one that is a natural progression and evolution of Home Theatre, :confused: unless 1.5 years later they are still disgruntled at the loss of their beloved format. Maybe the mods are just content keeping them away and out of threads that they have no intent in being supportive of and it keeps the BS to a limited area...almost like they are quarantined here, but not banned, because hey potential dollar signs are there if they support advertisers. :D

My two cents as always has been BD will thrive and 2012 is 3 full xmas shopping seasons away with plenty of time for price drops and adoption to be successful. Like others have said it is a lot of speculation at this point, but there is some reality and I think 50% maybe on the conservative side. Then again I just walked out of a landscape customers of mine's house with a DVD player, VHS player and 5 disc Teac CD changer all in working order as they were giving them away. They are an older couple in their 70's and I think they are not the exception but rather the standard that will take place over the next couple of years as tvs get swapped for HDTV's and BD players replace their DVD players.

Hughmc

07-10-09, 12:59 AM

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 01:11 AM

In case anyone is wondering: when I want to know the cost of shipping an item I go to the shipper for that information, be it FedEx, UPS, DHL or USPS. I do not depend on any other references. It is clear Blockbuster is using BRM First-Class Mail. One can go to USPS site and easily find the rates for such service. The rate, in volume, for said service is much less than an individual mailing a single First-Class letter. There is no reason to believe Netflix is doing any different other than paying round trip postage (PRM) which probably gets them an even greater discount.

I have not seen a single reference to the official USPS site that would contradict the above.

If you want to show me wrong then please use only the official USPS web site. I do not have any interest in any other information.

PSound

07-10-09, 01:21 AM

Calamus

07-10-09, 01:21 AM

The statement that Netflix pays less than $.10 round trip is incorrect. My first post that corrected him referenced a Netflix SEC filing. So did my second response. The only reason it went on was because he kept on pushing the false information.

You would think that if people really wanted to get the thread back in topic they would tell him that the facts support that Netflix pays a discounted First Class postage rate outbound, and full First-Class postage inbound.

But that's NOT what you said...

The streaming model fits in perfectly with Netflix's all-you-can-eat model. It removes one of their biggest costs (US Post Office), and allows them to offer MORE money per viewing to the studios (basically the $.88 of postage can now be given to the studios).

So while others may have understated the cost you clearly overstated the cost since you chose to overlook the discount and thus distributed false information. You cant have it both ways.

Also you said....

I hope most reasonable people can see that the Blu-ray price increase has everything to do with Blu-ray. The fact is that the investments that Netflix will be making in streaming (as it continues to drive their growth) are likely going to far outpace the extra revenue they see from Blu-ray (and which revenue has already been earmarked to cover the extra Blu-ray costs).

There is no way you can possibly know that 100% (earmark = set aside money) of the increase in BD cost goes to the added cost of BD.

While I do believe the majority of cost is used exactly as was stated in the filling, but I would advise not using absolutes that you have no way to know for certain and then accuse others of speaking falsely.

Hughmc

07-10-09, 01:27 AM

Is this the US Postal forum or did I lose my mail or something? WTF?? Guys let it go, move on or expect the thread to be closed. So one argument can't hold water anymore and now we need to move to arguing about postal rates when really it is still an HD DVD vs BD projection argument. I will say it again and again because I still believe it. This forum has no place and should have been closed last year.

PSound

07-10-09, 01:41 AM

So while others may have understated the cost you clearly overstated the cost since you chose to overlook the discount and thus distributed false information. You cant have it both ways.

I am not trying to have it both ways. I used the information that I had at the time. I also corrected myself when I was able to find better information. That is what reasonable people do... try and learn more and incorporate that knowledge into their statements and opinions.

There is no way you can possibly know that 100% (earmark = set aside money) of the increase in BD cost goes to the added cost of BD.

While I do believe the majority of cost is used exactly as was stated in the filling, but I would advise not using absolutes that you have no way to know for certain and then accuse others of speaking falsely.

Netflix stated that they were charging extra for Blu-ray due to extra costs associated with Blu-ray. I do not have the exact financial details (and never claimed I did), but based on the higher cost of Blu-ray and Netflix pointing out the higher failure rate of BD as a risk in their SEC filing, I absolutely do believe that the revenue from Blu-ray subscribers is going to cover those extra costs.

And again, to be clear. I have absolutely no issues with clarifying what I mean and incorporating new or updated info. If Netflix were to release information tomorrow that contradicted anything I had posted, I would have no problem accepting that info.

What I will not do is change my mind because people are using logical fallacies, or let someone muddy what is clearly a fact by throwing around doubt and not presenting any data to support their argument.

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 02:54 AM

The statement that Netflix pays less than $.10 round trip is incorrect. My first post that corrected him referenced a Netflix SEC filing. So did my second response. The only reason it went on was because he kept on pushing the false information.You need to learn the difference between a statement of fact and an opinion. There is a big difference between “They are paying less than 10¢” and “I believe they are paying less than 10¢”. I was very clear that it was an opinion.

PSound

07-10-09, 03:10 AM

You need to learn the difference between a statement of fact and an opinion. There is a big difference between “They are paying less than 10¢” and “I believe they are paying less than 10¢”. I was very clear that it was an opinion.

You did make the statement... complete with ROFL icons, insults to those who disagreed with you and a dismissal for several sources of information and a valid breakdown of how the numbers fit into Netflix' financial data.

Most people just giving an "opinion" do not resort to such antics.

Fortunately it looks like you have finally let reality in and we can move off this topic. We don't know the exact outbound discount they are receiving, but it looks like a reasonable estimate is $.80 in USPS postage fees for the round-trip of physical media. As PRM is now the only shipping method available for this type of round-trip DVD delivery, it looks like all businesses involved will be paying close to this rate.

Carry on...

bt12483

07-10-09, 06:51 AM

I am not trying to have it both ways. I used the information that I had at the time. I also corrected myself when I was able to find better information. That is what reasonable people do... try and learn more and incorporate that knowledge into their statements and opinions. You have mainly been using one document, the SEC filing, as if it is the gospel on this manner. As if anything that wasn't said in that document cannot be true. Plenty was left unsaid in that SEC filing. For instance, not once do they explicitly mention how they are paying for streaming. Yet we know they are somehow paying for it. Why did they not mention that? If the SEC filing is the most current "Bible" of this topic....welll it sure is missing some pretty big components. And it is this fact, that not everything that is known about this topic was said in the SEC filing, that allows for "doubt" to be introduced.

Netflix stated that they were charging extra for Blu-ray due to extra costs associated with Blu-ray. And they also said that breakage only afflicted "a fraction of a percent (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/04/cracked-netflix/)" of discs...yet somehow you keep ignoring that comment.

If something has a failure rate of a "fraction of a percent", a logical assumption would be that any extra costs related to "a fraction of a percent" are also on a level of "a fraction of a percent". Therefore, without a quantifier in their SEC filing, how can you then attribute the majority of the extra bluray fees as being earmarked for something that only costs them "a fraction of a percent"? YOU CAN'T. Their is nothing to quantify their comments against. There are few if any absolutes.

I do not have the exact financial details (and never claimed I did), but based on the higher cost of Blu-ray and Netflix pointing out the higher failure rate of BD as a risk in their SEC filing, I absolutely do believe that the revenue from Blu-ray subscribers is going to cover those extra costs. Did they even quantify "higher failure rate"? I do not believe they did. "Higher" in regards to what level?

What if DVD has a failure rate of 1/10 discs, and bluray has a failure rate of 1.1/10 discs. By the numbers, bluray indeed has a "higher failure rate"....but only by "a fraction of a percent". Since you do not know what level "higher" starts at, how can you know how much it costs them to fix? "Higher" without a reference point does not help very much in explaining things.

You are making an assumption. Which may or may NOT be correct.

And again, to be clear. I have absolutely no issues with clarifying what I mean and incorporating new or updated info. If Netflix were to release information tomorrow that contradicted anything I had posted, I would have no problem accepting that info.

What I will not do is change my mind because people are using logical fallacies, or let someone muddy what is clearly a fact by throwing around doubt and not presenting any data to support their argument.
The fact is you are making assumptions just like everyone else is. The SEC filing is full of missing data, that you are filling in with your "logical assumptions". None of the bluray comments were explicitly quantified. You seemingly want to attribute 100% of the bluray fees to covering the "higher" bluray costs. Which is a viable assumption, but is NOT the ONLY assumption that can be made. Too much data is left unmentioned to be able to absolutely call things one way or the other. And you cannot categorically say your assumption is correct, while others are incorrect.

Why is it you seem to hang on the fact that the bluray costs were "explicitly mentioned" but yet shy away from other data that was NOT "explicitly mentioned". Lots of stuff in the SEC document went unsaid. In fact it barely scrapes the surface on some topics - like how they are paying for streaming. It also lumps all of their revenue together. You cannot explicitly state that 100% of bluray fees are used ONLY to pay for extra bluray costs, just like I can't state that 100% of the extra fees are NOT being used to pay for extra bluray costs. The data simply is not their, and any assumptions made from the document are just that...ASSUMPTIONS - which cannot be proven wrong or right until more information is presented.

Yet somehow I bet you will state that I am "false", while you are "correct".:rolleyes:

fpconvert

07-10-09, 07:39 AM

Ratman

07-10-09, 07:58 AM

And Ratman, thanks for coming in to the blu-ray sub-forum to add your 2cents about something in which you are not experiencing in your own home.

Oh I'm sorry, I thought I was permitted to post an opinion in any forum. I guess I'll run out now and buy a BR player just in case I have more to say. :rolleyes:

Ratman

07-10-09, 08:13 AM

I have been here before in these threads in this sub forum and have asked what is the intent of the posters. Several of us that are Blu Ray owners and SUPPORTERS (because we enjoy the format) know that about a half dozen or so posters were or I should say ARE hardcore HD DVD zealots and they know who they are. I could call them out by name, but the point is they don't own Blu Ray, seemingly have no intention of owning BD, but yet come into these threads over and over to tout the demise of BD. .

The HD-DVD/BR war is over. The Title of the thread does not denote "Blu-ray Owners Only!". Why can't someone (a non-BR owner) state a reason in response to the thead? My response(s) has nothing to do with being an HD-DVD zealot nor the demise/success of BR nor did mention HD-DVD.:confused:

Everdog

07-10-09, 08:33 AM

While you guys were arguing about friggin postal rates, Wally World posted a $98 price tag on a BD player:p:D:D:D

Yes it's a low end model but....for guys who wrestle each other to the mat for a 10 cent postal discount on a mailer, it's right up your alley.:D

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3083

At this rate, i'm upping my estimate to 60% by 2012.

I think this is the same one I had for about 2 days. Its slow...don't play any BD-J discs on it, it does NOT support AVCHD, and of course its a profile that does not support all BD features.

I worry J6P will try players like this and be turn off by Blu-ray. In these days of instant gratification, waiting 2-4 minutes for a disc to load is torture (rumor was they used these players with BD-J discs at Guantanamo:D).

Nosferax

07-10-09, 08:51 AM

I think this is the same one I had for about 2 days. Its slow...don't play any BD-J discs on it, it does NOT support AVCHD, and of course its a profile that does not support all BD features.

I worry J6P will try players like this and be turn off by Blu-ray. In these days of instant gratification, waiting 2-4 minutes for a disc to load is torture (rumor was they used these players with BD-J discs at Guantanamo:D).

Those who buy this player may take the 2 to 4 minutes to get themself a beer and a bowl of popcorn, not bitch and moan about the speed of their player.

You don't need profile 2.0 if you don't have your player connected to the net which is the case for the vast majority of household I believe.

And AVCHD is only usefull if you have a video camera or if you rip your BR which the majority of houshold don't have or don't do I believe.

So for John Q public, this $98 player will fill the same rôle as his $40 DVD player. It will play movies.

Kosty

07-10-09, 09:11 AM

I think this is the same one I had for about 2 days. Its slow...don't play any BD-J discs on it, it does NOT support AVCHD, and of course its a profile that does not support all BD features.

I worry J6P will try players like this and be turn off by Blu-ray. In these days of instant gratification, waiting 2-4 minutes for a disc to load is torture (rumor was they used these players with BD-J discs at Guantanamo:D).

Its the faster 2nd generation of the Magnavox player. Its also being sold to exhaustion and it just arrived in Wal-Mart stores in Jan 2009. Pretty much looks like it a end of season remnant sale off the Father's Day sale and Wal-Mart will move to all BD-Live faster better performing capable players for now on. Most people that buy it for $98 will rightfully conclude they got a good deal and will understand its not the best performing Blu-ray player available.

Magnavox NB530MGX Blu-ray Player is the current report though any of the earlier ones still in stock probably will get the same price point.

Pretty much has a slow issue with about 6 BD-J heavy discs on the market, but its actually faster than most any of the 2006 2007 and early 2008 models that were sold. Have not heard many reports of storming the of the gates yet.

ack_bk

07-10-09, 10:43 AM

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 12:12 PM

You did make the statement...I said the “less than 10¢” was an opinion, it was not a statement of fact. What about that is unclear to you?

As to ROFL, go check your mirror, you use that quite often!!! The fact that I upstaged you with a graphic does not make mine worse than yours.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now some facts from USPS:

Notice 123 · Effective May 11, 2009
First-Class Mail
Commercial Letters & cards
1 ounce, 5-Digit = $0.335

Permit Reply Mail (PRM) - Permit holder pays postage for sending and receiving mail at the time of mailing. Permit holders obtain permits through the Business Mail unit (does not mean PRM is the same as BRM).

