http://www.homemediamagazine.com/tks-take/its-picture-stupid

TK Arnold, publisher of Home Media Magazine, has a revealing take on the value of Blu-ray.

Basically, he is saying that he and other pundits were initially not that impressed with Blu-ray's quality and so were looking for other parts of the value proposition. But he has changed his mind.

This has been my view all along, and I assume most people here. Blu-ray offers terrific picture and sound, and that is what I want.

What do you think?

When my kids are watching a movie on my 65-inch Panasonic plasma, I know instantly whether it's DVD or Blu-ray Disc. The Blu-ray Disc picture is so much cleaner and sharper — to the point where even my kids would rather wait until a film comes out on Blu-ray Disc than watch it on DVD.

So how about a 32" HDTV - sitting the average distance from the display - 9 feet.

So how about a 32" HDTV - sitting the average distance from the display - 9 feet.

While standing on one leg while rubbing the top of your head with one hand and your belly with the other counter clockwise....

So how about a 32" HDTV - sitting the average distance from the display - 9 feet.

It's funny that you mention that exact situation as my brother in-law recently got one of those $98 Magnavox blu-ray players for his 32" LCD.
He and his family enjoy the more detailed PQ they get from blu-ray discs.
He still does need to get a HTiB since they just use their TV speakers.


I've enjoyed blu-ray for the last 2 years and can't wait to see what the next decade or more of blu-ray PQ will bring to our homes. :D

As far as optical disks go in the US I can easily see Blu Ray getting 20-30 percent share in the next couple of years. Rest of the world I doubt it'll exceed single digits in the next 5 years or so. Reason being that US tends to have a lot more new content on Blu Ray than anywhere else. Also, US people tend to have much larger TV sets in general.

I travel a fair amount internationally and 40 inch is considered pretty big outside the US. Also, people tend to go to the movie theatres more and also perhaps watch movies on TV more than in the US. Just my opinion of course...

While standing on one leg while rubbing the top of your head with one hand and your belly with the other counter clockwise....

GREAT Strawman argument :rolleyes:

Guess you never saw this:

http://hdguru.com/lechner-distance-the-number-you-need-to-know-before-buying-an-hdtv/21/

Decide for yourselves if you think there is an improvement in the BD picture compared to the DVD picture.

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/3fff8abd.png
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/94b5a770.png

I don't think there is any debate that BD gives better picture and sound, it's whether the majority of the general public cares. For videophiles it is a no brainer, for the rest it is a toss up. Some will eventually be persuaded whiles others may have no interest in seeing the difference at all. It is just not a priority to them and they just want to watch the movie.

GREAT Strawman argument :rolleyes:

Guess you never saw this:

http://hdguru.com/lechner-distance-the-number-you-need-to-know-before-buying-an-hdtv/21/

You are the one trying to set a limit for enjoyment of movie on BR not me. Even with a smaller screen you'll still get the benefit of better color, better encoding with a modern codec, better audio even if you can't see the upgrade in minute detail.

I don't think there is any debate that BD gives better picture and sound, it's whether the majority of the general public cares. For videophiles it is a no brainer, for the rest it is a toss up. Some will eventually be persuaded whiles others may have no interest in seeing the difference at all. It is just not a priority to them and they just want to watch the movie.

Do you speak for everybody?

With a name like yours, HD may not be a priority but you shouldn't project your taste unto the masses.

This as been discussed here ad nauseam. BR is here to stay and is selling well. People will upgrade to BR even if it is due to simple attrition as their DVD player dies they will upgrade to BR. Especially now that the price are comming down fast.

Yes many people just want to watch the movie, but given the choice and shrinking price difference they'll take the superior version anytime like everything else. Hell, if not, we would still be watching VHS since all we want is to watch the movie.

Yes many people just want to watch the movie, but given the choice and shrinking price difference they'll take the superior version anytime like everything else. Hell, if not, we would still be watching VHS since all we want is to watch the movie.

Eventually everyone will switch to BD.

Not because they appreciate the improvement in AV quality but because BD will simply become ubiquitous.

In the UK we had/have a thing called Nicam stereo. Basically its digital stereo embedded in analogue broadcasts. When it first arrived it was only on a couple of channels on a handful of programmes and Nicam stereo TVs and VCRs were seen as very high end and niche market.

Most people laughed at the price differential as being something of interest only to frivilous madmen.

Scoot forward a few years . Nicam is so cheap and widespread its rare to find a TV over 14 inches that doesn't support it. Its so common its barely even mentioned in the specs.

How many people deliberately made the decision to buy a Nicam TV ( I personally know of only one...and that was me). How many people now have Nicam capable TVs? Throw a rock and you'll hit one.

Of course now with digital broadcasting Nicam is a dinosaur but the point remains. Everyone will end up with a BD player whether they actively desire one or not.

The most widespread comment I hear from people regarding BD is that they can't see any difference between BD and dvd on their sub 42" screen.

The second most popular comment is that they don't need to buy a BD player as they use an HDMI cable on their dvd player which makes it high definition anyway:o

Decide for yourselves if you think there is an improvement in the BD picture compared to the DVD picture.



Color on the BD capture looks very over-cooked.

Color on the BD capture looks very over-cooked.
But the general public will believe it looks better and gives the PQ that pop they look for on HD. Although the enthusiasts want blu-ray to be an enthusiasts format, the studios will cater to the general public as they are the ones paying the billing and providing profits.

I travel a fair amount internationally and 40 inch is considered pretty big outside the US.
The same could be said about the US 3 years ago.
But now 40-50" is an average size for a TV with the prices being about 1/3 of what they were 3 years ago.
When larger sets become cheaper or hit a certain price point, then people will go with the larger set.\ when it's time to upgrade or get a replacement.

Color on the BD capture looks very over-cooked.Nah, the color saturation looks about the same, with the BD you have much greater color detail.

For the doubters, connect your BD player to a fair quality standard NTSC set (25" to 30") using the COMPOSITE video connection. Then compare a title like Braveheart between the DVD and BD version and tell me what you see.

The same could be said about the US 3 years ago.
But now 40-50" is an average size for a TV with the prices being about 1/3 of what they were 3 years ago.
When larger sets become cheaper or hit a certain price point, then people will go with the larger set.\ when it's time to upgrade or get a replacement.

Based on my experience in the US people tend to live in bigger homes, away from urban settings and stay at home more often...hence why I believe larger screen sizes are not likely to be as popular outside the US as it is here.

Nah, the color saturation looks about the same, with the BD you have much greater color detail.

Greater color detail? nah, the color is in torch mode. Other screenshots show a blue color cast on clouds and castle walls.

Do you speak for everybody?

With a name like yours, HD may not be a priority but you shouldn't project your taste unto the masses.

