Why Has Blu-ray Failed to Catch Hold?

[Kasz216]

Xen said:

Kasz216 said:

Xen said:

Kasz216 said:

Xen said:

*reads*

I gather that the consumers are stupid, then?

Well it makes more sense then admitting that the analysits were stupid and wrong in their claims.

Easier to blame the consumers.  They don't want it because they're dumb.  Not because they don't want it.

Since the a lot of them are not that tech savvy, they just don't see the difference. One's a disc, and so is another. I guess ignorant would be a better description. Then, again, there is another huge camp of consumers that do see the diff... but that doesn't really negate the first point!

So now we're saying that they both "Don't realize that Blu-ray and DVD are different" and "That Blu-ray players can play DVDs."

Yeah, that's makes much more sense then "People don't give a shit."

Just how people didn't see the superiority of Betamax over VHS?

Or Laserdisc over VHS...

Note they don't have any stats supporting this to be the case... they just assume that's why consumers aren't adopting.

They're just caught in the same spiral of denile that's been extremly common with analysts lately.

Betamax isn't superior to VHS. It holds less film, and is vastly more expensive compared to VHS. Not the case of DVD vs Blu-ray. Laserdisc is simply very flimsy, which is why it never caught on.

People don't care to check what's the best for them if they're used to something.

A) Only in the shortrun.

B) No Laserdisc wasn't flimsy.   Not any flismier then a DVD, have you ever known anyone with a Laserdisc player?