PRM mail does not require the Permit Number to be on the mail piece (makes sense because you have to pay round trip postage up front)

I did not try to find the actual rate for PRM but it should be clear to anyone that when commercial rates and volume discounts are applied means the rate paid by Blockbuster and Netflix should be significantly less than 88¢ for a round trip per mail piece. And because PRM mail is paid at the time of mailing should mean a lower rate than BRM. Just using the single piece rate of 33.5¢ means round trip price of 67¢.

So I was on the low side of the rate card but it should be clear these folks are not paying anywhere near the full 88¢ rate for Domestic Retail Prices. That was my original contention with the SEC filing that was referenced.

()=my comments

PSound

07-10-09, 12:28 PM

I said the “less than 10¢” was an opinion, it was not a statement of fact. What about that is unclear to you?

As to ROFL, go check your mirror, you use that quite often!!! The fact that I upstaged you with a graphic does not make mine worse than yours.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now some facts from USPS:

Notice 123 · Effective May 11, 2009
First-Class Mail
Commercial Letters & cards
1 ounce, 5-Digit = $0.335

Permit Reply Mail (PRM) - Permit holder pays postage for sending and receiving mail at the time of mailing. Permit holders obtain permits through the Business Mail unit (does not mean PRM is the same as BRM).

PRM mail does not require the Permit Number to be on the mail piece (makes sense because you have to pay round trip postage up front)

I did not try to find the actual rate for PRM but it should be clear to anyone that when commercial rates and volume discounts are applied means the rate paid Blockbuster and Netflix should be significantly less than 88¢ for a round trip per mail piece. And because PRM mail is paid at the time of mailing should mean a lower rate than BRM. Just using the single piece rate of 33.5¢ means round trip price of 67¢.

So I was on the low side of the rate card but it should be clear these folks are not paying anywhere near the full 88¢ rate for Domestic Retail Prices. That was my original contention with the SEC filing that was referenced.

()=my comments

There are three sources that point to the rates being paid.

First is Netflix's SEC filing where they quote First-Class rates, and that they only discuss a discount on outbound mail:

Cost of Revenues

Postage and Packaging.

Postage and packaging expenses consist of the postage costs to mail DVDs to and from our paying subscribers and the packaging and label costs for the mailers. Between January 8, 2006 and May 13, 2007, the rate for first-class postage was $0.39. The U.S. Postal Service increased the rate of first class postage by 2 cents to $0.41 effective May 14, 2007 and by one cent to $0.42 effective May 12, 2008. We receive discounts on outbound postage costs related to our mail preparation practices.

Next is the report from the Office of Inspector General, United States Postal Service which also states that most companies only receive a discount on the outbound mail and that inbound mail pays "full First-Class Mail rates".

Regarding pricing, PRM DVD mailers present their mailings
at a business mail entry unit, and most pay First-Class
presort automation letter rates for outbound mailpieces.
Postage for the return envelopes is prepaid at full First-
Class Mail rates and is collected when the outbound pieces
are mailed. Mailpieces that fail one or more of the
nonmachinable criteria in the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM)
are assessed a nonmachinable surcharge of $0.17 per
piece.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

Last is a document from the United States Postal Service showing the rate for PRM mail is $.44.

Permit Reply Mail

B17 Single-Piece Letter (1 oz. or less) $0.440

http://www.usps.com/forms/_pdf/ps3600r_051109.pdf

I have not seen any evidence that any other rate applies to Netflix (or Blockbuster). PRM was designed specifically to provide appropriate service and pricing to DVD rental companies. The rates are known, as well as the one "discount" (related to pre-sort and bundling). There really is not much ambiguity with this data.

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 02:06 PM

I have not seen any evidence that any other rate applies to Netflix (or Blockbuster). PRM was designed specifically to provide appropriate service and pricing to DVD rental companies. The rates are known, as well as the one "discount" (related to pre-sort and bundling). There really is not much ambiguity with this data.Why would any US business pay full single piece Domestic Retail rates when they can pay discounted Domestic Commercial rates?? Family members that own businesses sure takes advantage of the discounted rates. Our agency sure took/takes advantage of USPS discounts that applied to us. If Netflix is paying single piece Domestic Retail rates then they could save a lot of money just by using Domestic Commercial rates and doing SASE.

Do you think I just made-up the pricing information about Domestic Commercial rates?

As to Blockbuster, I have posted a photo of their mailer. It is very clear they are using BRM (Business Reply Mail). It is not PRM and nowhere have I seen any indication PRM was designed specifically for DVD rental companies. As I noted above, it makes sense to use PRM because a DVD should be returned at some point. PRM only makes sense for users that will have a large return rate.

The USPS OIG said the DVD rentals should be assessed with the nonmachinable fee because they fail the DMM requirements. The USPS management said no to adding the fee. You see, when it comes to big money there is BIG gray areas created.

Just curious, if you should ever own a business that required a large volume of mail (with return mail) where would you go for authorization, pricing and info?

PSound

07-10-09, 02:32 PM

Why would any US business pay full single piece Domestic Retail rates when they can pay discounted Domestic Commercial rates?? Family members that own businesses sure takes advantage of the discounted rates. Our agency sure took/takes advantage of USPS discounts that applied to us. If Netflix is paying single piece Domestic Retail rates then they could save a lot of money just by using Domestic Commercial rates and doing SASE.

Do you think I just made-up the pricing information about Domestic Commercial rates?

As to Blockbuster, I have posted a photo of their mailer. It is very clear they are using BRM (Business Reply Mail). It is not PRM and nowhere have I seen any indication PRM was designed specifically for DVD rental companies. As I noted above, it makes sense to use PRM because a DVD should be returned at some point. PRM only makes sense for users that will have a large return rate.

(snip)

Just curious, if you should ever own a business that required a large volume of mail (with return mail) where would you go for authorization, pricing and info?

I would go to the USPS. If I was a DVD by mail rental company, they would tell me I am subject to Permit Reply Mail service and rates.

On August 3, 2006, the Postal Service launched PRM to
replace BRM because DVD mailpieces were not well-suited
for the BRM classification. Mailers who use PRM are those
who have close to 100 percent returns, such as DVD rental
companies.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

The USPS OIG said the DVD rentals should be assessed with the nonmachinable fee because they fail the DMM requirements. The USPS management said no to adding the fee. You see, when it comes to big money there is BIG gray areas created.

You are correct that Netflix is basically receiving a discount by not paying the $.17 nonmachinable surcharge. The document from the Inspector General of the USPS discusses this. If you do even a bit of research on the topic, you will see that the USPS does not have any official orders to hand process Netflix mailers, but that 70% of Post Offices do. This is cause for complaints, particularly from GameFly who pays the same PRM rates and does not get this beneficial treatment.

If Netflix were required to pay the nonmachinable surcharge, their roundrip rates would be closer to $.97 instead of the estimated $.80 they pay right now.

Ratman

07-10-09, 02:46 PM

Guys...
Can you create a new thread for the USPS discussion and ask the mods to move the existing USPS posts in this thread to the new one?

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 03:09 PM

I should have known you would evade the questions.

I would go to the USPS. If I was a DVD by mail rental company, they would tell me I am subject to Permit Reply Mail service and rates.Why? I bet if you wanted to mail out (and have returned) every DVD via fixed rate ($4.50) Priority Mail (they have that service) they would be elated to accommodate you. Also do you not believe Blockbuster is still using BRM?

As to Netflix using BRM, it is obvious that they did a some point in time. I was a subscriber for 27 months and when this came up I felt certain it had a BRM marking on it but I truly can not remember what the return envelope looked like.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1a/Netflixenvelope.jpg

PSound

07-10-09, 03:17 PM

I should have known you would evade the questions.

There is nothing to evade. The USPS has a service for DVD by mail rentals companies, and it is PRM.

The rates for PRM that have been discussed also line up precisely with the financial data from Netflix, and the statements by Netflix CEO Reed Hastings that 1/3 of revenue goes to the Post Office.

Wendell R. Breland

07-10-09, 03:35 PM

There is nothing to evade.Sure there is you just did so.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3459/3700731843_c5205d2775.jpg

That was just taken a day or two back. You can clearly see it is BRM it is not PRM. I can take more if you like.

Time to http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3078/3120825897_7955cd0df2_m.jpg because we are done.

Everdog

07-10-09, 03:42 PM

Those who buy this player may take the 2 to 4 minutes to get themself a beer and a bowl of popcorn, not bitch and moan about the speed of their player.

You don't need profile 2.0 if you don't have your player connected to the net which is the case for the vast majority of household I believe.

And AVCHD is only usefull if you have a video camera or if you rip your BR which the majority of houshold don't have or don't do I believe.

So for John Q public, this $98 player will fill the same rôle as his $40 DVD player. It will play movies.

I have 2 PS3s so the slowness was kind of a pain since I had something else mouch faster that I was used to. The profile thing didn't matter because of the PS3s.
AVCHD was the straw that broke the camels back. I own a Sony HD camcorder and had a Panasonic AVCHD camcorder before that. All my home videos for the past several years are in AVCHD. Its really becoming a standard and its a shame that some Blu-ray players do not support it.

BTW, a $40 DVD player will load discs about 5 times faster (than BD-J discs on that player).

Oh, and did anyone know that the ESCA thinks Blu-ray will be 50% of market by 2012 ? We do not know what their thoughts are on postal rates though.

PSound

07-10-09, 03:56 PM

...

I have shown multiple exhibits discussing what PRM is, how it applies specifically to DVD by mail rental companies and PRM postage rates.

Please show me any USPS documentation, or SEC (or other executive) information that counters that information.

You have not, because you cannot. You are correct that this discussion is over. Every piece of documentation supports the assertion of ~ $.80 roundtrip postal rates for DVD mailers.

Your original assertion of $.10 roundtrip is laughably wrong (by a factor of 800%). Good day! :)

Maltby

07-10-09, 04:15 PM

Does it cost Netflix more for mail and return mail of a bluray disc than a DVD?

PSound

07-10-09, 04:21 PM

Does it cost Netflix more for mail and return mail of a bluray disc than a DVD?

No. Shipping cost is the same.

They have stated in their SEC filings that breakage rates of Blu-ray are higher and could have a negative impact of their profitability... but did not provide any additional details in the filing.

Kosty

07-10-09, 05:09 PM

I would go to the USPS. If I was a DVD by mail rental company, they would tell me I am subject to Permit Reply Mail service and rates.

http://www.uspsoig.gov/FOIA_files/MS-AR-08-001.pdf

You are correct that Netflix is basically receiving a discount by not paying the $.17 nonmachinable surcharge. The document from the Inspector General of the USPS discusses this. If you do even a bit of research on the topic, you will see that the USPS does not have any official orders to hand process Netflix mailers, but that 70% of Post Offices do. This is cause for complaints, particularly from GameFly who pays the same PRM rates and does not get this beneficial treatment.

If Netflix were required to pay the nonmachinable surcharge, their roundrip rates would be closer to $.97 instead of the estimated $.80 they pay right now.

I believe the management action of USPS concerning a demand for Netflix to pay the 0.17 surcharge was an acknowledgement that the USPS did pre validate the Netflix mailers as being machinable. Thats the required process and if they did retract that after such a determination was made Netflix would have cause to request relief. After all Netflix did in good faith go out at buy millions and millions of those mailer designs and designed a business strategy and investments based on their use. Its also is a big customer that provides a revenue stream to the USPS and attempted in good faith to coordinate its actions. Kinda not their fault that the USPS folks who certified it for automation screwed up.

The extra labor charge also is an accounting vehicle. Sure it may make it easier if they were not needing the extra handling but it has been worked into their shifts. Perfect example of what a audit is supposed to do but also a pretty reasonable management action as well. It may very well be that Netflix has now coordinated to have a better design after their current supply is exhausted and that has been coordinated with the USPS.

PSound

07-10-09, 05:40 PM

I believe the management action of USPS concerning a demand for Netflix to pay the 0.17 surcharge was an acknowledgement that the USPS did pre validate the Netflix mailers as being machinable. Thats the required process and if they did retract that after such a determination was made Netflix would have cause to request relief. After all Netflix did in good faith go out at buy millions and millions of those mailer designs and designed a business strategy and investments based on their use. Its also is a big customer that provides a revenue stream to the USPS and attempted in good faith to coordinate its actions. Kinda not their fault that the USPS folks who certified it for automation screwed up.

The extra labor charge also is an accounting vehicle. Sure it may make it easier if they were not needing the extra handling but it has been worked into their shifts. Perfect example of what a audit is supposed to do but also a pretty reasonable management action as well. It may very well be that Netflix has now coordinated to have a better design after their current supply is exhausted and that has been coordinated with the USPS.

Yep.

Obviously Netflix and the USPS both want the business relationship to work. It looks like the USPS and Netflix are both trying to be good partners, with the USPS making efforts to keep the mailers flowing and Netflix taking actions to assist on the inbound mail (with what looks like no financial benefit to Netflix).

FYI, I have read that Netflix has indeed continued to modify their mailers to make them more machinable. On a side note (but very much on topic to this forum), I am guessing that one of the reasons the Blu-ray breakage rates seem to be regionally clustered is because certain post offices are not doing manual handling/sorting of Netflix mailers.

bt12483

07-10-09, 06:38 PM

No. Shipping cost is the same.