This as been discussed here ad nauseam. BR is here to stay and is selling well. People will upgrade to BR even if it is due to simple attrition as their DVD player dies they will upgrade to BR. Especially now that the price are comming down fast.

Yes many people just want to watch the movie, but given the choice and shrinking price difference they'll take the superior version anytime like everything else. Hell, if not, we would still be watching VHS since all we want is to watch the movie.

That's funny, I never mentioned anything about myself but that is what you seem to have gotten out of it. :rolleyes:

For your info I watch as much HD as I can, but for many, many others they don't watch any at all. Why may you ask?

1. They might not have the equipment to allow them to.

2. They just might NOT CARE about it

I know many who happen to belong to the latter, so in a way I guess I am speaking for those people . Yes, and many will indulge in the benefits of HD as well, which I also mentioned in my above post. So you are right afterall, I really am speaking for everyone. Unless there is another group I don't know about, ;)

Eventually everyone will switch to BD.

Not because they appreciate the improvement in AV quality but because BD will simply become ubiquitous.

In the UK we had/have a thing called Nicam stereo. Basically its digital stereo embedded in analogue broadcasts. When it first arrived it was only on a couple of channels on a handful of programmes and Nicam stereo TVs and VCRs were seen as very high end and niche market.

Most people laughed at the price differential as being something of interest only to frivilous madmen.

Scoot forward a few years . Nicam is so cheap and widespread its rare to find a TV over 14 inches that doesn't support it. Its so common its barely even mentioned in the specs.

How many people deliberately made the decision to buy a Nicam TV ( I personally know of only one...and that was me). How many people now have Nicam capable TVs? Throw a rock and you'll hit one.

Of course now with digital broadcasting Nicam is a dinosaur but the point remains. Everyone will end up with a BD player whether they actively desire one or not.

The most widespread comment I hear from people regarding BD is that they can't see any difference between BD and dvd on their sub 42" screen.

The second most popular comment is that they don't need to buy a BD player as they use an HDMI cable on their dvd player which makes it high definition anyway:o

So you foresee BD players selling for $20 or $30 in the not too distant future?

That's funny, I never mentioned anything about myself but that is what you seem to have gotten out of it.The only thing he mentioned was your username, dude.
For your info I watch as much HD as I can, but for many, many others they don't watch any at all. Why may you ask?

1. They might not have the equipment to allow them to.

2. They just might NOT CARE about it

I know many who happen to belong to the latter, so in a way I guess I am speaking for those people.That's fantastic. But it's not what this board is about. If you want to argue about people not watching HD, then it's very obvious that the HDTV Software forum is not the place to do it.

So you foresee BD players selling for $20 or $30 in the not too distant future?
That $30 dvd player technology you refer to sold for upwards of $600 in 1999.

That $30 dvd player technology you refer to sold for upwards of $600 in 1999.

You didn't answer the question. ;)

The most widespread comment I hear from people regarding BD is that they can't see any difference between BD and dvd on their sub 42" screen.

My experience is just the reverse. I've had HD PJ's and displays since 2003, and back then my sister wasn't too thrilled with the technology due to the price. It looked nice but wasn't something she needed. Fast foward to last year, and when prices came down to her "threshold", she bought a small 22" LCD. Within 6 months she added a 50" plasma, 26" LCD, and 37" 1080p LCD. For xmas she received a 19" LCD for the kitchen. She also has cable, D*, and OTA antenna - all for HD content. Her main viewing is done on the 37", and she can sure tell what is HD and what is not. She loves BD, as well.

Art

For the naysayers, here is how Blu-ray is doing. All your negative post appears to be a waste of your time.

http://i26.tinypic.com/2uscr4o.jpg

I own a BD system and love it. I think BD is a best resolution for home disk purchase today and I own it because I want to see the movies I want in the best resolution of my TV. But, this doesn't require me to hedge my bet that BD will be DVD's successor. DVD didn't have to compete against cable or satellite pay per view, Netflix and its clones, or on-demand Internet based streaming video.

Technologist often discuss that many consumers trade convenience over higher quality. DVD not only was higher quality pq vs VHS but its form and durability was also overall more convenient than VHS.

BD's real enemy is the convenience of streaming, today, and possibly equal resolution tomorrow. Folks will tolerate lower pq on PC desktops or cellphones, and streaming has already surpassed DVD quality for home use. 1080p streaming technology is already in beta. If BD pulls ahead in data requirements such as 3D BD or ultra HD, it will lead the pack, but then we have to buy all new disks again. If it were streamed, we simply download the new version. Likewise, in the stream world, a studio can source the same movie in any format your viewer accepts, low, med, hi, super hi res etc., with far lower costs.

To have a physical disk, the makers have more capital costs above meida mastering: creating the disks, printing the inserts, packaging, distribution, inventory and mailing. All those costs drop substantially when its distributed via the net. Those costs can then be passed to the consumer say by reduced subscription rates or per disk online purchases.

So if BD folds, and we have a streaming world so be it. It will join the ranks of my other old video formats: DVD, Laser Disc, VHS. I got what I got from them and moved on.

DVD didn't have to compete against cable or satellite pay per view, Netflix and its clones, or on-demand Internet based streaming video.Not true. I had DirecTV from 1994 to 2004. From the beginning there was PPV movie channels available. In the early days you purchased a movie for a given time slot, later DirecTV changed to a 24 hour window for their PPV. Later they added HD movies for PPV. Dish Network followed a similar path with their PPV. IIRC, cable has had PPV for a number of years. Netflix has been available for over 10 years (most of DVDs life).

It should be obvious to most, BD is here to stay. There is a big infrastructure behind the format and it is getting bigger. FWIW, Toshiba has released some details on their new Blu-ray player, info here (http://www.twice.com/article/339408-First_Toshiba_Blu_ray_Disc_Player_Unveiled.php).

I own a BD system and love it. I think BD is a best resolution for home disk purchase today and I own it because I want to see the movies I want in the best resolution of my TV. But, this doesn't require me to hedge my bet that BD will be DVD's successor. DVD didn't have to compete against cable or satellite pay per view, Netflix and its clones, or on-demand Internet based streaming video.

Technologist often discuss that many consumers trade convenience over higher quality. DVD not only was higher quality pq vs VHS but its form and durability was also overall more convenient than VHS.

BD's real enemy is the convenience of streaming, today, and possibly equal resolution tomorrow. Folks will tolerate lower pq on PC desktops or cellphones, and streaming has already surpassed DVD quality for home use. 1080p streaming technology is already in beta. If BD pulls ahead in data requirements such as 3D BD or ultra HD, it will lead the pack, but then we have to buy all new disks again. If it were streamed, we simply download the new version. Likewise, in the stream world, a studio can source the same movie in any format your viewer accepts, low, med, hi, super hi res etc., with far lower costs.

