By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - BD loses ground to DVD even with $199 BD players

FinalEvangelion on 25 September 2008
Jordahn said:
tuoyo said:
Jordahn said:

No I'm not kidding, and I'll tell you why. The only way you are going to readily get 1080p with uncompressed sound and disc extras for the time being is with Blu-ray. You are of the OPINION that Blu-ray isn't worth the money which I can respect. If some people are willing to pay extra to get extra, then so be it. CD's were more expensive that cassettes, and DVD's were more expensive than VHS. Some people were willing to pay extra then, and some people are willing to pay extra now. Nothing wrong with that. You CANNOT fault someone for acting on their own preference when they can afford to. And about the average person, the way I see it is that Blu-ray isn't for the average person for the time being. HD is catering more towards the HD enthusist. I for one never though that Blu-ray will be dominant/mainstream. As long as it has its target audience, and it's worth the content providers' business venture when both parties are happy.

See that's where you are wrong. The real benefit in the jump from cassette to cd and vhs to dvd was not the picture and sound. On the tv sizes and technology (CRT) that were available at the time you couldn't really tell a major difference between vhs and dvd. It is only with flat screens (and their crap performance with anything with a poor quality source) and with surround sound systems being more readily available that you noticed a difference in sound and picture quality. The real benefit was not having to bother with rewinding and forwarding and not having to worry about your tapes wearing out from significant use. This is especially true in the case of music. Quality is not the reason why cd had a strong uptake. Otherwise how do you explain the fact that mp3s are killing off cds?

Blu Ray unfortunately does not offer that advantage over DVD which is why I think unless Blu Ray manufacturers force it on people by making movie studios stop producing movies on DVD I don't think it is going to have a chance.

 

Where you are wrong is that you CANNOT accept the FACT that your statements are OPINION. No matter how you want to spin this, there are improvement from DVD to Blu-ray, and the difference and cost are all relative from person to person. Just accept the FACT that not everyone will have the same perception as you, and that doesn't make you better or worse. I for one (and others) saw and heard the difference between a VHS and a DVD on a 25" tube Sharp SDTV back in the late 2000. But guess what, you don't see me shoving it down people's throats.

Blu-ray is great and worth it for some whiile not for others, and that's okay. Just accept it, and stop being so self-righeous and closed-minded. And in regards to mp3, some people are willing to trade quality for convenience. It worked for 8-tracks when compared to turn-table albums. Besides, it's becoming more commonplace for audio products to offer quality enhancing options for mp3 playback. "killing off cds" is at the best subjective.  And really, there is a different mentality and aesthetics between listing to music and watching a movie.  That's always been a bad comparison.

 

I agree with you Jordahn.  As they say, "One man's trash is another man's treasure."  I find Blu-ray and HDTV an excellent value for what it's worth, and it seems that there is enough people that think the same that studios continue to release movies on Blu-ray.  For people that think DVDs are good enough, there is no reason to be worried.  For people that want more, the option is available.



"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."  --Hermann Goering, leading Nazi party member, at the Nuremberg War Crime Trials 

 

Conservatives:  Pushing for a small enough government to be a guest in your living room, or even better - your uterus.

 

Around the Network
kars on 25 September 2008
Jordahn said:

Where you are wrong is that you CANNOT accept the FACT that your statements are OPINION. No matter how you want to spin this, there are improvement from DVD to Blu-ray, and the difference and cost are all relative from person to person.

Exactly. I think it is necessary to get the heat out of this discussion. BluRay offers a potentially better image quality and a potentially better sound quality.

 

It always depends on the customer itself, what they are ready to invest to get the quality and how much of the potiential is used by the movie producers. I know people who are excited with their 200 Euro Surround Set, but I don't really think that they have even a chance to get to the limits of even Dolby Digital 5.1...

 

If I look around I know a lot of people who own a PS-3. but they don't even have the slightest interest to use it for BluRay. I know one guy who is still proud about its collection of 3 BluRays (which he bought when he got the PS-3). It is not the question if they see the differences or not, they simply don't care so much that they would really invest money. They are using DVD only. In the beginning I bouzght a lot of BluRays but now I select very carefully. The BluRay isn't the medium of choice for every movie, or I simply are not interested to pay the price that they demand.

 

But I don't claim that they are evil bastards, because they ask so much money. It is their choice too. And I thoink here lies a fundamental issue: Who is interested that BluRay gets into the mainstream? The hardware industry and Sony. Both see a chance to get more money. Are Warner Universal or Disney interested in getting the BluRay to the main stram? Yes, if the people pay the asked price. It simply makes no sense for them to simply reduce the prices for BluRay and replkace the DVD. They want to increase their revenue, not decrease it. For them the current situation simply works. Their are movie buffs who simply pay the demanded price to get their movies with the optimum quality, and there are people who are not ready to pay so much money and get the DVD. They are interested that more people buy the BluRay, but only because they earn more money with it.