They have stated in their SEC filings that breakage rates of Blu-ray are higher and could have a negative impact of their profitability... but did not provide any additional details in the filing.

Higher than what? DVD right? How much higher? What is the breakage rate of DVD? Do you know how much higher "higher" really is? Or did the SEC filing not quantify "higher".

After all..."higher" could mean higher (50>1), or "higher" could mean higher (1.1>1).

Obviously since blurays cost more they are more expensive to replace. Therefore even if the breakage rate was the same for DVD and bluray, bluray would cost more to replace. But what if they only broke at a rate of a "fraction of a percent", and DVD therefore breaks at an amount LESS THAN a "fraction of a percent"?

You know, like how the Netflix VP of corp. comm. Steve Swasey said that broken bluray discs only account for a "fraction of a percent (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/04/cracked-netflix/)"? Does that mean DVD breakage is even less than a "fraction of a percent", since bluray breakage is "higher"? I mean, how much higher is "higher"? Is it a "fraction of a percent" more than a slightly less "fraction of a percent"? How much does it cost them per year to replace broken DVDs? Can't be much...if blurays only crack at a rate of a "fraction of a percent", then DVDs crack at an even smaller rate (but have higher volume), right?

I am sure if anyone knows those intimate details about Netflix....it would be you.......So which one is it? Higher or higher?

I mean...this is critical to understanding just how much money bluray is costing Netflix, right? To understanding just how and why those extra bluray fees used to be $0 when bluray was most expensive (2006/2007), then were raised to a flat $1 (2008), and are now tiered at up to $4+ (2009)? At the same time bluray discs have dropped overall in price, but yet their streaming acquisition costs have skyrocketed to over $175M.

So what's the answer????? How much higher is "higher"?

xraffle

07-10-09, 08:03 PM

For this thread to still remain open, nobody must be reporting this nonsense. Because usually when someone reports a thread, the mods take action right away.

Maltby

07-10-09, 09:18 PM

For this thread to still remain open, nobody must be reporting this nonsense. Because usually when someone reports a thread, the mods take action right away.

Why bother. I doubt many people are following the fascinating turn this thread has taken.

Are you afraid someones going to go postal?

xraffle

07-10-09, 09:27 PM

Well I'd rather there be a separate thread where you guys can continue your arguing about the USPS and Netflix/BB Online. It would be nice if we can get back on topic. Just a thought.

Lee Stewart

07-10-09, 10:12 PM

Well I'd rather there be a separate thread where you guys can continue your arguing about the USPS and Netflix/BB Online. It would be nice if we can get back on topic. Just a thought.

Why bother.

The OP is nothing more than speculation. "Experts" who are giving their opinion - who BTW couldn't forecast the recession in the Entertainment industry.

xraffle

07-10-09, 11:05 PM

Ok. Let the arguing continue then.

42Plasmaman

07-11-09, 12:41 AM

Its the faster 2nd generation of the Magnavox player. Its also being sold to exhaustion and it just arrived in Wal-Mart stores in Jan 2009. Pretty much looks like it a end of season remnant sale off the Father's Day sale and Wal-Mart will move to all BD-Live faster better performing capable players for now on. Most people that buy it for $98 will rightfully conclude they got a good deal and will understand its not the best performing Blu-ray player available.

Magnavox NB530MGX Blu-ray Player is the current report though any of the earlier ones still in stock probably will get the same price point.

Pretty much has a slow issue with about 6 BD-J heavy discs on the market, but its actually faster than most any of the 2006 2007 and early 2008 models that were sold. Have not heard many reports of storming the of the gates yet.
Just went to Walmart and picked one of these up for my brother in-law whose B-day is in a couple of weeks.
He's been wanting to get a blu-ray player to compliment his new HDTV purchase but his wife won't let him dump the amount of cash to get one after he just brought home the HDTV as a surprise.
For $98, it a great bargain & better than the $99 A3 sale a couple of years ago.:)
To bad this model doesn't have a streaming option. :D

I guess I just did my part in helping blu-ray achieve 50% market penetration by 2012. :p

Kosty

07-11-09, 12:56 AM

Kosty

07-11-09, 12:59 AM

You know I did not check the endcap model numbers. They actually might have been the 530s as they were the newer arrivals.

42Plasmaman

07-11-09, 01:08 AM

FWIW I just came back to from my local 24 Wal-Mart Supercenter. They have the Magnavox 500s on both an end cap today and on the shelf at $98.00. They received an additional shipment after Father's Day already sold through half and endcap and four additional units off the display shelf. They also sold a few Philips players, Samsungs and Sony players for over $200 since they placed the sale price on the Magnavox. Ran out of time before I could confirm the end of season status. The stocking staff then told me that they thought they just had the best few weeks ever that they had for Blu-ray players, even better than last Christmas. So we will see.
I want to clearify that the 500 models I seen/bought at Walmart are the NB500MGX and not the old model.
The NB500MGX appears to be the NB530MGX possibly made exclusively for Walmart under the NB500MGX PN.
The NB500MGX does not exist on the Magnavox website and the NB500MGX looks identical to the NB530MGX with the new revamped front panel and rear connections.

Kosty

07-11-09, 01:26 AM

Oh. That makes sense to me. The packaging looked consistent thats why I didn't look too hard.

Wendell R. Breland

07-11-09, 01:34 AM

FWIW I just came back to from my local 24 Wal-Mart Supercenter. They have the Magnavox 500s on both an end cap today and on the shelf at $98.00.I truly did not believe that it would happen this early in the BD life cycle. The last time I walked through Wal*Marts media area I was surprised to see several BD titles for about $10.00 and several more titles for about $15.00 or less.

My local Best Buy has greatly expanded the BD software section. This brings back memories of the early days of DVD. I would got into Hollywood Video and check to see if they were starting to rent DVDs. I remember they started out with just one shelf with about 5 titles.

Kosty

07-11-09, 01:48 AM

I truly did not believe that it would happen this early in the BD life cycle. The last time I walked through Wal*Marts media area I was surprised to see several BD titles for about $10.00 and several more titles for about $15.00 or less.

My local Best Buy has greatly expanded the BD software section. This brings back memories of the early days of DVD. I would got into Hollywood Video and check to see if they were starting to rent DVDs. I remember they started out with just one shelf with about 5 titles.

Me neither. Thats part of the reason I supported and defended HD DVD so much . I just did not believe that Blu-ray could solve the BD50 replication issue, push out as many catalog releases, make BD-Live the default profile and reduce Blu-ray player cost issues as quickly as they did.

I never would have though that Wal-mart would have on the shelf a $98 Blu-ray player, Bonus View player at this point in time.

I'm happy as hell about it too.

Hughmc

07-11-09, 04:14 AM

Me neither. Thats part of the reason I supported and defended HD DVD so much . I just did not believe that Blu-ray could solve the BD50 replication issue, push out as many catalog releases, make BD-Live the default profile and reduce Blu-ray player cost issues as quickly as they did.

I never would have though that Wal-mart would have on the shelf a $98 Blu-ray player, Bonus View player at this point in time.

I'm happy as hell about it too.

uhumm...some of us tried to tell you guys....:D Really we did and if you searched my posts back two years and forward you will see I have said and maintained all along BD will replace DVD and sooner than those in this forum and even the CE companies and media think, simply by default of the marketing and demand in place here and most of the world today.

I maintain the reality is we think we are driving markets, but markets like for BD are really driving us to the inevitable overtake of DVD regardless of what the anti BD zealots, media, government, CE companies, statisticians and every other know it all wanna be procrastinator of tech adoption says. Just a thought. If you build it they will come, if you show it they will be curious and wanting and if you make it cheap enough game over.

Hughmc

07-11-09, 04:32 AM

The HD-DVD/BR war is over. The Title of the thread does not denote "Blu-ray Owners Only!". Why can't someone (a non-BR owner) state a reason in response to the thead? My response(s) has nothing to do with being an HD-DVD zealot nor the demise/success of BR nor did mention HD-DVD.:confused:

THis isn't directed at you and I was posting in general what you quoted me. Notice the ones I was referring to are smart enough not to respond to the truth of what I said, but don't take that as an insult they know I call BS on them every so often by visiting here. :D

Beyond a reasonable doubt some here are known holdouts for lack of a better term, from HD DVD and they were some of the most outspoken who were vehemently opposed to BD and it's success, not just beating out HD DVD, but from BD succeeding at all.

THe ones I mention check their post history and you will find not one post that they are supportive in any way of BD, hence they come here to try to proliferate a belief that BD will fail. Not only has it surprised some of us, but it is doing better than they want to admit, so they will post only the negative news and facts they can find or try to support that it will fail based on other tech like downloads.

The reverse would be like me wanting the internet to fail or downloads to become illegal, so downloads could stop competing with BD.

Oh well, Cest la vie.

The arguments in most of these threads end up like the postal discussion in this thread, because that is replacing the no longer allowed childish bantering of BD vs HD DVD.

fpconvert

07-11-09, 06:48 AM

Just went to Walmart and picked one of these up for my brother in-law whose B-day is in a couple of weeks.
He's been wanting to get a blu-ray player to compliment his new HDTV purchase but his wife won't let him dump the amount of cash to get one after he just brought home the HDTV as a surprise.
For $98, it a great bargain & better than the $99 A3 sale a couple of years ago.:)
To bad this model doesn't have a streaming option. :D

I guess I just did my part in helping blu-ray achieve 50% market penetration by 2012. :p

Brother in laws big mistake was only bringing home the HDTV as a surprise.
If you're going to surprise someone, do it all at once.
Now he spread the surprise "fallout" over several weeks!

Bozster

07-11-09, 11:41 AM

THis isn't directed at you and I was posting in general what you quoted me. Notice the ones I was referring to are smart enough not to respond to the truth of what I said, but don't take that as an insult they know I call BS on them every so often by visiting here. :D

Beyond a reasonable doubt some here are known holdouts for lack of a better term, from HD DVD and they were some of the most outspoken who were vehemently opposed to BD and it's success, not just beating out HD DVD, but from BD succeeding at all.

THe ones I mention check their post history and you will find not one post that they are supportive in any way of BD, hence they come here to try to proliferate a belief that BD will fail. Not only has it surprised some of us, but it is doing better than they want to admit, so they will post only the negative news and facts they can find or try to support that it will fail based on other tech like downloads.

The reverse would be like me wanting the internet to fail or downloads to become illegal, so downloads could stop competing with BD.

Oh well, Cest la vie.

The arguments in most of these threads end up like the postal discussion in this thread, because that is replacing the no longer allowed childish bantering of BD vs HD DVD.

I haven't been a member during the format war but I can tell you right that i've seen much more people posting EXACTLY what you descrbied in video downloads services forum. They only post negative and some analyst predictions that say that digital downloads and streaming and similar has no change, will never happen and all the usual nonsense.

I am yet to see someone post really bad news about blu-ray except analysis.

You can't have it both ways. Some people have genuine beefs with Blu-ray and most likely because they own a few players and bunch of movies.

Basically the whole issue starts with misleading and just overstate opinions from paid researches and editors who are in one way or the other financially dependent on Blu-ray.

I said it many times. Instead of spreading nonsense such as Blu-ray will take 50% of market by then and then, or it's growth is through the roof when it's not.. how about we actually hear what BDA and everyone involved is doing to stop constant revisions of hardware as if there is still no strict standard for Blu-ray or the fact that not all of them have same features and the prices of media and the monopoly that Sony holds on replication.

Those are more pressing issues and something you SHOULD be concerned about and not just hyping up Blu-ray. I don't want to keep buying players every year just because of their flying specifications. This is something that certainly every owner of Blu-ray is fully entitled to complain about. Even with $100 players, you are not getting all features. This is so far pretty ridiculous. DVD was from the start supporting things it supported 5 years from it came out. It's an embarassment of a format to have beta specs and us constantly paying for it. I don't remember a product in the past I have personally gotten that was so unfinished with specifications.

I'd wish them to just stop spreading this BS and address and fix issues and finalize the damn format. Then we won't even need to discuss whether or not Blu-ray is a standard such as DVD or if it will succeed. It will be given.

Nosferax

07-11-09, 12:17 PM

I haven't been a member during the format war but I can tell you right that i've seen much more people posting EXACTLY what you descrbied in video downloads services forum. They only post negative and some analyst predictions that say that digital downloads and streaming and similar has no change, will never happen and all the usual nonsense.

I am yet to see someone post really bad news about blu-ray except analysis.

You can't have it both ways. Some people have genuine beefs with Blu-ray and most likely because they own a few players and bunch of movies.

Basically the whole issue starts with misleading and just overstate opinions from paid researches and editors who are in one way or the other financially dependent on Blu-ray.

You mean like some here are for streaming but wont acknowledge it.

I said it many times. Instead of spreading nonsense such as Blu-ray will take 50% of market by then and then, or it's growth is through the roof when it's not.. how about we actually hear what BDA and everyone involved is doing to stop constant revisions of hardware as if there is still no strict standard for Blu-ray or the fact that not all of them have same features and the prices of media and the monopoly that Sony holds on replication.

You only need a profile 1.0 player for watching BR movies. The first DVD player didn't have progressive scan or DTS. My 2005 Mazda 3 doesn't have all the feature of the 2009 model. Should I scream and cry.