To have a physical disk, the makers have more capital costs above meida mastering: creating the disks, printing the inserts, packaging, distribution, inventory and mailing. All those costs drop substantially when its distributed via the net. Those costs can then be passed to the consumer say by reduced subscription rates or per disk online purchases.

So if BD folds, and we have a streaming world so be it. It will join the ranks of my other old video formats: DVD, Laser Disc, VHS. I got what I got from them and moved on.

Streaming is all good if you live in a country where bandwith is still not capped. Elsewhere streaming is a costly proposition. Physical disk are available to everybody who has a way to play them and past the rental or the buying cost you don't have to pay for an internet connection or bandwith overcharge.

But all this has already been said.

As for people taste, you know what, they change as people get older. When I was younger I put up with a lot of crap. But now that I'm older, and now that I have money, I do enjoy better thing.

For the naysayers, here is how Blu-ray is doing. All your negative post appears to be a waste of your time.

http://i26.tinypic.com/2uscr4o.jpg

I don't have a graph like you do.

But I do have a Pie Chart:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/2009MidYearOverallPie.jpg

;)

That $30 dvd player technology you refer to sold for upwards of $600 in 1999.

You didn't answer the question. ;)

I'll say yes. There is already a $98 player and that one is very likely going to be a black Friday $50 player. Considering that in 1999 a $600 DVD player was not uncommon three years into blu ray's kick-off the price of some decent players isn't too shabby. Within a few months of being introduced several new main stream players are hitting price points that a year ago were considered super deals. More of those funai rebadges will be hitting similar price points like the Wally Magnavox for sure by black Friday and this holiday season.

Lee time to let go of your hatred for blu ray...

I'll say yes. There is already a $98 player and that one is very likely going to be a black Friday $50 player. Considering that in 1999 a $600 DVD player was not uncommon three years into blu ray's kick-off the price of some decent players isn't too shabby. Within a few months of being introduced several new main stream players are hitting price points that a year ago were considered super deals. More of those funai rebadges will be hitting similar price points like the Wally Magnavox for sure by black Friday and this holiday season.

Lee time to let go of your hatred for blu ray...

Fixed it!

Lee time to let go of your doubts about blu ray...

You can thank me later.:p

Fixed it!

Lee time to let go of your doubts about blu ray...

You can thank me later.:p

What is there to thank?

And what "doubts" could possibly remain?

This is all quite tiresome at this point.

Every issue you have ever beat into he ground has been addressed. Things you said would NEVER happen have already happened.

Bluray players are available for less than $100. Media prices are coming down. Toshiba will be releasing a bluray player.

It is cheaper now to get into bluray than it was when you got into HD DVD, with MORE titles and MORE speedier, feature filled players.

So once again, I ask, what "doubts" could possibly remain? Either you want new/more HD or you don't. For someone that owns well over 100 HD DVDs, I would think you would actually enjoy bluray IF you ever bought it.

A fully featured name 1080p brand name player with 7.1 analog outs and media streaming can be had for ~$238 right now. Far less than what you paid for that A2 of yours, with far more features.

Guys, hopefully this isn't seen as shameless self-promotion, but I'm here at IFA in Berlin with AVForums (UK) and was at the BDA press conference yesterday. You might find some of the data shared by FutureSource interesting. A full summary is here:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/home-cinema-tech-news/1072226-ifa-2009-live-blu-ray-disc-assoc-press-conference.html

Jim Bottoms of Futuresource makes the point that eventually, prices for BD hardware will fall to the point where there will be little point in manufacturers making DVD-only machines. To illustrate the point, he asked how easy it was to find a CD player these days...

With the release of Toshiba's Blu-ray machine, we now have the amusing situation where the only people with any logical reason to hate or attack Blu-ray are now making players for them.

Looks like Toshiba is adding a BD laptop (http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3366) to its standalone BD player offerings.

Mr. Skin was on a podcast and said that they're going back and re-cataloging movies because as BDs of older movies are released, they're finding things that they didn't see in the DVD version.

That's the true value of Blu Ray!

Mr. Skin was on a podcast and said that they're going back and re-cataloging movies because as BDs of older movies are released, they're finding things that they didn't see in the DVD version.

That's the true value of Blu Ray!

Is this the Mr Skin of the nudie clips fame?

Given how he makes clips, there truly must be a lot more to see;)

I don't have a graph like you do.

But I do have a Pie Chart:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/2009MidYearOverallPie.jpg

;)

Nice chart Lee, thanks for posting.

DVD sales -16%
DVD rental +6%
Blu Ray sales +91%
Blu Ray rental +62%
Digital +21%

Very good numbers for Blu Ray. Thanks.

Nice chart Lee, thanks for posting.

DVD sales -16%
DVD rental +6%
Blu Ray sales +91%
Blu Ray rental +62%
Digital +21%

Very good numbers for Blu Ray. Thanks.

Care to comment on the $ numbers also? :D

Thanks! This is a wonderful insiders view, lots of good aggregated data.

Guys, hopefully this isn't seen as shameless self-promotion, but I'm here at IFA in Berlin with AVForums (UK) and was at the BDA press conference yesterday. You might find some of the data shared by FutureSource interesting. A full summary is here:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/home-cinema-tech-news/1072226-ifa-2009-live-blu-ray-disc-assoc-press-conference.html

Jim Bottoms of Futuresource makes the point that eventually, prices for BD hardware will fall to the point where there will be little point in manufacturers making DVD-only machines. To illustrate the point, he asked how easy it was to find a CD player these days...

The bottomline has already been explained in this thread. Blu-Ray will simply become ubiquitous with buying an HDTV. The price points for Blu-Ray players will get to the point, within the next few years, that it simply will make sense to buy one to match the performance of your brand new HDTV, or when your DVD player dies. At some point ($49 and under) they will simply be an impulse buy. And there will be lots of movies available (both catalog and new release) to feed your player.

Look at the charts from IFA. DVD is declining and Blu-Ray is increasing. I expect Blu-Ray to only accelerate as certain price points are met. Even Toshiba gets it. :)

Blu-Ray has made it. It is here to stay for sometime. I don't know what more there is to say really...

The bottomline has already been explained in this thread. Blu-Ray will simply become ubiquitous with buying an HDTV. The price points for Blu-Ray players will get to the point, within the next few years, that it simply will make sense to buy one to match the performance of your brand new HDTV, or when your DVD player dies. At some point ($49 and under) they will simply be an impulse buy. And there will be lots of movies available (both catalog and new release) to feed your player.

Look at the charts from IFA. DVD is declining and Blu-Ray is increasing. I expect Blu-Ray to only accelerate as certain price points are met. Even Toshiba gets it. :)

Blu-Ray has made it. It is here to stay for sometime. I don't know what more there is to say really...

Yet today, we have people buying HDTV's that do not watch HD on their HDTV.

How do you explain that?

Yet today, we have people buying HDTV's that do not watch HD on their HDTV.

