Why Are They Still Making Profile 1.1 Players? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:13 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bbanderic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I saw another thread a list of the new 2008 model Blu-ray players as shown at CES. I noticed that many of them are profile 1.1. I know that profile 1.1 is the Blu-ray "final" standard but why must they screw around and not just make 2.0 capable players only? It makes absolutely no sense to me. Especially when the lowest end HD-DVD players are so much cheaper (150.00) and 2.0 profile, standard, out of the box. The cost of making the players 2.0 can't be that much more costly.

My main issue is that for Blu-ray to get mass adaption of the Blu-ray format, I think they should elininate the confusion, increase BD compatability between players, and make firmware updates easier for the average Joe, having an ethernet port standard will go a long way in doing that. Most average people don't want to be bothered with burning a CD and installing new firmware from that, along with a warning of "do so at your own risk". Hooking up to the internet and doing it , that's doable.

I own a PS3 and want to see Blu-ray succeed on a much bigger scale but I think they're hurting themselves with all of these profiles.

I know many of the new 2008 models are profile 2.0 as well as 1.1 but beyond 2008, starting in 2009, do you guys think all of the players will be 2.0?
bbanderic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
namechamps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
$$$

BD launched 2 years ago and new players cost $600 - $1000.
At CES 2008 we see lots of BD 1.1 player costing $600-$2000. The 1.0 players are being discontinued and sell for $300 or less.

In a year or so we will see BD 2.0 players being touted exclusively and costing $600-$1000. BD 1.1 players will be discontinued and sell for $300-$500.

The whole BD profile nightmare is a CE companies wet dream. Selling products that are obsolete before they even start selling them. I mean if you could do it would you?
namechamps is offline  
post #3 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Macfan424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbanderic View Post

...make firmware updates easier for the average Joe, having an ethernet port standard will go a long way in doing that. Most average people don't want to be bothered with burning a CD and installing new firmware from that, hooking up to the internet and doing it , that's doable...

Most "average people" don't want to be bothered with hooking up their DVD player to the internet via ethernet, either.

In fact, most "average people" don't care about the 2.0 features, or even the 1.1 additions. They just want to play movies, simply and without fuss.
Macfan424 is offline  
post #4 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:35 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bbanderic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

$$$

BD launched 2 years ago and new players cost $600 - $1000.
At CES 2008 we see lots of BD 1.1 player costing $600-$2000. The 1.0 players are being discontinued and sell for $300 or less.

In a year or so we will see BD 2.0 players being touted exclusively and costing $600-$1000. BD 1.1 players will be discontinued and sell for $300-$500.

The whole BD profile nightmare is a CE companies wet dream. Selling products that are obsolete before they even start selling them. I mean if you could do it would you?

I think those profile 1.1 price estimates you have quoted are a little high, many of the 2008 models haven't been priced yet, but I get your point.

I don't see how selling obsolete or potentially problematic players benefits CE companys, I see it as pissing off the consumer and alienating them. Then again, you may be right because I see no other logical reason not to make 2.0 players only.
bbanderic is offline  
post #5 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:39 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bbanderic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

Most "average people" don't want to be bothered with hooking up their DVD player to the internet via ethernet, either.

In fact, most "average people" don't care about the 2.0 features, or even the 1.1 additions. They just want to play movies, simply and without fuss.

I agree, but that's where technology is headed. Personally I don't care about the 1.1 or 2.0 features either, I just want to watch the movie. However, I'm mainly speaking to the compatability issue, for instance, the well known problematic playback of BD-Java discs on the 1.0 players.
bbanderic is offline  
post #6 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 11:45 AM
Member
 
jamesm1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

$$$

BD launched 2 years ago and new players cost $600 - $1000.
At CES 2008 we see lots of BD 1.1 player costing $600-$2000. The 1.0 players are being discontinued and sell for $300 or less.