Those are more pressing issues and something you SHOULD be concerned about and not just hyping up Blu-ray. I don't want to keep buying players every year just because of their flying specifications. This is something that certainly every owner of Blu-ray is fully entitled to complain about. Even with $100 players, you are not getting all features. This is so far pretty ridiculous. DVD was from the start supporting things it supported 5 years from it came out. It's an embarassment of a format to have beta specs and us constantly paying for it. I don't remember a product in the past I have personally gotten that was so unfinished with specifications.

You don't have to buy a player every years. You only have to if you really need that new option that later profile brings. You are doing what you accuse other of doing in the download section.

I'd wish them to just stop spreading this BS and address and fix issues and finalize the damn format. Then we won't even need to discuss whether or not Blu-ray is a standard such as DVD or if it will succeed. It will be given.

You shouldn't throw stone when you live in a glass house.

Bozster

07-11-09, 01:16 PM

You don't have to buy a player every years. You only have to if you really need that new option that later profile brings.

Exactly.. that's what is called an UNFINISHED SPECIFICATIONS.. I have never had a device in my house that i had to repurchase just to use new set of options on discs.. It's ridiculous. With DVD it was years and years before anything was added and even then it was purely for those who wanted the max quality and the fact that at that time certain codecs that became popular were simply unpredictable. And this happened way way into the life of the format. All DVD features mastered on discs are the same as they were at inception. Don't fudge reality please.

With Blu-ray, now not even 3 years into the format we have 4th revision of players.

The point is that people can't use features that most disc from that year and forward will have. This is unacceptable and fully warrants consumer critics.

I tell everyone who wants to get a blu-ray player to be very careful. As long as they know they'll need to buy a new player if new features they find cool on new discs then I have no problems. But as I said, I have never seen a format that is aiming to be a standard do this. It's simple beta testing on the back of all of us.

I was fine getting the very first blu-ray player and accepting the possibility that I will have to buy a new one as some things were missing. I'm at the 3rd generation of players and now I'll have to replace it again if I want to use managed copy or who knows what else they introduce.

If you find this normal and completely justifiable, then good luck to you. That's one of the reasons why normal people don't want to buy this and the louder everyone points it out people will be more aware the better it will be and we just might get the FINAL version of Blu-ray players that will not change constantly and where CE manufacturers will actually compete on quality like they did with DVD.

Ratman

07-11-09, 01:30 PM

1) will BR take 50% of the market by 2012? Maybe, maybe not. We'll see in 2012.
2) will Netflix/Blockbuster make/break achieving that goal? Maybe, maybe not.
3) does Netflix/Blockbuster live by BRD rentals alone? Highly doubtful.
4) will Netflix/Blockbuster survive should BR die? You bet!
5) does the postage paid by Netflix/Blockbuster really matter? No... as long as you get what you ordered. They both have a return policy. They may address mailing/damage issues eventually.
6) Will download/streaming be the demise of BR? Highly doubtful.
7) If one does not want to pay an extra dollar to Netflix to (supposedly) subsidizing download/streaming, don't subscribe.

So with that rant...
If you are a BR owner/renter/etc... live with what you have and enjoy. It will take a few years to get things sorted out. Heck... no one can even get HDMI/HDCP compatibility to work seamlessy from product to product! :)

Wendell R. Breland

07-11-09, 02:14 PM

DVD was from the start supporting things it supported 5 years from it came out. It's an embarassment of a format to have beta specs and us constantly paying for it. I don't remember a product in the past I have personally gotten that was so unfinished with specifications.That is not true. In the beginning there were two kinds of DVD players. One type would play standard DVD the other type would play standard DVD and Divx DVD. The standard DVD player would not play a Divx DVD. Later DTS audio was added to DVD and unless you had a compatible player you could not play the DTS sound track from a DVD.

There was a similar situation with D-VHS. At a point in time D-Theater was added but it required a player that was compatible with D-Theater. Even latter, DTS audio was added to D-Theater. And guess what, it required a player that was compatible D-Theater and DTS audio.

I have a first generation Blu-ray player, a Panasonic DMP-BD10. It has played every single movie I have tried in it. I also have a Panasonic DMP-BD55.

When 3-D is added to Blu-ray it may or may not require a new player to play 3-D movies.

Wendell R. Breland

07-11-09, 02:27 PM

I will add some more. With LaserDisc players there were added features which required a new compatible player to take advantage of those features, they were: Audio with CX noise reduction, Digital Audio, Dolby Digital, DTS Audio.

βeta and VHS Tape added features which required a new compatible player to take advantage of those features, they were: βeta Hi-Fi Audio, VHS Hi-Fi Audio, ED βeta and S-VHS.

Ratman

07-11-09, 02:43 PM

It's called growing pains, experience and streamlining cost effectiveness (to the manufacturer and consumer)...

No different than TV
Radio
tape formats
PC's
Portable radios
telephones
refrigerators
ovens (conventional/microwave)
cars
PVC pipe
Duct tape
silcone
reciprocal saws
catv
satellite
FiOS
and... disposable diapers. ;)

Nothing is perfect in a three year time frame. It's more probable that most (electronics) is obsolete in a three year timeframe.

Nosferax

07-11-09, 03:21 PM

Exactly.. that's what is called an UNFINISHED SPECIFICATIONS.. I have never had a device in my house that i had to repurchase just to use new set of options on discs.. It's ridiculous. With DVD it was years and years before anything was added and even then it was purely for those who wanted the max quality and the fact that at that time certain codecs that became popular were simply unpredictable. And this happened way way into the life of the format. All DVD features mastered on discs are the same as they were at inception. Don't fudge reality please.

With Blu-ray, now not even 3 years into the format we have 4th revision of players.

The point is that people can't use features that most disc from that year and forward will have. This is unacceptable and fully warrants consumer critics.

I tell everyone who wants to get a blu-ray player to be very careful. As long as they know they'll need to buy a new player if new features they find cool on new discs then I have no problems. But as I said, I have never seen a format that is aiming to be a standard do this. It's simple beta testing on the back of all of us.

I was fine getting the very first blu-ray player and accepting the possibility that I will have to buy a new one as some things were missing. I'm at the 3rd generation of players and now I'll have to replace it again if I want to use managed copy or who knows what else they introduce.

If you find this normal and completely justifiable, then good luck to you. That's one of the reasons why normal people don't want to buy this and the louder everyone points it out people will be more aware the better it will be and we just might get the FINAL version of Blu-ray players that will not change constantly and where CE manufacturers will actually compete on quality like they did with DVD.

First dvd player wouldn't do DTS and progressive scan. You had to buy a new one for that. But like your BR 1.0 they still played all disk since the DTS one included a DD or stereo track. So are you decrying the inhumanity of those unfinished spec of DVD?

My PC came with a video card that can't do direct x 10, should I go and complain to NVidia for releasing it when it was well known that the new version of direct x 10 was around the corner? And what about direct x 11 or 12 or 13?

Stop bitching and start enjoying HD on disk already. Your excuses are getting and exageration are getting more and more outrageous as time goes by. What is next: BR are nailing puppy on church door...

Hughmc

07-11-09, 04:18 PM

I haven't been a member during the format war but I can tell you right that i've seen much more people posting EXACTLY what you descrbied in video downloads services forum. They only post negative and some analyst predictions that say that digital downloads and streaming and similar has no change, will never happen and all the usual nonsense.

I am yet to see someone post really bad news about blu-ray except analysis.

You can't have it both ways. Some people have genuine beefs with Blu-ray and most likely because they own a few players and bunch of movies.

Basically the whole issue starts with misleading and just overstate opinions from paid researches and editors who are in one way or the other financially dependent on Blu-ray.

I said it many times. Instead of spreading nonsense such as Blu-ray will take 50% of market by then and then, or it's growth is through the roof when it's not.. how about we actually hear what BDA and everyone involved is doing to stop constant revisions of hardware as if there is still no strict standard for Blu-ray or the fact that not all of them have same features and the prices of media and the monopoly that Sony holds on replication.

Those are more pressing issues and something you SHOULD be concerned about and not just hyping up Blu-ray. I don't want to keep buying players every year just because of their flying specifications. This is something that certainly every owner of Blu-ray is fully entitled to complain about. Even with $100 players, you are not getting all features. This is so far pretty ridiculous. DVD was from the start supporting things it supported 5 years from it came out. It's an embarassment of a format to have beta specs and us constantly paying for it. I don't remember a product in the past I have personally gotten that was so unfinished with specifications.

I'd wish them to just stop spreading this BS and address and fix issues and finalize the damn format. Then we won't even need to discuss whether or not Blu-ray is a standard such as DVD or if it will succeed. It will be given.

I understand you feel strongly about the above issues, but really for most of us they are non issues. Look, I am a PS3 owner so I have had NO issues from day one back in Nov of 06 with BD, but many others have had no issues either. Most of what you are claiming is an issue with BD ties into my mantra that I have been repeating in the BD forum and here for the last two years. It is about perception and acceptance.

One could easily argue iphones getting better is a scam for early adopters of iphones as well and on and on about most modern CE devices especially PC's. And that other format that failed, please that wasn't really finished either and those who considered it finished were accepting something less than, so it became more and more evident and BD succeeded, because it really did have more potential and more to offer and so here we are. Again, perception and acceptance. If you bought a new car last year and it didn't have GPS, but this years model did, is that an unfinished spec for the car model as well. No. Things change, modify and move on. My first DVD player I paid 600.00 for in 1998 and it couldn't play burned cds/dvds. A year later models from the same company Onkyo could play burned CDs /DVD's. Nosferax makes the point about first DVD players not being able to play DTS, etc. We could go on and on...!!

xraffle

07-11-09, 09:01 PM

Look, I am a PS3 owner so I have had NO issues from day one back in Nov of 06 with BD, but many others have had no issues either.
Wow! That's some PS3 you got!

bt12483

07-11-09, 09:30 PM

Exactly.. that's what is called an UNFINISHED SPECIFICATIONS.. I have never had a device in my house that i had to repurchase just to use new set of options on discs.. It's ridiculous. With DVD it was years and years before anything was added :confused: So you complain to high heaven that bluray should not be allowed to revise and improve upon players, but then go on to state "With DVD it was years and years before anything was added".

What a hypocrite. You are excusing DVD for doing the same thing as bluray. Releasing players that do new things later on in the products life cycle.

As usual...you are contradicting yourself. Embarrassing.

and even then it was purely for those who wanted the max quality and the fact that at that time certain codecs that became popular were simply unpredictable. And how is this different form what bluray is doing???:confused: You are contradicting yourself.....AGAIN.

Hey, I don't care about Managed Copy. Therefore I don't have to buy a new player, if I don't want that feature. No one is forcing you to buy anything.

And why was it OK for DVD to do this but not bluray. Stop being a hypocrite. You can barely go one sentence after the other without contradicting yourself. It's a joke.

And this happened way way into the life of the format. So you are essentially saying that my initial DVD player lacked the feature set of a player that came out "way way into the life of" DVD? Right? I thought we were talking about "finished" formats here? You basically just admitted that even DVD wasn't a "finished format" since players that were released later had new and improved features that the first players didn't have.......JUST LIKE BLURAY NOW!:rolleyes:

I thought it was bad to EVER change and add something new to a player? I thought that meant the format wasn't "finished"? Yet here you sit saying it was OK when DVD did it, but not OK for bluray to do it. You are making a fool of yourself with each word you type. Golden.

...
If you find this normal and completely justifiable, then good luck to you. That's one of the reasons why normal people don't want to buy this and the louder everyone points it out people will be more aware the better it will be and we just might get the FINAL version of Blu-ray players that will not change constantly and where CE manufacturers will actually compete on quality like they did with DVD. Apparently it was "completely justifiable" when DVD did it.....after all, YOU just said so above. :rolleyes:

Do you honestly not see how you just entirely contradicted your entire rant against bluray by hypocritically saying that it was OK for DVD to release new players later on in the life of the format but not for bluray?

Do you not see how this is completely hypocritical?

bt12483

07-11-09, 09:31 PM

Wow! That's some PS3 you got!

Guess I must have the same one then.....

bt12483

07-11-09, 09:39 PM

First dvd player wouldn't do DTS and progressive scan. You had to buy a new one for that. But like your BR 1.0 they still played all disk since the DTS one included a DD or stereo track. So are you decrying the inhumanity of those unfinished spec of DVD?

My PC came with a video card that can't do direct x 10, should I go and complain to NVidia for releasing it when it was well known that the new version of direct x 10 was around the corner? And what about direct x 11 or 12 or 13?

Stop bitching and start enjoying HD on disk already. Your excuses are getting and exageration are getting more and more outrageous as time goes by. What is next: BR are nailing puppy on church door...

Apparently no product is ever allowed to improve upon itself by adding new features later on. By "no product", obviously I mean only bluray.

Apparently bluray companies are the first to ever "force" this disgusting practice onto consumers.

I mean, pay no mind to the car industry that releases a "new" model every year. Wherein the new model does something the previous model didn't.

Pay no attention to the iPhone....the iPhone 3G....the iPhone 3GS. Wherein the iPhone 3GS can do more than the iPhone 3G which can do more than the original iPhone. Oh...and these were released only 1 year apart from one another.....:rolleyes: I mean I reaalllyy wanted to record video and surf on a 3G network with the original iPhone. Why did Apple only allow these features two years later in the life of the "iPhone format"? Those sick bastards...it's like they want me to upgrade or something......

Apparently, to Bozster and a few others, it is OK for other companies to modify their product, but not bluray companies. Oh no. That's just unacceptable.