How do you explain that?
Even more bizarre...how do you explain someone asking directions on how to hook up a vcr to an hdtv?

Yet today, we have people buying HDTV's that do not watch HD on their HDTV.

How do you explain that?

Price, availability, education/exposure, etc. This is a marathon Lee, not a sprint. As you can see today when you go buy a new TV at Walmart, Sams, Costco, Best Buy, Sears, etc you are going to be pushed into buying an HDTV. At some point cable/sat providers will do the same with HD. I know very few people that (actually I don't know any) that once they sign up for HD service they cancel it and go back to SD. Most people that see a baseball/football/nature show/etc in HD "get it".

I can't believe some of the sentiments arising in this thread . I thought the vomit inducing BD vs HDDVD fanatacism had faded into history. (I'm not referring to Lee either).

BD will be the premier disc based format for the near future for reasons mentioned previously.

What its not is the crown jewel of quality either in reality or in the minds of consumers. At best its seen as merely an improvement to 90% of the people that watch it rather than a revelation. Why it inspires such rabid loyalty given the frankly lacklustre design and mastering most commercial BDs exhibit is frankly beyond me.

It will not succeed based on its merit. It will succeed purely because eventually it will be the only logical choice for the consumer.

As a format I personally hate it. The first thing I do to a BD is rip it and strip off all the garbage so I don't have to chapter or sit through 10 minutes of badly mastered trailers and warnings that there may be a delay whilst my player updates.

Price, availability, education/exposure, etc. This is a marathon Lee, not a sprint. As you can see today when you go buy a new TV at Walmart, Sams, Costco, Best Buy, Sears, etc you are going to be pushed into buying an HDTV. At some point cable/sat providers will do the same with HD. I know very few people that (actually I don't know any) that once they sign up for HD service they cancel it and go back to SD. Most people that see a baseball/football/nature show/etc in HD "get it".

Yet here we are today - 11 years after the intro of HDTV and with 50% of USA HH's owning at least one HDTV - the % for people actually watching HD on their HDTV is below 50%.

To put that into numbers - there are approx. 110M HH's with 55M HDTV's and 27.5M are not watching HD, which I am sure a large % could get for free just by putting up an antenna.

Personal anecodotes don't explain what is happening nationwide.

I can't believe some of the sentiments arising in this thread . I thought the vomit inducing BD vs HDDVD fanatacism had faded into history. (I'm not referring to Lee either).

BD will be the premier disc based format for the near future for reasons mentioned previously.

What its not is the crown jewel of quality either in reality or in the minds of consumers. At best its seen as merely an improvement to 90% of the people that watch it rather than a revelation. Why it inspires such rabid loyalty given the frankly lacklustre design and mastering most commercial BDs exhibit is frankly beyond me.

It will not succeed based on its merit. It will succeed purely because eventually it will be the only logical choice for the consumer.

As a format I personally hate it. The first thing I do to a BD is rip it and strip off all the garbage so I don't have to chapter or sit through 10 minutes of badly mastered trailers and warnings that there may be a delay whilst my player updates.

I don't believe the masses put quality before price. I can't think of an instance where that has happened.

As long as there are two formats (DVD and BD) and one is less expensive than the other - consumers will make the above choice.

And to many; "DVD is good enough" will definitely be an obstacle in the growth of BD the format.

So maybe at some point there will only be BD players for sale. But will there only be BD's for sale and no DVD's? Like what happened to VHS?

Yet here we are today - 11 years after the intro of HDTV and with 50% of USA HH's owning at least one HDTV - the % for people actually watching HD on their HDTV is below 50%.

To put that into numbers - there are approx. 110M HH's with 55M HDTV's and 27.5M are not watching HD, which I am sure a large % could get for free just by putting up an antenna.

Personal anecodotes don't explain what is happening nationwide.

First of all you need to supply a link stating that only 27.5 million people are watching HD.

And when did the majority of those people buy HDTV's? I doubt it was 11 years ago. And when did cable and sat companies really start pushing HD? This year Dish announced affordable HD only packages, and both cable and sat companies have been slow to add HD channels. I can tell you this is a major factor for many people in the adoption of HD.

And none of this disputes what I said above. When people adopt HDTV's and decide to either upgrade or replace their DVD player the choice will most likely already be made for them. Blu-Ray players will be front and center at their local store from all the major CE's and at all different price points.

And lastly, you have to look at the audience. If your numbers are accurate close to 30 million people subscribe or paid extra to get HD content in their house. That number will continue to increase over the next 5-10 years. As more people are accustomed to watching content in HD, Blu-Ray will be come an easy sale. The numbers are not going to go down or stay static. There is expected to be strong growth for HDTV sales over the next few years.

Look at the charts from IFA. Blu-Ray sales will continue to increase in strong numbers. They are expecting sales in 2009 to be 3 times higher than they were in 2008, even in a very tough global economy. And DVD is certainly not increasing or staying static. It is declining. And will continue to at the expense of newer technologies (Blu-Ray, downloads/streaming (which many BD players support).

I can't believe some of the sentiments arising in this thread . I thought the vomit inducing BD vs HDDVD fanatacism had faded into history...

Regarding bluray:
As a format I personally hate it.

This just struck me as funny.

Yet here we are today - 11 years after the intro of HDTV and with 50% of USA HH's owning at least one HDTV - the % for people actually watching HD on their HDTV is below 50%.

To put that into numbers - there are approx. 110M HH's with 55M HDTV's and 27.5M are not watching HD, which I am sure a large % could get for free just by putting up an antenna.


Those consumers only watching SD on their HDTV will also notice very easily the dramatic PQ improvement when they watch blu-ray on their HDTV.
This makes blu-ray that much easier to tell that IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE in PQ and for consumers to purchase when the price point hits their requirement, which is getting to the point of impulse purchase price.:D

First of all you need to supply a link stating that only 27.5 million people are watching HD.

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/15452-HDTV-owners-not-watching-in-HD.html

http://www.cepro.com/article/why_arent_people_watching_hd_programming/

So now I need a link from you disputing that info. ;)

And when did the majority of those people buy HDTV's? I doubt it was 11 years ago. And when did cable and sat companies really start pushing HD? This year Dish announced affordable HD only packages, and both cable and sat companies have been slow to add HD channels. I can tell you this is a major factor for many people in the adoption of HD.

Sure - the lions share of HDTV sales comes from the last 3 years - but that still doesn't change the fact.

And none of this disputes what I said above. When people adopt HDTV's and decide to either upgrade or replace their DVD player the choice will most likely already be made for them. Blu-Ray players will be front and center at their local store from all the major CE's and at all different price points.

So again - what good is buying a BD player if you are not going to buy BD's?

