or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Why are blu-rays still so expensive?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are blu-rays still so expensive? - Page 9

post #241 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

HD DVD was a pure joke. They chose the dumbest time to release it.

how is HDDVD any different from Blu ray given they were released 2 months apart? rolleyes.gif
post #242 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

HD DVD was a pure joke.

Both were viable options when they started, one of them won so case closed...

Should this thread remain unlocked, maybe it would be better to focus on something else than the format war... just sayin' wink.gif
post #243 of 480
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Both were viable options when they started, one of them won so case closed...

Should this thread remain unlocked, maybe it would be better to focus on something else than the format war... just sayin' wink.gif
Agreed. Anybody remember the first Blu-ray you ever bought and how impressed were you when you watched it?
post #244 of 480
I remember paying $35-$50 a pop for laserdisc releases almost 20 years ago, so today's blu-ray prices don't seem all that unreasonable to me. CD prices otoh, always seemed high to me.
post #245 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeantYnot View Post

how is HDDVD any different from Blu ray given they were released 2 months apart? rolleyes.gif

Is that a serious question?
post #246 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

Agreed. Anybody remember the first Blu-ray you ever bought and how impressed were you when you watched it?

To be honest, I was not that impressed vs. the hype around the new format.
Sure it was hi-def and had all the sound perks, but at the time I had a pretty decent set-up at home with a well built, quality progressive scan DVD player.
I would see demo's of BR and just didn't see the benefits of buying another piece of eqmt then spending $20.00/30.00+ for a film I could get all day for lots less. The upgrade didn't justify the investment - especially when some of the demo's I saw were not at all hi-def, but looked more like re-purposed A/V onto a BR disc.
Now that all price areas have come down I've joined the 'revolution'.
Sometimes I still wonder if I should have jumped....
post #247 of 480
Well worth it imo.
post #248 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Well worth it imo.

It is now...I paid less for my BRDVD player than any other piece of eqmt I've ever had and it definitely improved my SDVD discs.
I'm still skeptical about BR movies....maybe I need a different player.
But for now I'll wear this one out and wait like I always have.
It pays to be patient wink.gif
post #249 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

Agreed. Anybody remember the first Blu-ray you ever bought and how impressed were you when you watched it?

I sat out the first year or two of the HD format war until the holiday season of 2007 when several of my favorite films including Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, Blade Runner and 2001: A Space Odyssey among others were released on Blu-ray. I think I blew about $350+ on a armful of titles and spent a weekend combing through everything. I initially had mixed reactions to this format - image quality was almost always a huge improvement over previous dvd, LD etc releases but it was more the uptick in sound that really impressed me. On the other hand, I was very annoyed (and still am) over the long load times and forced trailers.
post #250 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifiHigh View Post

It is now...I paid less for my BRDVD player than any other piece of eqmt I've ever had and it definitely improved my SDVD discs.
I'm still skeptical about BR movies....maybe I need a different player.
But for now I'll wear this one out and wait like I always have.
It pays to be patient wink.gif

Wish I could be!
post #251 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Wish I could be!

It comes from experience - I used to not be.

Fortunately I learned. Sometimes I go through withdrawals, but perspective and lessons learned keep me in check. rolleyes.gif
post #252 of 480
I have it in everything except anything electronic or technical lol
post #253 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Is that a serious question?

You first state HDDVD was a joke and released too early (you forgot to google Bluray's launch date). Your statements are obviously way off smile.gif
Edited by SergeantYnot - 3/16/13 at 10:22pm
post #254 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeantYnot View Post

You first state HDDVD was a joke and released too early (you forgot to google Bluray's launch date). Your statements are obviously way off smile.gif
I know when they were released. That's my exact point. HDDVD was a joke period.
post #255 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

I know when they were released. That's my exact point. HDDVD was a joke period.

Ok so im curious, who chose the dumbest time to release HDDVD and why was it the dumbest time to release it exactly?
post #256 of 480
Because it doesn't compete with blu ray. Even the advertising for it against blu ray was a joke and flat out lie. Fact. The more room you have for your data the better it can look. HDDVD had no benefit at all towards blu ray. It would have had better success if it was abavaible like 7 years before blu ray.
post #257 of 480
$20-25 is cheap for new releases.
post #258 of 480
Never pay over 15!
post #259 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Because it doesn't compete with blu ray. Even the advertising for it against blu ray was a joke and flat out lie. Fact. The more room you have for your data the better it can look. HDDVD had no benefit at all towards blu ray. It would have had better success if it was abavaible like 7 years before blu ray.

Oh okay, excellent point rolleyes.gif
post #260 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Never pay over 15!