In a year or so we will see BD 2.0 players being touted exclusively and costing $600-$1000. BD 1.1 players will be discontinued and sell for $300-$500.

The whole BD profile nightmare is a CE companies wet dream. Selling products that are obsolete before they even start selling them. I mean if you could do it would you?

I couldn't have stated it better The Samsung story is a prime example of this philosophy
jamesm1 is offline  
post #7 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jpmst3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Davidsville, PA
Posts: 8,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

Most "average people" don't want to be bothered with hooking up their DVD player to the internet via ethernet, either.

In fact, most "average people" don't care about the 2.0 features, or even the 1.1 additions. They just want to play movies, simply and without fuss.

Exactly, I just want to watch the damn movie.

If the movie is crap, adding PiP and web content isn't going to make it any good. In fact, if they could eliminate the mandatory previews on some disks that would be an improvement too.

That is one of the weeknesses of the Blu-ray format. They rushed it all out without finalization in an effort to compete with HD DVD. That gamble may have paid off long term, but it will cost consumers in the near term, as usual.

jpmst3 is offline  
post #8 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
TheSimplePanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmst3 View Post

Exactly, I want to watch the damn movie. If the movie is crap, adding PiP and web content isn't going to make it any good.

Don't tell Toshiba - their entire HD-DVD strategy hinges on the fact that people would rather connect to the web to muck with a TV remote about then watch their copy of Transformers with lossless audio.
TheSimplePanda is offline  
post #9 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Macfan424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbanderic View Post

I agree, but that's where technology is headed. Personally I don't care about the 1.1 or 2.0 features either, I just want to watch the movie. However, I'm mainly speaking to the compatability issue, for instance, the well known problematic playback of BD-Java discs on the 1.0 players.

Lack of backward compatibility is an example of the format shooting itself in the foot.

The BD group should be enforcing standards that insist all software be 100% backward compatible for routine functions. Then they should encourage development of a simple, basic, no frills player that can be sold for less than $200. Reserve the "geeky" features for upscale players that can be sold to the relatively few consumers that care about them.

Otherwise, BD and HD will join the ranks of failed formats, like SACD and DVD-A, beloved by a few, irrelevant to most.
Macfan424 is offline  
post #10 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
b.greenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

Most "average people" don't want to be bothered with hooking up their DVD player to the internet via ethernet, either.

In fact, most "average people" don't care about the 2.0 features, or even the 1.1 additions. They just want to play movies, simply and without fuss.

Most "average people" people don't want HDM.
b.greenway is offline  
post #11 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:18 PM
Member
 
HD-king's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

Lack of backward compatibility is an example of the format shooting itself in the foot.

The BD group should be enforcing standards that insist all software be 100% backward compatible for routine functions. Then they should encourage development of a simple, basic, no frills player that can be sold for less than $200. Reserve the "geeky" features for upscale players that can be sold to the relatively few consumers that care about them.

Otherwise, BD and HD will join the ranks of failed formats, like SACD and DVD-A, beloved by a few, irrelevant to most.

Please quote a reputable source where they say 2.0 authored disks WILL NOT PLAY IN 1.0 or 1.1 players.

Wait, 2.0 disks will play fine in 1.0 and 1.1 players. Get your facts straight.
HD-king is offline  
post #12 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Macfan424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmst3 View Post

...That is one of the weeknesses of the Blu-ray format. They rushed it all out without finalization in an effort to compete with HD DVD. That gamble may have paid off long term, but it will cost consumers in the near term, as usual.

They probably viewed it as a marketing imperative, not a gamble, but you're right. Another reason the format war has been so counterproductive. Since consumers are quite happy with conventional DVDs, there is the danger that making the few new generation format supporters pay for the developers' errors may kill off the whole high definition disc concept.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSimplePanda View Post

Don't tell Toshiba - their entire HD-DVD strategy hinges on the fact that people would rather connect to the web to muck with a TV remote about then watch their copy of Transformers with lossless audio.