The situation was different with VHS. They were not really interested in getting rid of VHS but they could earn more money with DVDs that were cheaper than VHS tapes. In fact they had some trouble with it. More and more movie fanatics saw: Well I can simply wait six months and buy the DVD for half the price. If the BluRay prices don't drop to the mass market level more fanatics pay the high price.



tuoyo on 25 September 2008
Jordahn said:
tuoyo said:
Jordahn said:

No I'm not kidding, and I'll tell you why. The only way you are going to readily get 1080p with uncompressed sound and disc extras for the time being is with Blu-ray. You are of the OPINION that Blu-ray isn't worth the money which I can respect. If some people are willing to pay extra to get extra, then so be it. CD's were more expensive that cassettes, and DVD's were more expensive than VHS. Some people were willing to pay extra then, and some people are willing to pay extra now. Nothing wrong with that. You CANNOT fault someone for acting on their own preference when they can afford to. And about the average person, the way I see it is that Blu-ray isn't for the average person for the time being. HD is catering more towards the HD enthusist. I for one never though that Blu-ray will be dominant/mainstream. As long as it has its target audience, and it's worth the content providers' business venture when both parties are happy.

See that's where you are wrong. The real benefit in the jump from cassette to cd and vhs to dvd was not the picture and sound. On the tv sizes and technology (CRT) that were available at the time you couldn't really tell a major difference between vhs and dvd. It is only with flat screens (and their crap performance with anything with a poor quality source) and with surround sound systems being more readily available that you noticed a difference in sound and picture quality. The real benefit was not having to bother with rewinding and forwarding and not having to worry about your tapes wearing out from significant use. This is especially true in the case of music. Quality is not the reason why cd had a strong uptake. Otherwise how do you explain the fact that mp3s are killing off cds?

Blu Ray unfortunately does not offer that advantage over DVD which is why I think unless Blu Ray manufacturers force it on people by making movie studios stop producing movies on DVD I don't think it is going to have a chance.

 

Where you are wrong is that you CANNOT accept the FACT that your statements are OPINION. No matter how you want to spin this, there are improvement from DVD to Blu-ray, and the difference and cost are all relative from person to person. Just accept the FACT that not everyone will have the same perception as you, and that doesn't make you better or worse. I for one (and others) saw and heard the difference between a VHS and a DVD on a 25" tube Sharp SDTV back in late 2000. But guess what, you don't see me shoving it down people's throats.

Blu-ray is great and worth it for some while not for others, and that's okay. Just accept it, and stop being so self-righeous and closed-minded. And in regards to mp3, some people are willing to trade quality for convenience. It worked for 8-tracks when compared to turn-table albums. Besides, it's becoming more commonplace for audio products to offer quality enhancing options for mp3 playback. "Killing off cds" is at the best subjective. And really, there is a different mentality and aesthetics between listening to music and watching a movie. That's always been a bad comparison.

Where you are wrong is that you have a problem with comprehension and putting yourself in the place of the average person.  I am not saying there is no great improvement in HD over SD.  I have a HD display, spent £300 on a HD satellite box and have a HD DVD player and just ordered a HD camcorder.  When a Blu Ray recorder gets released in the UK I will definitely get one an I might have to get a PS3 to play my recordings from my HD camcorder if using PC does not prove very convenient.  So I have embraced HD full on.  What I am saying is that for the average person the difference does not justify the expense.  If you don't see that then you are blind to anything but your point of view.  For example someone could be a huge PS3 fan and think it is the best thing since sliced bread but you only have to look at sales to know that for the average person Wii is a better option.  Blu Ray is undoubtedly better than DVD but for the average person DVD is the better option due to the price difference.  Is that so difficult to understand? 

 



Biggest Pikmin Fan on VGChartz I was chosen by default due to voting irregularities

Super Smash Brawl Code 1762-4158-5677 Send me a message if you want to receive a beat down

 

xman on 25 September 2008

I havent switched I can dvd's for $2.00-$20.00 Bluerays start at $30.00 not happening they need to come down in price



PS3, WII and 360 all great systems depends on what type of console player you are.

Currently playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, Halo ODST and Dragon Age Origins is next game

Xbox live:mywiferocks

tuoyo on 25 September 2008
xman said:
I havent switched I can dvd's for $2.00-$20.00 Bluerays start at $30.00 not happening they need to come down in price

Exactly the point I was making in my post above.  The average person thinks the way you do which is why Blu Ray is going to face a struggle.

 



Biggest Pikmin Fan on VGChartz I was chosen by default due to voting irregularities

Super Smash Brawl Code 1762-4158-5677 Send me a message if you want to receive a beat down

 

Around the Network
kars on 25 September 2008
xman said:
I havent switched I can dvd's for $2.00-$20.00 Bluerays start at $30.00 not happening they need to come down in price

Not quite. They only want more money the higher quality is only a way to get it. They would only drop the price to get more money to buy it. But a BluRay is more expensive in production than the DVD, due to the higher quality that has to be maintained and the licences for encoding and encryption technologies. In the beginning they were also interestred in the copy protection and in the potential to sell the old movies another time, but:

People who are not even ready to buy a film in decent quality for 5$ simply won't buy the movie.