I'm buying The Hobbit 3D, Zero Dark Thirty, and This is 40 this week. If you know any place that sells them for $15 let me know and I'll shop there instead of Best Buy.
post #261 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth View Post

I'm buying The Hobbit 3D, Zero Dark Thirty, and This is 40 this week. If you know any place that sells them for $15 let me know and I'll shop there instead of Best Buy.
I'll get to searching for ya! As I've never payed over $15 for a movie. Usually within its 1st week of release. If not release day.
post #262 of 480
I'm envious of anyone who can get a new release for under 20 bucks.

40 bucks MINIMUM if your lucky with new stuff.

(Edit) In Australia. Oops. lol
post #263 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Cents View Post

I'm envious of anyone who can get a new release for under 20 bucks.

Did not realize you folks do not have Amazon for Australia. Skyfall is ≈ $24.00 US from Amazon in the US, UK and Spain. Where does one usually purchase Blu-ray’s in Australia?
post #264 of 480

Originally Posted by hifiHigh View Post

It pays to be opportunistic wink.gif

FIFY

 

Got my Panny when it included the 3D Avatar which I sold for more than the cost of the player. I was waiting for the BR player to drop below $100 but that was too good to pass up.

post #265 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Because it doesn't compete with blu ray. Even the advertising for it against blu ray was a joke and flat out lie. Fact. The more room you have for your data the better it can look. HDDVD had no benefit at all towards blu ray. It would have had better success if it was abavaible like 7 years before blu ray.

What a crock, save your bias for someone else.

1) Blu-ray puts everything on 50GB discs; that's right, they don't as there are numerous movies on 25GB discs.
2) It all fits on to a 50GB disc so there is no need to put a movie on two discs. Again false as there are several movies you have to swap discs for.
3) All Blu-ray versions look better than their HD-DVD counterpart. Wrong again.

Space wasn't an issue, especially considering that HD-DVD was working on larger capacity discs.

"It would have had better success if it was available like 7 years before Blu-ray" They both launched when they should have. If Blu-ray hadn't come out for another seven years after that, there would be no Blu-ray as HD-DVD would be firmly embedded.

My first HD player was an XA2, purchased strictly because of Spartacus (and wasn't that a piece of cra*). So yes, I had money invested in the format (and I still have it, as well as the 40 titles or so I bought for it to play). However, they lost as did Betamax so I moved on. At this point I have five Blu-ray players, three PS3s and two stand-alones.

They were both comparable products; one lost and one didn't.
post #266 of 480
It isn't bias little buddy. Fact. HD-DVD holds nothing compared to Blu Ray. Hence. It died as quick as it came. It isn't a debate.
post #267 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcmo View Post

What a crock, save your bias for someone else.


Space wasn't an issue, especially considering that HD-DVD was working on larger capacity discs.

You're absolutely right. At the very function where Warners pulled the plug, Toshiba was going to present the 51 GB disc...that's one GB more than BD. Going by Jukebox's reasoning, that would have made HD-DVD superior to BD.
(and as you noted, it already proved itself to be so at least on many of the movie transfers) What one can say is that many BDs and HD-DVDs looked the same. And some HD-DVDs looked better than the BDs. (THE THING being one example.) But no BD ever looked superior to the same title on HD-DVD. (Unless it was remastered.) The best it ever displayed was equal, but never better. HD-DVD wowed people right out of the gate. And those first BDs looked like crap, regardless of capacity.

I also found that the upconversion of standard DVDS was much better on HD-DVD players than the BD players at the time. Obviously, there have been improvements over the years and today's BD players now handle it quite well.

Simply put, initially HD-DVD was ready for prime-time and BD was not,. Personally, I feel the reason BD won out was due solely to the PS3. At any rate, it doesn't matter now...as you say, one format is here and the other isn't. Now let's bring back HD laserdisc!
Edited by cinema13 - 3/17/13 at 9:12am
post #268 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

It isn't bias little buddy. Fact. HD-DVD holds nothing compared to Blu Ray. Hence. It died as quick as it came. It isn't a debate.

But nobody cares anymore how much one sucked over the other. We're all happy with Blu-ray. There's no need to convince anyone. And in case you don't remember, it died mostly because studios chose to support Blu-ray. The Blu-ray association probably did an astounding job getting the studios behind them so kudos to them in that regard (iirc it was very risky too as Sony lost huge amount of cash thanks to the PS3 shaky start, and "buying" the major hollywood studios' support). HD DVD made mistakes obviously, but the format itself was as good as the other one. The Blu-ray specification wasn't even finished when it was launched.... fact!

But it's 2013 now.......
post #269 of 480
I know I am!
post #270 of 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Cents View Post

I'm envious of anyone who can get a new release for under 20 bucks.

40 bucks MINIMUM if your lucky with new stuff.

(Edit) In Australia. Oops. lol

New releases here in the States are at least $19.99, which isnt bad. But yeah $40 is high.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Why are blu-rays still so expensive?