And lastly, you have to look at the audience. If your numbers are accurate close to 30 million people subscribe or paid extra to get HD content in their house. That number will continue to increase over the next 5-10 years. As more people are accustomed to watching content in HD, Blu-Ray will be come an easy sale. The numbers are not going to go down or stay static. There is expected to be strong growth for HDTV sales over the next few years.

Yes - it has been increasing. But it still doesn't change the facts. And BD will NOT be an easy sale because of it's very small catalog of titles as compared to DVD. That coupled with the higher cost of buying BD's iver DVD's still has to be considered and you continue to ignore that.

Look at the charts from IFA. Blu-Ray sales will continue to increase in strong numbers. They are expecting sales in 2009 to be 3 times higher than they were in 2008, even in a very tough global economy. And DVD is certainly not increasing or staying static. It is declining. And will continue to at the expense of newer technologies (Blu-Ray, downloads/streaming (which many BD players support).

Creating stong numbers with a fledging format is easy. I really question some of those stats that were shown at IFA. DVD did $2.5B in revenue in 2000. Do you think that BD is going to get anywheres near that in 2009?

http://www.dvdinformation.com/News/press/CES2009yearEnd.htm

Those consumers only watching SD on their HDTV will also notice very easily the dramatic PQ improvement when they watch blu-ray on their HDTV.
This makes blu-ray that much easier to tell that IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE in PQ and for consumers to purchase when the price point hits their requirement, which is getting to the point of impulse purchase price.:D

The last stat I saw said that nationwide (USA) 18% got their TV from OTA. The other 82% from CST.

So why aren't they ordering HD from their CST provider?

Which offers a more diversity of HD? BD or CST?

NOTE: CST stands for CBL SAT TELCO

Yet here we are today - 11 years after the intro of HDTV and with 50% of USA HH's owning at least one HDTV - the % for people actually watching HD on their HDTV is below 50%.http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/15452-HDTV-owners-not-watching-in-HD.html

http://www.cepro.com/article/why_arent_people_watching_hd_programming/

So now I need a link from you disputing that info. ;)The links you provide seem to do a bit of that. After all, you claim there are 55m HDTV households, but the study you cite says 39m. You then go on to claim less than 50% of HDTV households watch HD programming, but the study says that number is actually higher than 55%.
Sure - the lions share of HDTV sales comes from the last 3 years - but that still doesn't change the fact.Change what fact?
So again - what good is buying a BD player if you are not going to buy BD's?Who's claiming that? Again, your "proof" only says HDTV service (from OTA or CST), nothing about Blu-ray.
Yes - it has been increasing. But it still doesn't change the facts. And BD will NOT be an easy sale because of it's very small catalog of titles as compared to DVD. That coupled with the higher cost of buying BD's iver DVD's still has to be considered and you continue to ignore that.Where does he ignore that?

As he said, you're viewing it as a sprint, whereas he's viewing it as a marathon.

The links you provide seem to do a bit of that. After all, you claim there are 55m HDTV households, but the study you cite says 39m. You then go on to claim less than 50% of HDTV households watch HD programming, but the study says that number is actually higher than 55%.

We going to quibble about 5%? And the 55M HDTV HH's os a more recent number. Just a few weeks old.

EDIT: newer info:

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/07/06/who-are-the-10-4-of-us-tv-households-with-hd-tvs-but-no-hd-programming/22374

Change what fact?

That a large % of HDTV owners aren't watching HD on their HDTV.

Who's claiming that? Again, your "proof" only says HDTV service (from OTA or CST), nothing about Blu-ray.

Look at Ack's post, which mine is a response to - you have taken it out of context.

Where does he ignore that?

By claiming that "BD is an easy sale." The player might be when it reaches the 'throwaway" price level but the software will still be more expensive than DVD.

As he said, you're viewing it as a sprint, whereas he's viewing it as a marathon.

Oh - the old; "just wait" response?

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/15452-HDTV-owners-not-watching-in-HD.html

http://www.cepro.com/article/why_arent_people_watching_hd_programming/

So now I need a link from you disputing that info. ;)

Ummm. Your numbers are off:

"In the US, there are more than 39 million households with an installed HDTV set," says In-Stat analyst Mike Paxton. "However, only 22 million of those are HDTV households, meaning that 17 million US households with an installed HDTV set are not watching HD programming."

At any rate that would be over 50% of households that own an HDTV and get HD programming.

And from your the article:

number of U.S. HDTV households, that which have installed an HDTV and watch HD programming, increased nearly 40 percent in 2008

So the numbers are growing quickly. Which goes back to several points that I made that you glossed over. HD subscriptions are directly related to availability and price. Availability of channels that consumers want at a price that consumers are willing to pay. Clearly many channels are not in HD yet compared to SD. And price and HD packages continue to evolve as the market and technologies mature. Just as an example in December of 2006 I had to pay $149 for my Dish HD DVR. And SD DVR was essentially free. DirectTV also wanted a simialar price for an HD DVR at the time. That is it in my area. No cable companies. Now? You can get an HD DVR added in with none of those upfront fees that I had to pay in Q4 2006. Now? I can get affordable HD programming packages including the local channels.

What do you think will happen in the upcoming years? My guess? More HD channels will be added, better technology will continue to emerge, and even cheaper HD packages will also emerge as the cable/sat/telco companies compete for your dollar.

Sure - the lions share of HDTV sales comes from the last 3 years - but that still doesn't change the fact.

See above. It is all about pricing, availability, and people experiencing HD. Especially in many of the rural areas.


So again - what good is buying a BD player if you are not going to buy BD's?

I never said people will not but BD's. Price on hardware and software will continue to decline just like they did for DVD:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=68

Just like DVD, cheaper hardware pricing on Blu-Ray hardware will result in a larger ownerbase which will push studios and retailers to drop pricing on titles to generate more revenue and profit. Again, same thing happened with DVD. And again, I am talking long term, not just 2009 and 2010. Think 2012 and beyond.

Yes - it has been increasing. But it still doesn't change the facts. And BD will NOT be an easy sale because of it's very small catalog of titles as compared to DVD. That coupled with the higher cost of buying BD's iver DVD's still has to be considered and you continue to ignore that.


See above. Pricing will continue to fall over time. New releases drive the market, not catalog titles, and surely Blu-Ray will have more than enough of both to satisfy the general consumer who buys an HDTV.


Creating stong numbers with a fledging format is easy. I really question some of those stats that were shown at IFA. DVD did $2.5B in revenue in 2000. Do you think that BD is going to get anywheres near that in 2009?

http://www.dvdinformation.com/News/press/CES2009yearEnd.htm

I don't think it really matters to me if Blu-Ray makes $1.5 bllion in 2009 or $3 billion. The reality is that DVD is in an oversaturated market and is yesterdays news. I am not saying it is not going to remain as the dominant format in home video over the next few years, but I also don't see DVD increasing marketshare against Blu-Ray or even stabilizing. I see it continuing to drop by healthy margins year after year until Blu-Ray simply surpasses it. You can say that Blu-Ray will be a tough sale, but the whole industry is behind it and clearly we are going to see more of the same (Blu-Ray increasing marketshare against DVD). Blu-Ray, most likely has another 10 years in the tank at least.

