Why Are They Still Making Profile 1.1 Players?

$$$

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?

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 couldn't have stated it better The Samsung story is a prime example of this philosophy

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.

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.

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.

Most "average people" people don't want HDM.

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.

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.


How's that working out for them?

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.

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.

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..

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.

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.



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.



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.



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.

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.

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.



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.

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

Moving target = CE mfgr's win = consumers have to keep rebuying equipment

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.

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



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.



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?



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.

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

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.

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)



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.


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.

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).



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



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



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.

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.