How's that working out for them?
Macfan424 is offline  
post #13 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
blainehamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The disks will be backwards compatible, with notable exceptions that always happen. Hell, BD+ threw a monkeywrench into things that had movie studios and CEs both pointing fingers and laying blame.

The overall experience will suck. No extras on a BD1.0 player, and nothing online with a BD1.1 model. A game system or a +$500 player later this year is what you will be stuck with for choices...

Don't even get me started on Samsung, my BDP1200 is a major thorn in my side right now. Playback issues alone are enough.

BD1.0 -> BD1.1 -> BD2.0 -> BDx.x is a guaranteed revenue stream for CEs making players for the next 12 to 18 months at least. The new models will guarantee a high release price, and the unforunate 'value consious' consumers will get burned by obsolete technology in the low cost clearance ones unless they really do their homework.
blainehamilton is offline  
post #14 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Macfan424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD-king View Post

Please quote a reputable source where they say 2.0 authored disks WILL NOT PLAY IN 1.0 or 1.1 players.

Wait, 2.0 disks will play fine in 1.0 and 1.1 players. Get your facts straight.

Everyone insists the new discs will play in old players, and I hope they are right because I own a 1.1 player, but experience has demonstrated that it doesn't always work out that way in practice. The aforementioned problems with java disc in 1.0 players is one example, the issues with 1.1 discs (even on 1.1 players) is another. It shouldn't be necessary to upgrade the player's firmware to play a new disc.

And one would think that a Panasonic authored 1.1 Blu-Ray would play on a new Panasonic 1.1 player, but ask DMP-BD30 owners how well "Sunshine" plays for them.
Macfan424 is offline  
post #15 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 12:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jvillain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 2,110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Can we change the name of this thread to "I didn't think we had enough crap on BD threads so decided to start yet another", so people don't waste their time like I just did..
jvillain is offline  
post #16 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Macfan424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by blainehamilton View Post

The disks will be backwards compatible, with notable exceptions that always happen...

It's the exceptions I am taking exception to. Selling a new technology that is in greater demand by the seller (studios looking for a way to offset flat DVD sales trends) than by the consumer (perfectly content with SD DVDs) requires extra care.

I believe -- for their own good -- the BD group should have insisted on 100% backwards compatibility, not 90% or 95% or 99%. You can play any current CD on your first generation CD player (if you have one that still works). The same is true of SD DVDs with early players. You may not have random play or progressive scan, but the discs still play music or movies without a hitch.

But such care was lost in the rush to market, and the technology remains irrelevant to the public at large, while the BD group risks alienating the early adopters, the very people they are counting on to lead the mass market into acceptance. And, of course, it won't be any kind of revenue stream it it fails. Again, I reference SACD and DVD-A.
Macfan424 is offline  
post #17 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 01:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbanderic View Post

I saw another thread a list of the new 2008 model Blu-ray players as shown at CES. I noticed that many of them are profile 1.1. I know that profile 1.1 is the Blu-ray "final" standard but why must they screw around and not just make 2.0 capable players only?

Because unlike Toshiba the Blu-ray CE companies are actually trying to make a profit on their players. For instance every stand alone HD DVD player for under $500 is either from Toshiba or is a Toshiba rebadge.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bbanderic View Post

I know many of the new 2008 models are profile 2.0 as well as 1.1 but beyond 2008, starting in 2009, do you guys think all of the players will be 2.0?

It is all about the issue of cost and profit. The Blu-ray CE companies have to pay for all the development, production, and support that goes into their Blu-ray players. That means that even adding something like BD-Live to a player, which most likely has a production cost under $10, would add a lot to the player cost because of development and support costs.