This is lame and ridiculous at this point. People expect to be taken seriously when they are a walking/talking contradiction.

xraffle

07-11-09, 11:22 PM

:confused: So you complain to high heaven that bluray should not be allowed to revise and improve upon players, but then go on to state "With DVD it was years and years before anything was added".

Yeah I know.

I hope you people realize that my 9 year old Sony player will have to be ditched when I don't have anymore SDTVs in the house because it only has Composite outputs.

First there was regular DVD players, then Progressive Scan ones, then Upscaling DVD players. Not to mention that several older players couldn't play writable DVDs.

xraffle

07-11-09, 11:25 PM

Look, I am a PS3 owner so I have had NO issues from day one back in Nov of 06 with BD, but many others have had no issues either.

Guess I must have the same one then.....
Yeah, I was only kidding. The PS3 is known to be the only issue-free BD player out there. Sure there are some standalones that work great, load faster and have more features, but they do tend to have a few minor quirks in them.

Funny how some people complain about Blu-ray issues though. Blu-ray is the only way I can watch HD content without any freezing or pixelation issues. HD cable is full of those issues.

Bozster

07-11-09, 11:55 PM

That is not true. In the beginning there were two kinds of DVD players. One type would play standard DVD the other type would play standard DVD and Divx DVD.

That is not true.. Divx codec to players were added much later and none of the movies were actually done with Divx.. It was mostly for the consumer to had a recorded disc with their own Divx movies. Divx was not part of the main spec for the DVD nor was needed to experience every feature mastered on DVD.

And AGAIN.. DTS sound was not a feature. You could enjoy all features of a DVD without DTS. A person buying a DVD didn't HAVE TO HAVE a DTS or Progressive player in order to enjoy everything on movie they bought. Not so with Blu-ray player.

With Blu-ray this is not the case. You have to buy new player to actually experience new features of disc. What's so hard to understand.

It's not at all the same.

And I personally don't care about LaserDisc because that format didn't make it as mainstream format exactly for the same problems. Was it around.. Sure, but I don't want to feel with Blu-ray like some felt with LaserDisc.

xraffle

07-11-09, 11:59 PM

With Blu-ray this is not the case. You have to buy new player to actually experience new features of disc. What's so hard to understand.
Ok, this is just plain crazy talk. Blu-ray players have the ability to have their firmware updated, in case you didn't know.

Nosferax

07-12-09, 12:00 AM

That is not true.. Divx codec to players were added much later and none of the movies were actually done with Divx.. It was mostly for the consumer to had a recorded disc with their own Divx movies. Divx was not part of the main spec for the DVD nor was needed to experience every feature mastered on DVD.

And AGAIN.. DTS sound was not a feature. You could enjoy all features of a DVD without DTS. A person buying a DVD didn't HAVE TO HAVE a DTS or Progressive player in order to enjoy everything on movie they bought. Not so with Blu-ray player.

With Blu-ray this is not the case. You have to buy new player to actually experience new features of disc. What's so hard to understand.

It's not at all the same.

And I personally don't care about LaserDisc because that format didn't make it as mainstream format exactly for the same problems. Was it around.. Sure, but I don't want to feel with Blu-ray like some felt with LaserDisc.

LOL... You don't even know that Divx player (not the codec but the disposable disc player pushed by Circuit City and a couple of studios) was in competiton with DVD.

read their demise here (http://hometheater.about.com/library/weekly/aa062199.htm)

You should educate yourself about the discussed subject before putting your feet in your mouth... again...

Nosferax

07-12-09, 12:01 AM

And for the last time, you only need a profile 1.0 player to watch movie. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU!

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:02 AM

It's called growing pains, experience and streamlining cost effectiveness (to the manufacturer and consumer)...

Nothing is perfect in a three year time frame. It's more probable that most (electronics) is obsolete in a three year timeframe.

ROFL.. okay..

I have never had issues from all the devices you bought. I still have a TV that I bought 4 years ago that has pretty much the same features as new TVs today and can enjoy anything. I don't have to BUY new devices to experience new movies and TV. Please.

Same with most of the other stuff you listed which btw, has nothing to do with movies btw.

There is a difference when you are comparing an individual product and a standard. Please.

The difference is that with all products that are based on the standard they offer all NECESSARY features that are tied to that product to enjoy fully what you buy for it. The difference is that companies compete by adding certain things to their products that make things easier or better to use so they would be competitive but it still goes after some standard not reinventing it every year.

Let's compare apples to apples.

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:03 AM

Let's compare apples to apples.
Ok, what apples do you like better? Red or green ones?

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:04 AM

LOL... You don't even know that Divx player (not the codec but the disposable disc player pushed by Circuit City and a couple of studios) was in competiton with DVD.

So? It was a competing format that failed. What are you even talking about? I know very well what I"m talking about.

There were 2 things with DIVx.. Certain DVD players actually supported DIVx codec so you could watch your recordable discs with DIVx movies and that was a feature added to the DVD players. The other was a completely new player that was only based on DIVx, which failed.

Again, I don't want Blu-ray to be another DIVx either considering how much money I paid for players and movies.

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:07 AM

Ok, this is just plain crazy talk. Blu-ray players have the ability to have their firmware updated, in case you didn't know.

No.. you can't upgrade BD 1.0 to BD 1.1 you can't upgrade to BD-Live plus you can't update via firmware to player that will support Managed Copy. 4 revisions that are not fixable via firmware upgrades. And probably another version next year with 3D. It's completely out of hand.

This is not growing pains. This is sloppy format that relies on consumers to keep repurchasing equipment to enjoy all the things that will be on the movies.

If that was the case with firmware update only I wouldn't have a problem, but that's not the case.

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:10 AM

And for the last time, you only need a profile 1.0 player to watch movie. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU!

I don't want to JUST PLAY THE MOVIE.. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU.

I want to buy a product that will read all features of the movies I buy. I don't want a half assed product and most people I know want a full product when they buy it even if they don't use some features.

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:10 AM

...And AGAIN.. DTS sound was not a feature. No? Then what is it? If I have a DVD that has both DTS and Dolby, I have a choice in which audio I want to hear. If my generation 1 DVD player doesn't do DTS - I am stuck with Dolby. My choice was just cut down by 50% because the DVD hardware has to be revised and updated to include a new specification - DTS audio.

Please dazzle us with your logic and explain how that is any different from bluray adding additional features.

You could enjoy all features of a DVD without DTS You couldn't enjoy DTS audio.

A person buying a DVD didn't HAVE TO HAVE a DTS or Progressive player in order to enjoy everything on movie they bought.They sure didn't. Just like you don't need a profile 1.1/2.0 player to just enjoy the movie.

Not so with Blu-ray player. How so? A person with a profle 1.0 can watch a bluray movie. No different than DVD. I repeat: no different than DVD. One let's you watch a movie. The other also let's you watch a movie.

With Blu-ray this is not the case. You have to buy new player to actually experience new features of disc. What's so hard to understand. What's so hard to understand is your application of double standards and hypocrisy.

No 1.1 movies were released until 1.1 players were released. Profile 2.0 movies were also released the same time as profile 2.0 players.

No matter how hard you try to spin this, the fact is DVD players evolved over time. They added DTS support. They added progressive scan. They added upscaling. Were you bitching then when you had to buy 3 different DVD players to experience the latest and greatest in DVD???:confused:

Bet not.:rolleyes:

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:14 AM

No.. you can't upgrade BD 1.0 to BD 1.1 you can't upgrade to BD-Live plus you can't update via firmware to player that will support Managed Copy. 4 revisions that are not fixable via firmware upgrades. And probably another version next year with 3D. It's completely out of hand.

This is not growing pains. This is sloppy format that relies on consumers to keep repurchasing equipment to enjoy all the things that will be on the movies.

If that was the case I wouldn't have a problem, but that's not the case.

I don't want to JUST PLAY THE MOVIE.. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU.

I want to buy a product that will read all features of the movies I buy. I don't want a half assed product and most people I know want a full product when they buy it even if they don't use some features.

So stop buying so many bluray players until they meet YOUR desires. No one forced you to buy a bluray player in 2007. No one forced you to buy a player in 2008. No one forced you to buy a player in 2009. If you are so discontent....wait on the the sidelines. Don't fall face first into buying three players and blame everyone else but yourself for spending money on a product that apparently wasn't ready to suit your needs.

Stop buying bluray movies if you are so upset.

If you are soooo dissatisfied....STOP BUYING SH*T! Problem solved. And we will be sure to tell the CE industry to stop revising and improving their products because you buy their stuff before it is ready to meet your needs. Surely this is their fault, and not your own. I mean, it's not like all you had to do was close your wallet and not buy the damn thing(s). Here's some advice - stop being an early adopter, and you won't have to buy as many players. I know, I know, crazy concept.

Stop wasting everyone's time here liberally applying double standards and contradicting yourself at every turn. You are making a fool of yourself.

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:16 AM

No? Then what is it? If I have a DVD that has both DTS and Dolby, I have a choice in which audio I want to hear. If my generation 1 DVD player doesn't do DTS - I am stuck with Dolby. My choice was just cut down by 50% because the DVD hardware has to be revised and updated to include a new specification - DTS audio.

Please dazzle us with your logic and explain how that is any different from bluray adding additional features.

You couldn't enjoy DTS audio.

They sure didn't. Just like you don't need a profile 1.1/2.0 player to just enjoy the movie.

How so? A person with a profle 1.0 can watch a bluray movie. No different than DVD. I repeat: no different than DVD. One let's you watch a movie. The other also let's you watch a movie.

What's so hard to understand is your application of double standards and hypocrisy.

No 1.1 movies were released until 1.1 players were released. Profile 2.0 movies were also released the same time as profile 2.0 players.

No matter how hard you try to spin this, the fact is DVD players evolved over time. They added DTS support. They added progressive scan. They added upscaling. Were you bitching then when you had to buy 3 different DVD players to experience the latest and greatest in DVD???:confused:

Bet not.:rolleyes:

You don't seem to get it and you probably never will..

DTS nad Progressive weren't necessary to enjoy the movie and all of it's features. It was a plus for those who wanted better audio and somewhat better picture. ALL features of the movie, extra content, menus and who knows what was available to all players.

There is a HUGE difference between that and me not being able to enjoy some extra features or connect online to explore additional content with the disc or play managed copy movies or whatever else they seem to be putting now on discs.

If they introduced a Blu-ray player 2 years from now that had an updated 2000p picture and a new audio codec I would be fine with that. You could still use all of the features of the Blu-ray STANDARD but those who would really wanted 2000p and new audio codec could buy it but you wouldn't be missing out of authored content and everything that comes on a disc.

It's not at all the same but I'm really not willing to try to change YOUR mind because you've proven to not being able to admit anything.

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:20 AM

No.. you can't upgrade BD 1.0 to BD 1.1 you can't upgrade to BD-Live plus you can't update via firmware to player that will support Managed Copy. 4 revisions that are not fixable via firmware upgrades.

I don't want to JUST PLAY THE MOVIE.. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU.

Ok, so you are bashing Blu-ray because it added certain features that you can't use because you have an older player? You're also whining because your player can't support Managed Copy? And playing the movie is not enough for you?? Wow, bt12483 is right. You are a hypocrite. Nuff said.

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:24 AM

You don't seem to get it and you probably never will..

DTS nad Progressive weren't necessary to enjoy the movie and all of it's features. It was a plus for those who wanted better audio and somewhat better picture. ALL features of the movie, extra content, menus and who knows what was available to all players.

There is a HUGE difference between that and me not being able to enjoy some extra features or connect online to explore additional content with the disc or play managed copy movies or whatever else they seem to be putting now on discs.

If they introduced a Blu-ray player 2 years from now that had an updated 2000p picture and a new audio codec I would be fine with that. You could still use all of the features of the Blu-ray STANDARD but those who would really wanted 2000p and new audio codec could buy it but you wouldn't be missing out of authored content and everything that comes on a disc.

It's not at all the same but I'm really not willing to try to change YOUR mind because you've proven to not being able to admit anything.

My recommendation to you is to not buy new technology anymore.

I am sure the people that bought the first iPhone would have loved 3G access...but they wanted the phone so bad they decided to live without 3G access and buy the 2G model anyway. No one forced them to do that. They made the decision.

Think those people were bummed when Apple then announced the 3G? I am sure they were - but guess what - they were EARLY ADOPTERS. They knowingly bought the first model. Knowing exactly which features it lacked. Knowing that an upgraded model would come out with more features.

Think the people that later bought the iPhone 3G now want the 3GS, which allows for video recording, etc.? I bet they do. But guess what - they chose, at the time, to buy the 3G and not wait for a future revision which is sure to be more refined and have more features.

So, once again - my advice to you - stop buying new electronics. Wait 5 years. Then I am sure everything will work exactly as you want it to.

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:24 AM

BTW, nobody buy a PS3, a Xbox 360 or a Wii because in a year or two, they will come out with a new console that will render those obsolete and you will have to purchase ANOTHER console just to enjoy new video games! Oh boy! This is ridiculous! :rolleyes:

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:26 AM

Ok, so you are bashing Blu-ray because it added certain features that you can't use because you have an older player? You're also whining because your player can't support Managed Copy? And playing the movie is not enough for you?? Wow, bt12483 is right. You are a hypocrite. Nuff said.

Based on what? And can we lay off personal attacks.

Why is it so hard for you to understand.