The number of people who will pay again for the movie on BluRayis lower "Well I already have this film and I watched it one time. Is it really worth to buy this film again?". People didn't saw VHS as a durable medium, so they even bought the film without significant quality improvements, simply to have them "safe".

 



Jordahn on 25 September 2008
tuoyo said:
Jordahn said:
tuoyo said:
Jordahn said:

No I'm not kidding, and I'll tell you why. The only way you are going to readily get 1080p with uncompressed sound and disc extras for the time being is with Blu-ray. You are of the OPINION that Blu-ray isn't worth the money which I can respect. If some people are willing to pay extra to get extra, then so be it. CD's were more expensive that cassettes, and DVD's were more expensive than VHS. Some people were willing to pay extra then, and some people are willing to pay extra now. Nothing wrong with that. You CANNOT fault someone for acting on their own preference when they can afford to. And about the average person, the way I see it is that Blu-ray isn't for the average person for the time being. HD is catering more towards the HD enthusist. I for one never though that Blu-ray will be dominant/mainstream. As long as it has its target audience, and it's worth the content providers' business venture when both parties are happy.

See that's where you are wrong. The real benefit in the jump from cassette to cd and vhs to dvd was not the picture and sound. On the tv sizes and technology (CRT) that were available at the time you couldn't really tell a major difference between vhs and dvd. It is only with flat screens (and their crap performance with anything with a poor quality source) and with surround sound systems being more readily available that you noticed a difference in sound and picture quality. The real benefit was not having to bother with rewinding and forwarding and not having to worry about your tapes wearing out from significant use. This is especially true in the case of music. Quality is not the reason why cd had a strong uptake. Otherwise how do you explain the fact that mp3s are killing off cds?

Blu Ray unfortunately does not offer that advantage over DVD which is why I think unless Blu Ray manufacturers force it on people by making movie studios stop producing movies on DVD I don't think it is going to have a chance.

 

Where you are wrong is that you CANNOT accept the FACT that your statements are OPINION. No matter how you want to spin this, there are improvement from DVD to Blu-ray, and the difference and cost are all relative from person to person. Just accept the FACT that not everyone will have the same perception as you, and that doesn't make you better or worse. I for one (and others) saw and heard the difference between a VHS and a DVD on a 25" tube Sharp SDTV back in late 2000. But guess what, you don't see me shoving it down people's throats.

Blu-ray is great and worth it for some while not for others, and that's okay. Just accept it, and stop being so self-righeous and closed-minded. And in regards to mp3, some people are willing to trade quality for convenience. It worked for 8-tracks when compared to turn-table albums. Besides, it's becoming more commonplace for audio products to offer quality enhancing options for mp3 playback. "Killing off cds" is at the best subjective. And really, there is a different mentality and aesthetics between listening to music and watching a movie. That's always been a bad comparison.

Where you are wrong is that you have a problem with comprehension and putting yourself in the place of the average person...

Stop right there because this is where your argument falls apart.  It seems YOU "have a problem with comprehension" because earlier I did say:

"And about the average person, the way I see it is that Blu-ray isn't for the average person for the time being."

And I also said:

"Where you are wrong is that you CANNOT accept the FACT that your statements are OPINION."

So please let me restate that please do not force you opinion as fact.  People have different opinions, neither which is right or wrong.  "Is that so difficult to understand?"



Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.

Jordahn on 25 September 2008
tuoyo said:
xman said:
I havent switched I can dvd's for $2.00-$20.00 Bluerays start at $30.00 not happening they need to come down in price

Exactly the point I was making in my post above.  The average person thinks the way you do which is why Blu Ray is going to face a struggle.

 

 

What kind of struggle?  Dominance? Mainstream acceptance?  Profitability?  Healty userbase?  Universal studio support?  PC storage media support?  Etc...  And what really counts here?



Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.

Pristine20 on 25 September 2008
vizunary said:
Hawkeye said:
I would have bought a PS3 over my 360 if BD were $20-$30 Instead of $35-$50

 

The only BDs that are $35-50 are the pornos(these are up to $79) and multi disc sets<--- which is negated if you price per movie. I just picked up The Godfather collection for $58 for all three films and 5 hrs of extra HD content, not a bad deal...

 

OT: That was too lofty a goal, not realistic, HDTV's would have to have a 50% market share and that's not even close. It's going to be slow and steady, hell Blockbuster still had VHS to rent up till just a few years ago.

 

LOL. Now we know what hawkeye really buys!



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

hibikir on 25 September 2008

On a typical store, considering a mainstream release, Blu-Ray is at least 50% more expensive than the equivalent DVD. I'd rather have 3 DVDs than 2 Blu-Ray movies. Therefore, I don't buy any.