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

BD launched 2 years ago and new players cost $600 - $1000.
At CES 2008 we see lots of BD 1.1 player costing $600-$2000. The 1.0 players are being discontinued and sell for $300 or less.

namechamps, if you are going to post BS about Blu-ray you should at least know enough not to do it in the Blu-ray players section of the forum. The first generation Blu-ray players cost $1000+, the second generation Blu-ray players cost $500+, and the third generation Blu-ray players cost $300+ so there is definitely a lowering of price as time goes on. For instance the Funai Blu-ray player is going to sell for around $300 and the Philips Blu-ray player is going to sell for $350. Both players are Profile 1.1 players.


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

Selling products that are obsolete before they even start selling them. I mean if you could do it would you?

Well considering that HD DVD has less capacity, less bandwidth, less CE support, less studio support, and a high probability of becoming an obsolete format I would say that Toshiba has been doing that for a while.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #18 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 01:52 PM
Member
 
Rob9874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just more reason to buy PS3. I'm assuming $399 is cheaper than other 1.1 players? And the free upgrade to 2.0 in the future will be nice, too.
Rob9874 is offline  
post #19 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
namechamps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

namechamps, if you are going to post BS about Blu-ray you should at least know enough not to do it in the Blu-ray players section of the forum. The first generation Blu-ray players cost $1000+, the second generation Blu-ray players cost $500+, and the third generation Blu-ray players cost $300+ so there is definitely a lowering of price as time goes on. For instance the Funai Blu-ray player is going to sell for around $300 and the Philips Blu-ray player is going to sell for $350. Both players are Profile 1.1 players.

Cry me a river. I can't believe that some people are such fanboys that they believe making consumers buy the same player over and over to get all the features (both profiles & audio decoders) is a good thing for anyone except the CE.

Just for the record you are wrong about the pricing. The S300 & DMP-BD10 (BD1.0 players) had an MSRP of $499 & $599. Look at BD 1.1 players, the S500 & DMP-BD30 had MSRP of $549 & $499. However the DMP-BD30 drops all internal decoding. Likely with internal decoding the DMP-BD30 would be similar in price to the 1.0 version (DMP-BD10). One year between players and essentially no drop in prices. Now there is only 1 BD 2.0 player announced - DMP-BD50 and guess what the estimated MSRP is $499-$599. 2 years after launch and BD 2.0 players are selling for essentially the same prices as BD1.0 & BD1.1 player did.


Quote:


Well considering that HD DVD has less capacity, less bandwidth, less CE support, less studio support, and a high probability of becoming an obsolete format I would say that Toshiba has been doing that for a while.

You feel like a big kid now. Since when was this thread about HD DVD. Even if HD DVD never existed the whole profile and incomplete decoder support nonsense would have still have been a pain in the ass.

I think Warner's decision has killed HD DVD but this topic has nothing to do with format war or HD DVD. It is sad that fanboys will defend stupid decision because they were done by "their side" because they don't want to make it look like the "enemies side" is doing better. For what it is worth I have an DMP-BD30 on the way. I think it is the best of a confusing set of partially complete products. It would have been nice if the DMP-BD50 (BD live, full decoder support, 8 channel analog) had been available a year ago (even if it had cost $1000).

I don't work for Toshiba and I don't work for the the BDA so I really don't give a damn. Not everything is about red vs blue fanboy stupidity, sometimes a crap deal for the consumer is just that a crap deal. The sad thing is had there been no "format war" many of the people (like you) standing up to "defend" these stupid profile decisions would instead be complaining about them. However the "can't break ranks" mentality prevails over common sense.

BTW: These are multi-billion dollar companies. They don't need you or anyone else to "defend" them. Grow up.
namechamps is offline  
post #20 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 02:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rakesh.S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

$$$

BD launched 2 years ago and new players cost $600 - $1000.
At CES 2008 we see lots of BD 1.1 player costing $600-$2000. The 1.0 players are being discontinued and sell for $300 or less.

In a year or so we will see BD 2.0 players being touted exclusively and costing $600-$1000. BD 1.1 players will be discontinued and sell for $300-$500.

The whole BD profile nightmare is a CE companies wet dream. Selling products that are obsolete before they even start selling them. I mean if you could do it would you?

