Yeah, that's a really impressive compariso-

"Spider-Man 3 - DVD (MPEG-2/SD) vs. Blu-ray (AVC/37.50GB) comparison"

The Ice Age comparison screengrab on a better TV (still downscaled BD though):

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/8092/untitled35lb6.jpg

To answer the question again, no one NEEDS Blu-ray, it is part of what you call technological progress. It will be more evident when the content companies really start pushing it and you might get Blu-ray releases that offer more content or released earlier in order to justify the higher price.

You have to remember Blu-ray is a way for producers to increase revenue. One way or another they will get people to jump on the Blu-ray bandwagon wheter they need it or not.

Ice Age BD (PS3) on Samsung LN-T4661 TV:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a127/wgrose/IMG_0834.jpg

@OP

well thats deffinantly an oppinion... and i respect it :D

We do not really need Blue Ray and HD TV's we just buy them to keep up with the guy next door. Blue Ray's and HDTV's are wants they are not needs essential for survival. A world so driven by materialism, people will buy the latest technology providing they can afford them. I wonder how would the modern Western world would manage if technology was no longer available? We would all be in deep shit. The magical world of marketing and advertising in the western world can brainwash people in believing they need expensive Blu Ray's and HDTV's. In time both Blu-Ray's and HDTV's will be superseded and no longer needed because a new player and TV is on the market.

ROTFLMBO - I have both formats, plus several movies on my DVR in HD and it's sharp, but it's not that big of a jump from VHS to DVD. At this point, it's overrated. I am in no rush whatsoever to get an HD movie (Blu or HD DVD) unless it's a movie I really enjoy and need to get. And that's even including HD DVDs at fire sales. There's no real need for it right now.

Truth be told, if you can afford it, get it. However, if you are on the edge of going broke or have a tough time making ends meet, forget it - it's not a need and purely a want.

I enjoy watching sharper films and see if I can notice the difference. In 'Tears of the Sun,' for instance, you can read Tom Skerritt's nametag vs. it blurred in SD. In 'The Matrix,' you can see in the shootout scene in the lobby the guard on Neo's right is named Garcia and there's a mesh of some type on the partition.

Mike B gets props for some pretty accurate images. In the end of the day, though, there's no need for buying into the HD war unless you just have $$$$$$ to blow. 

I have seen Spider Man on Blu Ray on a very expensive Sony TV.  No one is doubting that Blu Ray looks better.  The question is why the need for Blu-Ray and the answer is for the general public there is no need as dvd is more than enough.  The jump from video to dvd is vastly different from the jump from dvd to HD discs.  With video you had to go through the hassle of rewinding, there was no 5.1 surround sound, if you watched a movie many times then the tape would start dying.  DVD not only provided an amazing jump in picture and sound quality it overcame the other short comings of video.  That is not the case when you jump from dvd to Blu Ray.  The jump in picture and sound quality cannot even begin to dream of being as significant as the jump from vhs to dvd.  Plus the other short comings that were present in vhs were overcome by dvd and Blu Ray does not take these to a new level.  Yes I have read from many posters that blu ray doesn't scratch as easily as dvd but I have yet to even come accross a scratched dvd disc.     

davygee said: People who question the need for HD and BR and the very same people that record Coronation Street on their 15 year old video recorder is LP.

I am questioning the need for BR and dont watch Coronation Street.  I In the last five years there has never been a year I have spent less than £1500 on gadgets and .  I was one of the first in the UK to get projector, one of the first to get Sky HD and got a dvd recorder before the general population even knew there was such a thing.  You are suggesting only people that aren't into technology and don't spend on technology would question the need for BR but that just ain't the case.  For me I think HD TV broadcasts are essential because the difference between a HD TV broadcast and SD TV broadcast of older programmes is quite incredible (much less so for newer programmes like Lost, 24) but the difference between upscaled dvd and BR is not so incredible as to say it is a need. 

Sometimes, people need to get with the times though.  Yes, not everyone needs BR or HD and yes it is seen as a luxury, but it is something that will and is happening, so people will eventually have to embrace it.

There is nothing wrong with VCRs at all, they serve a purpose and serve it well.

And who decides whether it's needless or not.  As a fact, I do not own a working VCR and as a fact, I do not record anything off the TV at all.  I have no need for it....in fact VCRs are needless to me.  Yes I would probably use one if I had one, and in fact I have a video collection of around 600 titles, yet I haven't watched any of them in years and can't do it now...but would I spend £40 to get a VCR...no I wouldn't as it needless technology to me.

HD in fact, is needless tech for most people....but nowadays, people are more technologically minded than they were 10 years ago or even 5 years ago.  People buy into the new tech is good methodology and there is nothing wrong with that...unless it gets people in debt.

And yes, maybe these people that just use VCRs instead of DVD or BR has nice houses from all the money they are saving....and maybe they don't drink or go on holiday as well....actually maybe they just live in their very nice house and are content in being content....also, they probably wouldn't be on here as they wouldn't know what a computer was or the internet was.