We going to quibble about 5%? And the 55M HDTV HH's os a more recent number. Just a few weeks old.

EDIT: newer info:

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/07/06/who-are-the-10-4-of-us-tv-households-with-hd-tvs-but-no-hd-programming/22374That makes your previous claims even harder to swallow, since it says that only 10.4% of HD households have no HD programming, not 45%, let alone >50%
That a large % of HDTV owners aren't watching HD on their HDTV.Apart from your ever-changing claims on percentages, ack_bk has already addressed this. It's not his fault you choose to bitch about it.
Look at Ack's post, which mine is a response to - you have taken it out of context.How? He never said people were going to buy BD players and not BDs. Again, your choice of words, not his.
By claiming that "BD is an easy sale." The player might be when it reaches the 'throwaway" price level but the software will still be more expensive than DVD.But there's nothing saying it will stay at the levels you seem to think it will. We've seen a significant drop in player and software prices in the last year, but you're operating under the assumption that that will stop, which only makes sense if you want to be contrarian.
Oh - the old; "just wait" response?Y'know, Lee, if you only want to talk about how crappy HD in general is doing, the HDTV software forum seems like the worst place to do it.

That makes your previous claims even harder to swallow, since it says that only 10.4% of HD households have no HD programming, not 45%, let alone >50%


Wow, if this is the case (almost 90% of HDTV owners receive HD programming) then this shoots some big holes in Lee's theories on Blu-Ray adoption!

Ummm. Your numbers are off:

"In the US, there are more than 39 million households with an installed HDTV set," says In-Stat analyst Mike Paxton. "However, only 22 million of those are HDTV households, meaning that 17 million US households with an installed HDTV set are not watching HD programming."

At any rate that would be over 50% of households that own an HDTV and get HD programming.

And from your the article:


So the numbers are growing quickly. Which goes back to several points that I made that you glossed over. HD subscriptions are directly related to availability and price. Availability of channels that consumers want at a price that consumers are willing to pay. Clearly many channels are not in HD yet compared to SD. And price and HD packages continue to evolve as the market and technologies mature. Just as an example in December of 2006 I had to pay $149 for my Dish HD DVR. And SD DVR was essentially free. DirectTV also wanted a simialar price for an HD DVR at the time. That is it in my area. No cable companies. Now? You can get an HD DVR added in with none of those upfront fees that I had to pay in Q4 2006. Now? I can get affordable HD programming packages including the local channels.

What do you think will happen in the upcoming years? My guess? More HD channels will be added, better technology will continue to emerge, and even cheaper HD packages will also emerge as the cable/sat/telco companies compete for your dollar.

So for all the growth in HD as you describe it - and bringing the thread back to the topic - BD - how do you explain that BD's growth hasn't come close to HD's growth? Could it be a $ issue? Lack of interest issue? Pervieved value issue?

See above. It is all about pricing, availability, and people experiencing HD. Especially in many of the rural areas.

People in rural areas don't get SAT?

I never said people will not but BD's. Price on hardware and software will continue to decline just like they did for DVD:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=68

Which is all well and good but aren't BD players and BD discs more expensive (on the whole) then DVD players and DVD discs?

Just like DVD, cheaper hardware pricing on Blu-Ray hardware will result in a larger ownerbase which will push studios and retailers to drop pricing on titles to generate more revenue and profit. Again, same thing happened with DVD. And again, I am talking long term, not just 2009 and 2010. Think 2012 and beyond.

And pushing the price of BD discs down will also push the price of DVD discs down.

See above. Pricing will continue to fall over time. New releases drive the market, not catalog titles, and surely Blu-Ray will have more than enough of both to satisfy the general consumer who buys an HDTV.

And see above for my questions about the difference between DVD and BD.

I don't think it really matters to me if Blu-Ray makes $1.5 bllion in 2009 or $3 billion. The reality is that DVD is in an oversaturated market and is yesterdays news. I am not saying it is not going to remain as the dominant format in home video over the next few years, but I also don't see DVD increasing marketshare against Blu-Ray or even stabilizing. I see it continuing to drop by healthy margins year after year until Blu-Ray simply surpasses it. You can say that Blu-Ray will be a tough sale, but the whole industry is behind it and clearly we are going to see more of the same (Blu-Ray increasing marketshare against DVD). Blu-Ray, most likely has another 10 years in the tank at least.

But what of the consumer? Is he going to replace his DVD collection with BD's? Can he rent BD's at a Redbox kiosk (anywhere)? Are consumers habits changing as to how they get their home video entertainment?

Lee we are just going to keep talking in circles and just regurgitate the same arguments that you have been having all over the Internet over the past few years.

Clearly you have serious doubts about Blu-Ray and you continue to abstain from enjoying the format. Good luck with that.

Clearly I don't. I just keep buying and renting titles on the format and enjoy it. There is better selection, and better pricing than previous years and I just don't see that changing as the format continues to grow.

So for all the growth in HD as you describe it - and bringing the thread back to the topic - BD - how do you explain that BD's growth hasn't come close to HD's growth? Could it be a $ issue? Lack of interest issue? Pervieved value issue?Off the top of my head:

Around 1/4th as long
Involved in long-standing format war
Incomplete studio and hardware support for more than half of life-span
Hardware not rentable (most HD units from CST are leased)

And, that of course, assumes point-in-lifecycle growth for HD was bigger, which you have yet to prove.
And pushing the price of BD discs down will also push the price of DVD discs down.Demonstrably false, in that we've yet to see DVD MSRPs fall as you're describing. Indeed, many comparable DVD versions are the same price as the Blu-ray (see also: every Criterion disc). And the "bargain bin" deals are not MSRP, and at the same time represent the floor for pricing.
And see above for my questions about the difference between DVD and BD.Which, again, assumes all BD price drops are arrested as of the present and/or will drive down DVD MSRPs, neither of which is accurate.
But what of the consumer? Is he going to replace his DVD collection with BD's? Can he rent BD's at a Redbox kiosk (anywhere)? Are consumers habits changing as to how they get their home video entertainment?As it relates to HD? No.

Lee we are just going to keep talking in circles and just regurgitate the same arguments that you have been having all over the Internet over the past few years.

Clearly you have serious doubts about Blu-Ray and you continue to abstain from enjoying the format. Good luck with that.

Clearly I don't. I just keep buying and renting titles on the format and enjoy it. There is better selection, and better pricing than previous years and I just don't see that changing as the format continues to grow.Exactly.

This forum is for the discussion of, and promotion of HDTV software. If a great deal of your posts are about the failure of such, you're in the wrong place. People who are excited about discussing HDTV don't spend half or more of their time trying to tear it down.