I agree 100% or as everyone around here likes to say ..." +1 "

Moving target = CE mfgr's win = consumers have to keep rebuying equipment
Rakesh.S is offline  
post #21 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 04:05 PM
Senior Member
 
COVERkreator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SeattleJapanNZ
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

I believe -- for their own good -- the BD group should have insisted on 100% backwards compatibility, not 90% or 95% or 99%. The same is true of SD DVDs with early players. You may not have random play or progressive scan, but the discs still play music or movies without a hitch.

My oldest dvd player from 1996 has many compatibility problems with current disc. They either will not load properly and will go to an incorrect menu, instead of the main menu, or will play the first title track. Newer players do the proper things and going to the correct menu. Also some problems with RCE region coded disc, will frequently not play.

Furuhata
HDVS, UniHi, HVLD, Muse LD, W-VHS, D-Theater D-VHS,
WMV-HD, HVD, EVD, HD DVD, BD, HD-VMD

it's HighDef or NoDef!
COVERkreator is offline  
post #22 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 04:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

Cry me a river.

I post several facts that refute what you said and this is your response?


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

Just for the record you are wrong about the pricing. The S300 & DMP-BD10 (BD1.0 players) had an MSRP of $499 & $599.

The S300 was actually a second generation Blu-ray player from Sony and their first generation player was the BDP-S1 which cost $1000. As for the DMP-BD10 it was a first generation player and it was originally released for $1300.


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

Now there is only 1 BD 2.0 player announced - DMP-BD50 and guess what the estimated MSRP is $499-$599.

Maybe, but it will be a BD-Live player that delivers 7.1 channel internal decoding for both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA. Technically speaking a stand alone HD DVD player would be inferior to it in several ways but in terms of just audio decoding what is the cheapest stand alone HD DVD player that can decode 7.1 channel DTS-HD MA?


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

BTW: These are multi-billion dollar companies. They don't need you or anyone else to "defend" them. Grow up.

namechamps, so you can attack Blu-ray all you want but you are going to insult anyone who disagrees with you? It just seems to me that someone who makes statements such as "Cry me a river", "some people are such fanboys ", "You feel like a big kid now", "many of the people (like you)", and "Grow up" is not even trying to have a mature discussion.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #23 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 04:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
splinters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A couple of facts:

1) Profile 2.0/BD-Live is an optional spec, not a requirement. Remember not everyone requires online features (I know my parents won't care).

2) Profile 1.1/Final Standard Profile should be able to play any BD disc.

3) Profile 1.0 players will be missing the PiP, but the movie and lossless audio, and standard extras will be available. It will be able to play 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 profile discs.

-Splints
splinters is offline  
post #24 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 04:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dildatonr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dutchess County NY
Posts: 1,720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I'm a little frustrated about the whole profile mess myself as well.


All rhetoric and bashing aside - I'm looking forward to the BD50. Hopefully it can deliver what I want.

and if it doesn't - I sure as well won't be blaming Toshiba for it's problems. Don't forget we're in the BR Hardware section y'all.
I realize some of you just can't help yourselves though.
dildatonr is offline  
post #25 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 04:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
namechamps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

The S300 was actually a second generation Blu-ray player from Sony and their first generation player was the BDP-S1 which cost $1000.

Which doesn't change the fact that the S300 was available for same price as S500 for some time now. I think at best you could describe the BD prices as stagnating. I have no doubt that in 6-9 months Sony will have a BD700 which is BD 2.0 and prices exactly the same as BD300 & BD500 were.
Rather than a complete spec (like DVD)


Quote:


Maybe, but it will be a BD-Live player that delivers 7.1 channel internal decoding for both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA. Technically speaking a stand alone HD DVD player would be inferior to it in several ways but in terms of just audio decoding what is the cheapest stand alone HD DVD player that can decode 7.1 channel DTS-HD MA?