When I buy a product based on a standard and certain features are being advertised as part of that standard I want to be able to use all of the features that were promised when I buy a player that says "Blu-ray".

If it was playing only a movie with the player I bought and I had to buy a new player that supports picture in picture, online connectivity like Disney has or WB offers with "Chat with director" and all of the other things ADVERTISED for Blu-ray movies, I expect my Blu-ray player to support that.

Otherwise they need to call players they sell like it really is:

Blu-ray "Movie Only", Blu-ray "Movie with some features", Blu-ray "You'll use most features", Blu-ray "With this one you'll have everything we advertise", Blu-ray "Well this one will probably play what we add next year" players.

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:29 AM

Based on what? And can we lay off personal attacks.

Why is it so hard for you to understand.

When I buy a product based on a standard and certain features are being advertised as part of that standard I want to be able to use all of the features that were promised when I buy a player that says "Blu-ray".

If it was playing only a movie with the player I bought and I had to buy a new player that supports picture in picture, online connectivity like Disney has or WB offers with "Chat with director" and all of the other things ADVERTISED for Blu-ray movies, I expect my Blu-ray player to support that.

Otherwise they need to call players they sell like it really is:

Blu-ray "Movie Only", Blu-ray "Movie with some features", Blu-ray "You'll use most features", Blu-ray "With this one you'll have everything" players.

Yeah, come to think of it, you're right. You know, I have a 5th Generation Ipod. It doesn't have all the new features like the newer Ipod Touch has. I mean, I don't want to just listen to music or watch videos. I want all the cool features!! Now I'm forced to buy a new Ipod! Oh, my goodness! What is the world coming to?? :rolleyes:

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:30 AM

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:35 AM

My recommendation to you is to not buy new technology anymore.

Why? Because Blu-ray is unfinished format?

I buy plenty of new electronics. I buy everything that's new and never had to re-buy something I bought a year ago in order to use something that was advertised in the first place.

Ok, I don't understand you. Maybe you're just some troll looking for attention. You buy Blu-ray, then come here to whine about how you have to repurchase a player every year. So, someone tells you not to buy new technology to avoid that from happening to you again and that's still not good enough for you. You're hopeless! If Blu-ray is such a problem, don't buy it anymore. Simple as that! Geez!

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:36 AM

Why? Because Blu-ray is unfinished format?

I buy plenty of new electronics. I buy everything that's new and never had to re-buy something I bought a year ago in order to use something that was advertised in the first place.

Maybe you should stop justifying everything Blu-ray and how it's ok to rip people off by segmenting a STANDARD (they claim BD is) to 4 different type of substandards.

Did they ever advertise that a profile 1.0 player will play 1.1 or 2.0 "features"? That a profile 1.1 player would play profile 2.0 "features"? No. They didn't. It was clear which "features" worked with which players.

Only a pure IDIOT would buy a profile 1.0 player and expect to be able to play 1.1/2.0 features.

If you wanted those features in a player - then you should have waited until a player existed that had all of those features. No one forced you to buy anything. Yet you did. Blame yourself for not waiting for a player that suited your needs better. No one forced you to buy that first player. No one forced you to buy that second player. No one forced you to buy that third player. Ever heard they expression, "fool me once..."? It seems you repeatedly like to fool yourself, as evidenced by your buying behavior. If a product doesn't meet your personal tastes....THEN DON'T BUY IT!

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:39 AM

Yeah, come to think of it, you're right. You know, I have a 5th Generation Ipod. It doesn't have all the new features like the newer Ipod Touch has. I mean, I don't want to just listen to music or watch videos. I want all the cool features!! Now I'm forced to buy a new Ipod! Oh, my goodness! What is the world coming to?? :rolleyes:

What can't you do with your 4th generation iPod that you could with 5th generation please?

5th generation does exactly what 4th generation does but introduces slimmer form, updated UI to some extent and larger hard drive. It's been like this with pretty much every revision of iPod.

iPod Touch is a separate product. And it comes A LONG time after iPod as an evolution just like Blu-ray is trying to be to DVD.

And to be quite honest, iPod is not a standard like DVD was or Blu-ray claims to be.

I like how some people go on and try to find excuses for sloppiness Blu-ray is when you ALL KNOW that it's not OK to have a half assed format like it is now that claims to be the standard.

And that's one of the reasons btw that people don't want to buy Blu-ray or are waiting and why growth is slow. They want to buy a fully featured product not revisions that come out every year.

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:42 AM

I like how some people go on and try to find excuses for sloppiness Blu-ray is when you ALL KNOW that it's not OK to have a half assed format like it is now that claims to be the standard.
And I like how you can go on and find excuses so you can whine and whine about how Blu-ray is such a problem for you.

And that's one of the reasons btw that people don't want to buy Blu-ray or are waiting and why growth is slow.
Exactly. You should also do the same thing instead of buying a new player every year and then come here to whine about it. Grow up!

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:43 AM

Did they ever advertise that a profile 1.0 player will play 1.1 or 2.0 "features"? That a profile 1.1 player would play profile 2.0 "features"? No. They didn't. It was clear which "features" worked with which players.

Only a pure IDIOT would buy a profile 1.0 player and expect to be able to play 1.1/2.0 features.

First of all they don't advertise Profiles AT ALL. They just advertise Blu-ray and then you see commercials on TV that show features of certain movies with chat, picture in picture and so on.

And then you have a fine print on the bottom somewhere or inside the case that tells you that you can't use those features if your player is profile 1.0 or profile 1.1 which most people buying Blu-ray players have NO IDEA what it means and get disappointed.

It's omission of facts and someone who goes to buy a Blu-ray player for $98 might really expect to see all the goodiness of Blu-ray. Yet they can't.

Maybe you and I know about Profiles but that doesn't make it ok they exist in the first place.

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:44 AM

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:46 AM

And I like how you can go on and find excuses so you can whine and whine about how Blu-ray is such a problem for you.

Exactly. You should also do the same thing instead of buying a new player every year and then come here to whine about it. Grow up!

Stop addressing me in an immature way as you keep doing.. This is all relevant and if you are unable to comprehend why certain things are not OK with Blu-ray and you find people "whining" about it then buddy, it's your problem and you are the one who needs to grow up.

All of the things I've stated are actually very present issues and problems with Blu-ray and I'm personally not fine with that and neither are many people. I'm not fine with constantly being ripped off by needing to buy new stuff as I WANT to use all features that standard promises yet fails to deliver unless you keep repurchasing new equipment.

If you are fine with that, then you should keep out of the conversation and not insult people especially since it's against the rules of the forum.

I've never called anyone's opinions of complaints about one thing or another "WHINING" and expect to be treated that way as well.

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:47 AM

Well let's see...I have digital photos and videos.

At one point I had an iPod that did not have a color screen and only played music and could NOT play my photos or videos.

Then a new one came out with a color screen that played my music and allowed me to view my digital photos.

Then yet another one came out that allowed me to play my music, photos AND videos.

What do you call that?

How about I call the first iPod I had a profile 1.0 iPod. How about I call that second one a profile 1.1 iPod? And how about I call that last one a profile 2.0 iPod.

Guess what. Now I have an iPod that does all of those things...and also makes phone calls. What profile should I call this latest iPod???:rolleyes:

Except iPod is 1 product. Blu-ray is a standard or claiming to be one.. Don't you understand the difference?

xraffle

07-12-09, 12:47 AM

Stop addressing me in an immature way as you keep doing.. This is all relevant and if you are unable to comprehend why certain things are not OK with Blu-ray and you find people "whining" about it then buddy, it's your problem and you are the one who needs to grow up.

All of the things I've stated are actually very present issues and problems with Blu-ray and I'm personally not fine with that and neither are many people. I'm not fine with constantly being ripped off by needing to buy new stuff.

If you are fine with that, then you should keep out of the conversation and not insult people especially since it's again the rules of the forum.

So then don't buy Blu-ray. Why is that so hard for you to understand??

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:49 AM

BOZSTER: DO YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU WRITE?????????

First of all they don't advertise Profiles AT ALL.

And then you have a fine print on the bottom somewhere or inside the case that tells you that you can't use those features if your player is profile 1.0 or profile 1.1

For about the third time tonight, you contradict your own words. Seriously. Like, really? This is beyond ridiculous. The fact is it was known which profile of players could play which features on which discs. You just admitted so above. Just because it wasn't plastered via a sticker on front doesn't mean it wasn't known.

Maybe you and I know about Profiles but that doesn't make it ok they exist in the first place.
Obviously you didn't know much about profiles or you wouldn't be bitching about having to buy 3 players to access the new "features" associated with each profile. Unless you are just that bad at making wise spending decisions. Did you think they were joking when they said a profile 1.0 player wouldn't play 1.1 or 2.0 features?

bt12483

07-12-09, 12:54 AM

Except iPod is 1 product. Blu-ray is a standard.. Don't you understand the difference?

What is the difference? Both have different versions of products that allow me to do different things. The oldest product had the least amount of features. The latest one had more.

Did people buying the first iPod expect to be able to play videos? No. They knew it wouldn't play videos.

And you do realize standards are revised and updated all the time, right? You think the standard(s) for electrical wiring in the home haven't been updated in the last century? As technology improved?

It seems you are caught up on terminology instead of the real world application.

Bozster

07-12-09, 12:58 AM

BOZSTER: DO YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU WRITE?????????

For about the third time tonight, you contradict your own words. Seriously. Like, really? This is beyond ridiculous. The fact is it was known which profile of players player which features on which discs. You just admitted so above.

Obviously you didn't know much about profiles or you wouldn't be bitching about having to buy 3 players to access the new "features" associated with each profile. Unless you are just that bad at making wise spending decisions. Did you think they were joking when they said a profile 1.0 player wouldn't play 1.1 or 2.0 features?

Of course I read what I write. It's you who has the inability to comprehend what is being pointed out as false advertising or lack in the standard because you simply don't want to.

The fact is that in many instances you will get a Blu-ray player, you will buy a movie (on the case it will say Profile 2.0 compatible) which means absolutely nothing since when you buy players they don't really make it visible what profile you are buying and especially they don't do it in advertising and when you open the disc, you put it inside you get a very nice screen that says you can't use some of the features on this disc because your player doesn't support it.

At that point it's pretty much too late, because you can't return the movie, you can't return the player if you used it past 30 days and if you want to use all of the features of that overpriced disc you paid for you will need to buy a new player.

Why all of this is relevant is I personally don't like the fact that it's a floating standard and since I want to have everything in a player it means I will have to buy new one. I'm not fine with that but furthermore I'm not fine that people who don't know squat will be exploited this way especially since they'll be selling them this holiday season players that will not be $100 and be at least BD 2.0 Live capable.

xraffle

07-12-09, 01:01 AM

Bozster,

I'm going to give you one last advice and I hope this will help you. Buy a PS3. It's the most future proof BD player out there. It can even be updated to support Managed Copy.

So there you go. If this advice is still not good, then I give up.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:05 AM

What is the difference? Both have different versions of products that allow me to do different things. The oldest product had the least amount of features. The latest one had more.

Did people buying the first iPod expect to be able to play videos? No. They knew it wouldn't play videos.

And you do realize standards are revised and updated all the time, right? You think the standard(s) for electrical wiring in the home haven't been updated in the last century? As technology improved?

It seems you are caught up on terminology instead of the real world application.

Nope.. Standard means that it abides to certain rules and is carefully thought out. It doesn't compete with anything really. It's clearly defined functionality and what it can and can't do or at least it needs to fulfill it's mandatory FINAL specifications for each product based on that standard - including reading the content and the way it's used. Manufacturers and content producers can introduce innovation unless it breaks the standard. With Blu-ray that's not the case. Content producers implement things that players specifications need to float around.

iPod is really not a standard, it' one product that competes with other products and can be changed and sold with newer versions offering more because it needs to compete with other manufacturers.

Again, imagine what would've happened if DVD was changing "Profiles" every year since it's inception. You could only watch a movie on DVD first. Then you would have to buy a new player to view extra content and so on.

I'm pretty sure people wouldn't be too happy about it.

DVD Forum was very careful when they defined DVD standard and any changes that came afterward were carefully implemented not to break the standard. Blu-ray is breaking their standard with Profile revisions like no other standard I've seen.

bt12483

07-12-09, 01:09 AM

Of course I read what I write. It's you who has the inability to comprehend what is being pointed out as false advertising or lack in the standard because you simply don't want to. It is not false advertising if it is marked on the f*cking package.:rolleyes:

False means a lie. If the package says "certain features will not play on older players" that is telling the truth. Which, in actuality, is the exact OPPOSITE of false advertising.

Once again, do you even read what you write? Do you know what false advertising is? I seriously am beginning to think that you lack the ability to understand things. Like...basic things. The amount of contradictions and basic misapplication of simple things like the term "false advertising" leads me to believe otherwise...(unless it is intentional.....)

Now, you may have issues with what you think is a LACK of advertising of the profile scenario....but quite simply a lack of advertising is not false advertising. You misspoke. Again.

The fact is that in many instances you will get a Blu-ray player, you will buy a movie (on the case it will say Profile 2.0 compatible) which means absolutely nothing since when you buy players they don't really make it visible what profile you are buying and especially they don't do it in advertising and when you open the disc, you put it inside you get a very nice screen that says you can't use some of the features on this disc because your player doesn't support it.

At that point it's pretty much too late, because you can't return the movie, you can't return the player if you used it past 30 days and if you want to use all of the features of that overpriced disc you paid for you will need to buy a new player.