Lee we are just going to keep talking in circles and just regurgitate the same arguments that you have been having all over the Internet over the past few years.

Clearly you have serious doubts about Blu-Ray and you continue to abstain from enjoying the format. Good luck with that.

Clearly I don't. I just keep buying and renting titles on the format and enjoy it. There is better selection, and better pricing than previous years and I just don't see that changing as the format continues to grow.

Count me as one who fully enjoys BD but has serious doubts. I don't care, but I still have serious doubts that BD will ever replace DVD.

My humble opinion is just price. How can there be so many DVDs out there at less than $5?

Since when?

I thought this was AVS as opposed to Bluray.com

:confused:Who said Blu-ray? You've spent half this thread bemoaning HDTV itself! Why in thr world would anyone interested in HDTV software, Blu-ray or not, exert so much time and effort attempting to discredit the entire basis of it?

Count me as one who fully enjoys BD but has serious doubts. I don't care, but I still have serious doubts that BD will ever replace DVD.

My humble opinion is just price. How can there be so many DVDs out there at less than $5?

But is that really the argument at hand? That Blu-Ray has to replace DVD for it to be a very successful format?

I just don't see it. And clearly the success of both Blu-Ray and DVD are driven each and every week by new releases. Not cheap $5 catalog titles. I mean how much profit is there for a studio and retailer after manufacturing, shipping, stocking, etc fees are taken into account on a $5 DVD? Maybe $1 for the studios and $1 for the store? Maybe?

And isn't that just more fuel to the studios and retailers to phase DVD (at least the cheap bargain bin catalog titles) out and try and sell more Blu-Ray discs at higher margins as the ownerbase grows?

The last stat I saw said that nationwide (USA) 18% got their TV from OTA. The other 82% from CST.

So why aren't they ordering HD from their CST provider?

Which offers a more diversity of HD? BD or CST?

NOTE: CST stands for CBL SAT TELCO
Because HD costs extra, which they may not want to pay a MONTHLY fee.
And they aren't fooled by the promo's that say FREE HD but you need to upgrade your box to an HD capable box that will cost you extra MONTHLY fees.

Unlike cable subscriptions, blu-ray is non-reoccurring fee once purchased.

Because HD costs extra, which they may not want to pay a MONTHLY fee.
And they aren't fooled by the promo's that say FREE HD but you need to upgrade your box to an HD capable box that will cost you extra MONTHLY fees.

Or . . .

http://www.multichannel.com/blog/The_Satellite_Dish/11490-Why_is_HD_not_Selling_Like_It_Should_.php

Unlike cable subscriptions, blu-ray is non-reoccurring fee once purchased.

Really? They giving away free rentals or purchases of BDs?

But is that really the argument at hand? That Blu-Ray has to replace DVD for it to be a very successful format?

I just don't see it. And clearly the success of both Blu-Ray and DVD are driven each and every week by new releases. Not cheap $5 catalog titles. I mean how much profit is there for a studio and retailer after manufacturing, shipping, stocking, etc fees are taken into account on a $5 DVD? Maybe $1 for the studios and $1 for the store? Maybe?

And isn't that just more fuel to the studios and retailers to phase DVD (at least the cheap bargain bin catalog titles) out and try and sell more Blu-Ray discs at higher margins as the ownerbase grows?

I agree. I don't care whether it ever replaces DVD or not, I will still collect it. However, I would not want to be the head of the BD strategy for a studio. It appears to be a no-win solution at least for many years.

I just don't think they can pull out of it. If they do, they will be beaten up for not growing the business until they can force a change to BD. In the meantime, I can see many DB players being sold (why wouldn't you at the prices they are reaching), but disc sales to be dismal on a per player basis. I think many people will rent the BD (at least that is a start) but buy the DVD due to the ridiculous prices out there. I mean, have you seen the Wal-Mart bins lately? There are often movies less than a year old that are in the $5 bin.

As the OP, it seems to me that this discussion has wandered from the topic.

TK Arnold was saying that he (and others) had somewhat missed the point in not seeing that the real value of Blu-ray was, simply, the terrific picture and sound, as compared to some of the ancillary features such as BD-Live. He has another blog along similar lines today as well.

I thought this was a good point and one that I have been making.

Bickering removed. Most of it, anyway. Further sniping will result in a loss of posting priveleges.

Jim Bottoms of Futuresource makes the point that eventually, prices for BD hardware will fall to the point where there will be little point in manufacturers making DVD-only machines. To illustrate the point, he asked how easy it was to find a CD player these days...
I think his assumption and analogy are faulty although his prediction might come true anyway :).

The royalty stack for BD is quite substantial (close to the cost of building a DVD player!). So putting aside implementation costs, it will always cost more than building DVD players. Of course, license holders could choose to lower their royalty rates to reduce that impact but I would not hold my breath on this happening to a significant manner anytime soon.

The royalty cost of CD was nowhere near DVD and now, BD. So it was a lot easier to bundle in that format.

With the details of above data not being in public domain, I am not surprised that people in the industry are not aware of it. Or maybe he is just talking about hardware costs and not the rest (royalties and licensing costs for the implementation).

The reason it might not matter at the end is that maybe $20 DVD players go away and get replaced with $35 BD/DVD players and life will go on.

Regarding bluray:


This just struck me as funny.

I'm expressing my own opinion. I'm not launching into some rabid attack on someone elses opposing view. Frankly I think it's a terrible format and treats the average consumer like a moron.

I think his assumption and analogy are faulty although his prediction might come true anyway :).

The royalty stack for BD is quite substantial (close to the cost of building a DVD player!). So putting aside implementation costs, it will always cost more than building DVD players. Of course, license holders could choose to lower their royalty rates to reduce that impact but I would not hold my breath on this happening to a significant manner anytime soon.

The royalty cost of CD was nowhere near DVD and now, BD. So it was a lot easier to bundle in that format.

With the details of above data not being in public domain, I am not surprised that people in the industry are not aware of it. Or maybe he is just talking about hardware costs and not the rest (royalties and licensing costs for the implementation).

The reason it might not matter at the end is that maybe $20 DVD players go away and get replaced with $35 BD/DVD players and life will go on.

These are good points about the royalties. But there may be other factors at work, such as the following:

1. "Cheap enough" vs. "cheapest": At some price point, most consumers will just pay a few dollars more to get a Blu-ray player without worrying about it. "Why pay $20 for a DVD player when you can get Blu-ray for $50?" As entry-level prices fall below $100 this may become a common line of argument.

2. Retailer pro-activity: Retailers have a lot of reasons to push Blu-ray. At some point, they will just stop carrying DVD players to any degree. We saw this with VHS, where it became the case that the only VHS players you could find also played DVD. I was surprised how quickly that happened. Manufacturers will nudge this along.