You keep bringing up HD DVD. Even if HD DVD never existed having profiles and planned obsolescence of hardware so soon after launch is simply a crappy deal for consumers. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Take a poll of 1000 J6P and ask them if they think the idea that BD players are "incomplete" is a good idea or bad idea. Guess what it will be overwhelmingly "bad idea". The idea that you seem to think there is some way to defend profiles I find sad.

Quote:


so you can attack Blu-ray all you want but you are going to insult anyone who disagrees with you? It just seems to me that someone who makes statements such as "Cry me a river", "some people are such fanboys ", "You feel like a big kid now", "many of the people (like you)", and "Grow up" is not even trying to have a mature discussion.

1) Not attacking BD. In 2 years this won't matter anyways. Despite what BDA says about BD 2.0 being "optional" by 2010 100% of players will be 2.0. It will simply be cheaper, avoid consumer confusion, returns, and bad PR.

2) If you still think having profiles and obsolete hardware benefits anyone other than the CE companies then quite frankly sir YOU ARE A FANBOY.

3)Imagine there is no HD DVD. It never existed. Now imagine two scenarios. One complete BD sepc (nothing optional). One profile and optional decoders like today. Which is better for the consumer? It is a simple question. Don't think to hard on it. If you think profiles are better than YOU ARE A FANBOY.
namechamps is offline  
post #26 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 06:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Why do people believe profile 1.0 players are obsolete ?
Obsolete - no longer in use or no longer useful

Profile 1.0 players should be backwards compatible to play profile 1.1/2.0/x.0 discs.
They will have access to the movie and extras that are not tied to PiP or web access.

Profile 1.0 players are far from being obsolete and with the new Blufocus company being created, it they do their job throughly and check new titles prior to release on all players/profiles, nobody is being left behind that has a profile 1.0 player.

I also have the Samsung BD-P1200 and although it has playback issues with specific titles, it beats my HD-A20 in upconverting SD DVD's and the Blu-ray PQ/AQ is also great.
I just hope Samung steps up and resolves the playback issues now that Warner is onboard and Blu-ray is here to stay for the long haul.

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #27 of 29 Old 01-16-2008, 10:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

Which doesn't change the fact that the S300 was available for same price as S500 for some time now.

Can I assume that no apology is forthcoming for the false information you were posting as fact in the last few posts you made? Also since you brought it up I might as well point out that the BDP-S500 was considered to be a step up model compared to the BDP-S300 and that its price was originally $700 (not $550).


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

1) Not attacking BD.

Funny, posting false information in an effort to smear Blu-ray is usually done by those posters who are trying to attack it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

2) If you still think having profiles and obsolete hardware benefits anyone other than the CE companies then quite frankly sir YOU ARE A FANBOY.

What a surprise, both a strawman argument and an accusation of being a fanboy in the same sentence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps View Post

3)Imagine there is no HD DVD. It never existed. Now imagine two scenarios. One complete BD sepc (nothing optional). One profile and optional decoders like today. Which is better for the consumer?

Well that depends. Do all consumers want both an internet connection and lossless audio decoding on their Blu-ray player? If you are going to argue that they do than start providing evidence for it or just admit that is a personal opinion.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #28 of 29 Old 01-17-2008, 05:46 AM
Senior Member
 
virusc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
no CE company is making money on any HDM player right now. They sell very low volume and engineering costs/manf are very high. Its more about building up their name in hopes of making profit someday.
virusc is offline  
post #29 of 29 Old 01-17-2008, 06:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jpmst3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Davidsville, PA
Posts: 8,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusc View Post

no CE company is making money on any HDM player right now. They sell very low volume and engineering costs/manf are very high. Its more about building up their name in hopes of making profit someday.

Believe me, they are making money! The prices fall as economies of scale take affect. When they were $1500 they had a nice profit margin, when they $399 they have a nice profit margin. They are not selling them at a loss like the gaming model dictates.

jpmst3 is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Players

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off