Why all of this is relevant is I personally don't like the fact that it's a floating standard and since I want to have everything in a player it means I will have to buy new one. I'm not fine with that but furthermore I'm not fine that people who don't know squat will be exploited this way especially since they'll be selling them this holiday season players that will not be $100 and be at least BD 2.0 Live capable. So then stop buying sh*t. Really, there is nothing else to be said at this point.

You are clearly overexaggerating the issue. As usual. Where is the public outcry over profile issues? It never happened. Which means in the real world (where you may or may not live), either people knew what they were buying, or simply don't give a sh*t about anything other than the movie. Hard to believe, I know.

Also, "A fool, and his money are soon parted". If people can't read the writing on product packages, they have far greater issues than worrying about if they can access web content on their profile 1.1 player.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:11 AM

bt12483

07-12-09, 01:17 AM

DVD Forum was very careful when they defined DVD standard and any changes that came afterward were carefully implemented not to break the standard. Break the standard? What happens if a DVD player that supports Managed Copy comes out.:confused:

Your entire talking point get DESTROYED in an instant.

Can you tell me why, if I look up the DVD forum (http://www.dvdforum.org/27scmtg-resolution.htm), I see the word "REVISION" so many times???

It's not "breaking" the standard. It is ADDING TO the standard. There's a difference.

Blu-ray is breaking their standard with Profile revisions like no other standard I've seen.

Once again....it's not "breaking" the standard. It is ADDING TO the standard.

Since, after all, a profile 2 player will play everything that preceded it.

"Breaking" the standard would involve a new player not being able to playback older media. Hence, it is "broken".

But if every new player can play back anything that existed before it, nothing is "broken". There is continuity.

bt12483

07-12-09, 01:21 AM

Here's a question for you

What would you say is the basic set of functionality that Blu-ray DOES support or is considered to be a part of standard?

Is it just the movie? Is it movie and picture and picture? Is it online connectivity? Is previous ones with managed copy? Is it going to be 3D? Or all of the above? When can you buy a player and know that it will support all of the above if it is claimed to be the part of Blu-Ray format.

What is it?

If you can't really answer, and you most likely can't because none of these is really a part of the fixed standard but spread out across several substandards (Profiles) it means that Blu-ray specifications are not really finalized and not all players abide to it's set of features.

It's simple as that. And advertising most of these things in TV commercials as Blu-ray experience and then selling split specification players is WRONG and should be criticize. But most people here just care for the movie so then it's ok? Right? :rolleyes:

It doesn't matter so long as any new player is capable of playing back any media that preceded it. Continuity.

For the last time - why don't you just stop buying stuff until you get your "final answer"?

This is beyond old at this point.

And yes, most people do just care about the movie. Which is exactly why you don't hear anyone in the real world complaining. The only people complaining are people like you in forums (that wanted the other format to win, coincidentally). Much to do about NOTHING I suppose.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:23 AM

Break the standard? What happens if a DVD player that supports Managed Copy comes out.:confused:

Your entire talking point get DESTROYED in an instant.

And that will not happen because it was never mentioned in the original specification of the format or promised and EVERYTHING that was added to the DVD format never interfered with the functionality of the movies you buy or features they include .. What the hell is so hard to understand about that?! :confused:

A revision is fine if it doesn't interfere with basic feature set of the format. This is all over the place with Blu-ray. There is not clear cut basic feature set. it's split into several different feature sets and you need to buy different players in order to utilize them.

I don't have problems accepting when I'm wrong but you seem to have a habit in your arguments to constantly treat people's opinions completely false or irrelevant and that you are the one who's always right. You should look into that.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:27 AM

It doesn't matter so long as any new player is capable of playing back any media that preceded it. Continuity.

For the last time - why don't you just stop buying stuff until you get your "final answer"?

This is beyond old at this point.

And yes, most people do just care about the movie. Which is exactly why you don't hear anyone in the real world complaining. The only people complaining are people like you in forums (that wanted the other format to win, coincidentally). Much to do about NOTHING I suppose.

It's not normal when it's done within the same year with a standard. It's not old. It's reality and I'm glad you actually admit there's an issue and yes I will not buy any new Blu-ray players and will tell everyone to be very careful when buying them until the final specifications come out.

And your conspiracies about people who liked HD DVD being all against is Blu-ray and we want it to fail is WHAT"S OLD and pretty silly overall. I said it and I'll say it again, not all people criticizing Blu-ray for what it is are bitter HD DVD fans. I don't care about either format enough in essence to be bitter about anything. I am however very concious when something is wrong. That whole US vs THEM is troubling with many people. You should get that thing in check. It's bordering with paranoia. We are all consumers that spend hard earned money on something being sold. Instead of justifying why and how companies are floating around with stuff they sell you should stand on the side of the consumers and the difficulties they face embracing Blu-ray format if you really are such a huge diehard fan of Blu-ray. Not justifying why and how we have to pay and re-pay...

From everything I said and have issues is for the good of Blu-ray as being a final standard as well as protecting consumers that have no idea what they are buying but are hyped about it.

Hughmc

07-12-09, 01:31 AM

What can't you do with your 4th generation iPod that you could with 5th generation please?

5th generation does exactly what 4th generation does but introduces slimmer form, updated UI to some extent and larger hard drive. It's been like this with pretty much every revision of iPod.

iPod Touch is a separate product. And it comes A LONG time after iPod as an evolution just like Blu-ray is trying to be to DVD.

And to be quite honest, iPod is not a standard like DVD was or Blu-ray claims to be.

I like how some people go on and try to find excuses for sloppiness Blu-ray is when you ALL KNOW that it's not OK to have a half assed format like it is now that claims to be the standard.

And that's one of the reasons btw that people don't want to buy Blu-ray or are waiting and why growth is slow. They want to buy a fully featured product not revisions that come out every year.

My buddy bought an iphone two months ago. I just got the latest 3GS last week. Mine has voice Voice Control, his doesn't. He can get it sent to his phone as an app and pay 4.99 per month to use it or he can pay another 300.00 plus and get the latest model. Again like most are saying and you are alone here in this argument, there are many things that are NEVER complete. And the best example is PC's. I just got a new PC and while I was purchasing it I was told the latest greatest will have some feature that Intel is touting, but I said screw it. If it is the be all end all next year when it comes out or is it this fall with Windows 7 I will be SOL. It is the way it is. Somehow you are trying to make it seem it should be different for BD than other tech like it is an exception.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:35 AM

My buddy bought an iphone two months ago. I just got the latest 3GS last week. Mine has voice Voice Control, his doesn't. He can get it sent to his phone as an app and pay 4.99 per month to use it or he can pay another 300.00 plus and get the latest model. Again like most are saying and you are alone here in this argument, there are many things that are NEVER complete.

Again.. if one thing is claiming to be the standard by which all devices made by that specifications should be created is not the same as with individual products. It's a whole different ball game and rules.

I shouldn't have gotten involved in iPod discussion because it is not the same thing at all.

Simple.

And the best example is PC's. I just got a new PC and while I was purchasing it I was told the latest greatest will have some feature that Intel is touting, but I said screw it. If it is the be all end all next year when it comes out or is it this fall with Windows 7 I will be SOL. It is the way it is. Somehow you are trying to make it seem it should be different for BD than other tech like it is an exception.

What prevents you from using your old PC with Windows 7?

Windows 7 works with P4 266mhz machines. So I don't see why YOU HAVE TO buy a new PC just to use Windows 7 to it's full extent it has to offer?

If you want the fastest CPU and fastest graphics card I would understand you would want to buy a new PC but you don't have to. You can still use anything on Windows with your old machine.. Can you not?

Let's put in the way you explained.

If I could use all Blu-ray features that come on discs with every player they sell that carries the name Blu-ray and they introduce new players that have much faster load times, improved picture quality due to their processing and better audio it would be fine. I wouldn't have a problem with that at all. They can sell it at $500 and if it's that important to me I would buy it but my basic feature set where I can use all of the features presented on Blu-ray discs still need to play. If I"m fine waiting 20 secs to load a disc that's ok. That's called evolution/revision of the format. They've improved aspects that are bad but you don't need to buy a new one just so you can watch certain features on the disc you couldn't before.

Does that make sense?

bt12483

07-12-09, 01:40 AM

And that will not happen because it was never mentioned in the original specification of the format or promised and EVERYTHING that was added to the DVD format never interfered with the functionality of the movies you buy or features they include .. What the hell is so hard to understand about that?! :confused: Umm, no sh*t...such a change would come via a revision to the specification. Like this revision that potentially will allow for downloads through a DVD player:
"DVD Forum's latest standard, DVD-Download for DL revealed in licensing specs (http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/02/04/dvd-forums-latest-standard-dvd-download-for-dl-revealed-in-lic/)"

Notice how it says "latest standard"...meaning that the standard has gone through changes???:rolleyes:

Listen - if you are going to b*tch about bluray adding Managed Copy at a later point, then you better damn well b*tch about DVD potentially adding a similar feature. You are applying a double standard....STILL.

Bluray has no interference. The small minority of profile 1.0 players cannot play 1.1 or 2.0 features. Likewise 1.1 players can't play 2.0 features. This is and was known.

A revision is fine if it doesn't interfere with basic feature set of the format. I know, because it ADDS to the standard. It doesn't break it.

This is all over the place with Blu-ray. No it isn't. It is clearly defined what functions are present in profile 1.0/1.1/2.0 players. It may confuse YOU. But nevertheless, it was defined.

There is not clear cut basic feature set. it's split into several different feature sets and you need to buy different players in order to utilize them. This is old news. Is this all you can really talk about, still???

Profile 1.0 players are a small small small minority of players. The PS3 accounts for ~75-85% of all bluray players. And profile 2.0 players have been abundant for over a year. Therefore we are talking about 5-10% of players that are not profile 2.0. In the real wrold, this topic you love to talk about sooooo much is simply a NON-ISSUE.

Your are living in the past to try and stick to this point you have, when in the real world it is simply negligible. The vast majority of players are 2.0 players that play everything.

Focusing on thousands of players sold to early adopters in 2006/07 instead of the millions of players that were majority 2.0 players sold afterwards is a sour grapes, antiquated lost cause of a talking point.

I don't have problems accepting when I'm wrong Must have something to so with the frequency with which it happens....

Hughmc

07-12-09, 01:43 AM

It's not normal when it's done within the same year with a standard. It's not old. It's reality and I'm glad you actually admit there's an issue and yes I will not buy any new Blu-ray players and will tell everyone to be very careful when buying them until the final specifications come out.

And your conspiracies about people who liked HD DVD being all against is Blu-ray and we want it to fail is WHAT"S OLD and pretty silly overall. I said it and I'll say it again, not all people criticizing Blu-ray for what it is are bitter HD DVD fans. I don't care about either format enough in essence to be bitter about anything. I am however very concious when something is wrong. That whole US vs THEM is troubling with many people. You should get that thing in check. It's bordering with paranoia. We are all consumers that spend hard earned money on something being sold. Instead of justifying why and how companies are floating around with stuff they sell you should stand on the side of the consumers and the difficulties they face embracing Blu-ray format if you really are such a huge diehard fan of Blu-ray. Not justifying why and how we have to pay and re-pay...

From everything I said and have issues is for the good of Blu-ray as being a final standard as well as protecting consumers that have no idea what they are buying but are hyped about it.

So what do you say to those who have never had issues or problems since 2.8 years ago? IMO,
the standard is HD video, 1080p and HD audio PCM, DTSMA and TRu HD. Everything else is bells and whistles to suck the public in, and to get you to bitch about how flawed you think it is. :D

Here is another thought to help think outside the box. Let's forget analogies to PC's, Iphone, HD DVD and especially DVD.

BD is not any of those. Look at it in an of itself. Why can it not evolve, change and improve even if we don't like it because we have to upgrade or change to access its current features. Why does it have to fit your parameters of being "complete" or else it is flawed and failed. How about, it is the way it is, there is nothing you can do about it, but 4 choices:

Buy it and enjoy it.

Buy it and bitch about it.

Don't buy it and enjoy not having it.

Don't buy it and bitch about not having it.

Bozster

07-12-09, 01:55 AM

So what do you say to those who have never had issues or problems since 2.8 years ago? IMO,
the standard is HD video, 1080p and HD audio PCM, DTSMA and TRu HD. Everything else is bells and whistles to suck the public in, and to get you to bitch about how flawed you think it is. :D

It's hard to say because most people did have problems with Blu-ray from 2.8 years ago. From playback of some discs, not being able to use features on new discs etc. But to be perfectly honest nobody was complaining because up until 2008 most people buying Blu-ray were early adopters and didn't really complain that much because they knew they are taking the risk. I had 2 Blu-ray players that I had numerous issues playing certain movies that were fixed later down the road with some firmware updates, but a few more movies came out after that. I replaced those and had less problems and now I"m at the 3rd set because I wanted to have all extra features on the disc that they advertise. All this pretty much within a year. That's really not much of a standard then.

I think you are looking it a bit biased from the point of view that you only care about the movie. And if you do, you will be probably fine with any Blu-ray player (if it does decode all codecs properly that is), that is true. But when something is being sold touting many other features under Blu-ray name, it's natural to expect that you don't have to rebuy players for each feature being introduced. Because if that's how it is, then it's not a standard at all. There is no firm specifications of the format to begin with.

And even with your basic set for the standard you consider it's not so clear cut. Not all players support those codecs. The only thing that's truly unique for all Blu-ray players is 1080p HD video. You have to again be careful to buy a specific player to know they support all of the standards you mentioned..

As for bells and whistles, they shouldn't then advertise all other things. Or at least they should make ti VERY CLEAR that you will need different players for those extra features. They don't. I have never seen a commercial or at retail store where they clearly explain what those Profiles are. People just think well it's version of the player or similar but it's Blu-ray it will play all of it. I can tell you that because many people asked the question.

The simplest example is that you can't say that any of the features in profiles are Blu-ray. As I said, they are Blu-ray "Functionality group 1", Blu-ray "Functionality group 2", Blu-ray "Functionality group 3" etc etc.. There is no Blu-ray "Full Blu-ray experience" considering they'll still be adding stuff to it.

And if next year they introduce Profile 3.0 then that's just ok right? Within 3 and a half years they introduced 4 different versions of Blu-ray experience more then what DVD did in more then a decade.

That's what the problem is.

Hughmc

07-12-09, 02:03 AM

If you want the fastest CPU and fastest graphics card I would understand you would want to buy a new PC but you don't have to. You can still use anything on Windows with your old machine.. Can you not?
No you can't. FOr example 1080p files and some older PC's have hardware limitations that won't let you do some new things that are being marketed and Windows 7 probably required a minimum amount of ram, etc just to run. Welcome to the world of upgrades and built in obsolescence.

Let's put in the way you explained.

If I could use all Blu-ray features that come on discs with every player they sell that carries the name Blu-ray and they introduce new players that have much faster load times, improved picture quality due to their processing and better audio it would be fine. I wouldn't have a problem with that at all. They can sell it at $500 and if it's that important to me I would buy it but my basic feature set where I can use all of the features presented on Blu-ray discs still need to play. If I"m fine waiting 20 secs to load a disc that's ok. That's called evolution/revision of the format. They've improved aspects that are bad but you don't need to buy a new one just so you can watch certain features on the disc you couldn't before.

Does that make sense?

Yes. :)

Bozster

07-12-09, 02:07 AM

No you can't. FOr example 1080p files and some older PC's have hardware limitations that won't let you do some new things that are being marketed and Windows 7 probably required a minimum amount of ram, etc just to run. Welcome to the world of upgrades and built in obsolescence.

It is true that you won't be able to play 1080p HD because anything from 10 years ago doesn't have enough horsepower for full HD. Other then that I can't think of one thing that I would HAVE TO buy a new computer to utilize all features of Windows 7.

Give me an example.

Wendell R. Breland

07-12-09, 02:08 AM

Bozster,

Have you tried to tune-in any local TV broadcast lately using your NTSC OTA TV? I will give you a hint, you are not likely to watch anything. Things have changed!!!

Have you tried to tune-in HDRadio on you older FM tuner/receiver. Guess what, it won’t. You will have to buy a new FM tuner/receiver with HDRadio in order to use that feature.

My 2004 car CD player will not play my MP3 disc. Oh dear, what shall I do??

Hughmc

07-12-09, 02:11 AM

It's hard to say because most people did have problems with Blu-ray from 2.8 years ago. From playback of some discs, not being able to use features on new discs etc. But to be perfectly honest nobody was complaining because up until 2008 most people buying Blu-ray were early adopters and didn't really complain that much because they knew they are taking the risk. I had 2 Blu-ray players that I had numerous issues playing certain movies that were fixed later down the road with some firmware updates, but a few more movies came out after that. I replaced those and had less problems and now I"m at the 3rd set because I wanted to have all extra features on the disc that they advertise. All this pretty much within a year. That's really not much of a standard then.

I think you are looking it a bit biased from the point of view that you only care about the movie. And if you do, you will be probably fine with any Blu-ray player (if it does decode all codecs properly that is), that is true. But when something is being sold touting many other features under Blu-ray name, it's natural to expect that you don't have to rebuy players for each feature being introduced. Because if that's how it is, then it's not a standard at all. There is no firm specifications of the format to begin with.

And even with your basic set for the standard you consider it's not so clear cut. Not all players support those codecs. The only thing that's truly unique for all Blu-ray players is 1080p HD video. You have to again be careful to buy a specific player to know they support all of the standards you mentioned..

As for bells and whistles, they shouldn't then advertise all other things. Or at least they should make ti VERY CLEAR that you will need different players for those extra features. They don't. I have never seen a commercial or at retail store where they clearly explain what those Profiles are. People just think well it's version of the player or similar but it's Blu-ray it will play all of it. I can tell you that because many people asked the question.

The simplest example is that you can't say that any of the features in profiles are Blu-ray. As I said, they are Blu-ray "Functionality group 1", Blu-ray "Functionality group 2", Blu-ray "Functionality group 3" etc etc.. There is no Blu-ray "Full Blu-ray experience" considering they'll still be adding stuff to it.

And if next year they introduce Profile 3.0 then that's just ok right? Within 3 years they introduced 4 different versions of Blu-ray experience.

That's what the problem is.

I hear you I do. Welcome to the world of HDMI and USB as well and now AV receivers with front high and wide channels @ 9.1, meanwhile there is only 7.1 content out and very little and even that is not always true 7.1 dedicated channels.

I am not going to BS you or anyone. I have stated in all these forums over and over that I am a strong supporter of BD and at the same time never had anything against HD DVD, downloads or anything that would take away from BD's success other than zealots who hated Sony just for the sake of hating Sony or some other BS reason why BD should fail or they hope it would fail out of some childish resentment which is what several ardent posters in this forum are doing, so I take a stand and call BS. I look at it in and of itself, how it works for me and what I hope it continues to be. If next year BD 3D comes out and my PS3 is capable, but my display isn't, well time to upgrade or settle.

Wendell R. Breland

07-12-09, 02:23 AM

In case anyone is wondering, there was another major change in TV broadcasting standards. They added color capability to B&W broadcasting. Oh my, you had to purchase a new color TV in order to view color programs in color.

Bozster

07-12-09, 02:29 AM

I hear you I do. Welcome to the world of HDMI and USB as well and now AV receivers with front high and wide channels @ 9.1, meanwhile there is only 7.1 content out and very little and even that is not always true 7.1 dedicated channels.

I am not going to BS you or anyone. I have stated in all these forums over and over that I am a strong supporter of BD and at the same time never had anything against HD DVD, downloads or anything that would take away from BD's success other than zealots who hated Sony just for the sake of hating Sony or some other BS reason why BD should fail or they hope it would fail out of some childish resentment which is what several ardent posters in this forum are doing, so I take a stand and call BS. I look at it in and of itself, how it works for me and what I hope it continues to be. If next year BD 3D comes out and my PS3 is capable, but my display isn't, well time to upgrade or settle.

I understand. and I agree with you on that. I'm just not fond of these revisions happening in such a short time frame where what you buy today and even if the discs are on the market that have certain features implemented already are not viewable or certain set of players. With HDMI and USB these are things that merely made things easier and allowed better quality of content (HDMI) and faster speeds and better connectivity (USB). But again, your software and other things continue working fine and with case of HDMI you still could watch all your content on players and TVs that didn't have HDMI. You content and features of materials you were viewing were same.

I guess the thing is if they made all players being sold to read all features on the discs being authored that would be fine and up to final Blu-ray standard.

I think that the biggest enemy to Blu-ray as a standard is exactly this. The confusion with profiles, what you can and can't do with players or discs you buy and being advertised by studios and CEs is what is turning a lot of people off. I mean $98 for a player might be a good entry point and for that price I guess lack of certain things could be fine but for some mid level players this needs to be sorted out.

Someone who buy a sub $100 player might be disappointed with some lack of features but they would probably be like "I guess it was cheap so I'm fine" and they can still watch the movie.

I want Blu-ray to be on the market. I do like digital downloads and streaming and hope they keep increasing quality to match Blu-ray because I like the convenience of renting movies that way but it's still not there and some time to go (without real standard either) but I do love Blu-ray on my 106" screen. There's no other quality on the market that will offer it and thus I want it to be present and have more and more content.

I guess I just have issues at how they developed the standard and have not really fully finalized it to the point where we know that some of these cool features, online connectivity and other stuff is available on every player.

We can call 3d something that would be extravagant and warrant a purchase of even new displays but the basic feature sets should be clear for the standard.

To round it up, Profiles are BAD anyway you look at it. I don't know who came up with that when they could've just planned and integrated everything together. I definitely don't have to be fine with it but it will come. The only thing is that those who expect it all should be made aware of the situation and wait until there's something final. If Profile 3.0 with managed copy and whatever might come is it. Then great. Let's wrap it up at 3.0 and invent on top of that but make sure that discs don't have additional things that you again have to buy a new player for.

As I said, I just have issues them splitting and introducing these things in such a short period of time when I thought latest players should've been final and people buying Blu-ray players would get the same thing across the board in features.

And I really enjoyed your responses. It was very concise and civil. :)

jvillain

07-12-09, 03:20 AM

Sorry for dragging this thread back in this direction but I just ran across this.

The CRTC (sort of like the FCC but in Canada ) is holding hearings on network neutrality and one of the organizations appearing before the committee is zip.ca which is the equivalent of Netflix but in Canada. One of the things they had to say was

Lamarre inquired into the cost of changing the delivery system from mail to the Internet. In response, Zip.ca said that it costs more to deliver a video through the Internet than through the post. They hoped that it would be cheaper in the long-run, but that with higher resolutions coming out, it is currently more expensive.

Denton asked about the cost of delivering movies by mail. Zip.ca replied that it was about a dollar each way plus some handling fees. They reiterated that with bandwidth costs, it was still more expensive to deliver movies over the Internet.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4107/125/#comments

A normal letter in Canada is 52 cents or so.

Hughmc

07-12-09, 03:35 AM

To round it up, Profiles are BAD anyway you look at it. I don't know who came up with that when they could've just planned and integrated everything together.

Mr. Give Meallumoney so I become a millionaire and continue to drain your resources preventing you from ever becoming rich as me. Of course there is more to it than that, but I couldn't resist. More to becoming well off that is. That guy is the genius who came up with built in incomplete!! :D

Cell phones and the cell phone markets are the best representation of never completely what we want, better known as what they are willing to give us to date to keep us wanting more.

There have been news articles about some tech, like digital cameras, being upgraded with more megapixels and better features too quickly, therefore "costing" the CE companies billions in lost revenue not carrying a product long enough for maximizing profit and conceding to get better and faster out to the consumer quicker.

Kosty

07-12-09, 03:36 AM

Well the BD-Live issue is taking care of itself as time goes on. Wal-Mart and Best Buy as we speak are blowing out those Bonus View only players and the common default standard for Blu-ray players in the fall will be BD-Live capable players, with SoC motherboards with chip sets capable of streaming. Good chance next year you will not be able to even buy a current model that is not BD-Live capable. Problem solved.

Ratman

07-12-09, 07:50 AM

ROFL.. okay..

I have never had issues from all the devices you bought.

You read too much into a response for argument's sake.

I never said electronics won't operate (although it does happen) after three years.

Obsolescence due to a lack of features/function.
(E.G. a working non-prog scan DVD player on an HDTV)

Nosferax

07-12-09, 09:54 AM

PSound

07-12-09, 11:11 AM

Good to see that Canadians are discussing that the issue is lack of competition and not technology. Why else would bandwidth for even a 10 GB file cost more than the $1 round-trip fee it takes to deliver via the post.

The presenters had some strong words about the lack of Canadian competition for high-speed Internet service, the debatable claims about the impact of P2P on congestion, and the overstated advertising claims. Unfortunately, it would appear once again that the Commission has accepted the ISP claims regarding congestion and network costs, leaving the panelists with the challenge of overcoming those basic assumptions.

That said, the day featured some startling revelations including Zip.ca's Rob Hall stating that it is currently cheaper to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on postage to send DVDs via the mail, rather than distributing the same content electronically through the Internet given the bandwidth costs.

The Coalition argued that a debilitating network could be a substantial and pressing objective. However, they pointed out that the evidence in this proceeding has not established the existence of debilitating network congestion. They also expressed doubt that applications like ********** and P2P "exploit" the Internet.

Addressing step two of the test, they argued that throttling is almost never narrowly tailored. Further, they argued that throttling has negative effects on innovation and that there are better means of lessening congestion.

For the third arm of the test, they argued in favour of techniques that were more effective at reducing congestion and that did not discriminate between applications. For the foremost alternative, they pointed to increased network capacity. They also pointed to application-neutral and price-based levers.

Denton asked for their view on price-based systems and the utility of a price-based system to alleviate congestion. In response, the Open Internet Coalition said they saw a variety of price based systems developing in the future. In addition, they expressed concern that price-based systems might have unintended consequences such as discouraging Internet use overall. However, they said that the Commission's role was to continue to promote competition, not to regulate fees.

Denton then asked whether their proposal to increase network capacity was an optimal solution. In response, the Coalition pointed out that increasing network capacity is key to the history of the Internet. In the past, increasing Internet capacity has encouraged innovation, leading to a win-win "virtuous circle." They cited an Internet2 study that demonstrated that adding capacity was a more beneficial way to deal with increased activity than managing the network.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4107/125/

There is lots more in that great article about Candian's working to address some of the serious limitations it looks like they are plagued by, but that is best addressed in the Video Downloads section. I only posted it here because the bandwidth questions were made in this thread.