I am already seeing stores like Best Buy cutting back on their shelf space and number of DVD models. With Toshiba coming on board and other new players at all price points, I think we will see an effort to "retire" DVD and it will succeed, I predict.

I'm expressing my own opinion. I'm not launching into some rabid attack on someone elses opposing view. Frankly I think it's a terrible format and treats the average consumer like a moron.

How exactly does a non-living plastic disk treat someone like a moron? You have a HDTV? Surround sound? Bluray will treat you just fine.

Why so bitter? I just got 3 used blurays with 1080p video/lossless audio for $23 total. They look and sound fantastic.

Some of those movies were on a 50GB disk, which you once said was like turning lead into gold. That was quite an incorrect statement. From you.

Are you saying bluray just treated me like moron?

How exactly does a non-living plastic disk treat someone like a moron?
If I may speak for him. Have you ever deleted someting and the software asks you, "are you sure?" and your answer is, "Of course I am sure. That is why I hit the darn delete button." That is some non-living thing treating you like a moron :). The system should have unlimitted undo feature, and let that be your back up, not keep asking you something you intend to do.

By the same token, I hear him saying he wants just the movie and not all the other things that come with blu-ray.

Since the costs of Blu-ray have been mentioned, my question is:

What is the minimum cost to a UK studio to release a Blu-ray title? Assuming it's a very simple menu, and no restoration, scanning/telecine or colour grading is required (ie. assume it's a TV programme and they already have an edited master). Assume no extras or minimum amount of extras and all they have to do is encode it to mpeg4 or VC1 at Blu-ray bitrates and put it onto one 50GB disc - and how much if it needed 2 or 3 50GB discs?. What's the minimum it would cost to release? And how many people would need to buy it to be profitable?

If I may speak for him. Have you ever deleted someting and the software asks you, "are you sure?" and your answer is, "Of course I am sure. That is why I hit the darn delete button." That is some non-living thing treating you like a moron :). The system should have unlimitted undo feature, and let that be your back up, not keep asking you something you intend to do.

By the same token, I hear him saying he wants just the movie and not all the other things that come with blu-ray.Nah, just another person that tried to convince people that 50GB technology wasn't possible, and if by some miracle it was, then 50GB wasn't necessary and only overkill. "Lead to gold", "science fiction", call it what you will.

But I will gladly take my 35+Mbps encodes with lossless audio on a 50GB over what the alternative would have been. I think that may be what TK Arnold might be talking about.

Nah, just another person that tried to convince people that 50GB technology wasn't possible, and if by some miracle it was, then 50GB wasn't necessary and only overkill. "Lead to gold", "science fiction", call it what you will.

But I will gladly take my 35+Mbps encodes with lossless audio on a 50GB over what the alternative would have been. I think that may be what TK Arnold might be talking about.

I refer you to my previous comment.

By the same token, I hear him saying he wants just the movie and not all the other things that come with blu-ray.I can see why some would post such drivel but it is surprising to see you post such statements. You know very well this is not related to format, it has everything to do with the studios choice of how a particular title operates. We had the same issues with certain DVDs from certain studios.

Nah, just another person that tried to convince people that 50GB technology wasn't possible, and if by some miracle it was, then 50GB wasn't necessary and only overkill. "Lead to gold", "science fiction", call it what you will.
If you remember all of this, you should also remember that my team also created the type of interactivity which Mr. D is objecting to.

So please read my post for what it was: simply helping clarify Mr. D's point which was missed in your response to him. It was not meant to agree or disagree with him. But simply to point out that a system can be frustrating to users even if it can have other benefits.

But I will gladly take my 35+Mbps encodes with lossless audio on a 50GB over what the alternative would have been. I think that may be what TK Arnold might be talking about.
Having met TK, not sure he means any of this. But you are welcome to assume what you like.

I refer you to my previous comment.

I would also like to refer people to read your previous comments via the search feature. They will give everyone a clear explanation of why you "hate" bluray.

If you remember all of this, you should also remember that my team also created the type of interactivity which Mr. D is objecting to.

So please read my post for what it was: simply helping clarify Mr. D's point which was missed in your response to him. It was not meant to agree or disagree with him. But simply to point out that a system can be frustrating to users even if it can have other benefits.


Having met TK, not sure he means any of this. But you are welcome to assume what you like. Thats cool Amir. We all know you were an "insider"...no need to name drop and brag about your associations.

But is the OP not about how TK and others might have underestimated how the QUALITY of bluray can be the biggest selling point? Quality that is at least due in part to having 50GB discs (which some tried to suggest were equivalent to unicorns)?

Thats cool Amir. We all know you were an "insider"...no need to name drop and brag about your associations.

But is the OP not about how TK and others might have underestimated how the QUALITY of bluray can be the biggest selling point? Quality that is at least due in part to having 50GB discs (which some tried to suggest were equivalent to unicorns)?

How about you drop the zealotry and try to understand we are not ressurecting old battles. Can you manage to do this ? I for one am getting tired of reading this hostile nonsense.

Can you not grasp that its possible to talk about BD in less than glowing terms for a number of reasons not least of which is the actual quality of the mastering foisted upon the general consumer.

I have yet to be blown away by the inferred capabilities of BD in any capacity. Whether you take exception to this point or not does not concern me in the slightest.

What I will not do is be drawn back into some juvenile argument based on nothing more than someone else's misguided over-zealousness. Your previous response to Amir is uncalled for and childish . Kindly moderate it yourself before someone reports you.

I would also like to refer people to read your previous comments via the search feature. They will give everyone a clear explanation of why you "hate" bluray.

Thank you. I'm sure it will be a much more interesting read than anything you have managed to "produce".

Edit: having just followed your advice and searched your own previous offerings I've come up with two observations.

You post hostile commentary whenever you infer any negative criticism of BD. You contribute to what seems to be a worryingly large number of locked down threads.

How about you drop the zealotry and try to understand we are not ressurecting old battles. Can you manage to do this ? I for one am getting tired of reading this hostile nonsense.

Can you not grasp that its possible to talk about BD in less than glowing terms for a number of reasons not least of which is the actual quality of the mastering foisted upon the general consumer.

I have yet to be blown away by the inferred capabilities of BD in any capacity. Whether you take exception to this point or not does not concern me in the slightest.

What I will not do is be drawn back into some juvenile argument based on nothing more than someone else's misguided over-zealousness. Your previous response to Amir is uncalled for and childish . Kindly moderate it yourself before someone reports you.I just have difficulty believing people that previously called BD50 production like "turning lead into gold". Such lack in foresight makes me hesitant to any other words spoken by such people since their previous comments absolute inaccuracy.

You post hostile commentary whenever you infer any negative criticism of BD.

Yeah, because saying about Blu-ray "as a format I personally hate it" is not hostile at all. :rolleyes: