Let us break this down into rational bites. What he is saying is the technology is too problematic in implementation and cost effectiveness. This does indeed hurt the format. When a party that should be supporting the format is effectively cock blocking the format. The format needs to be an integrated component within existing products due to its substantial price tag, and a stalling global economy.

This is all about obtaining ubiquity within the market place. Where the technology becomes a standard not a niche. This format isn't going to make it in the current market through stand alone products. Not when digital downloads are cheap, the format it is trying to replace is substantially more cost effective, and the associated products that use the functionality are leaving the price range of many consumers.

The bottom line is simple the format needs every inroad that it can get into the hands of consumers. That speeds up adoption, and thus allows for the prices to drop in a market that at the very least in the short term will be far more frugal. Do not be fooled into thinking this format has all of the time in the world. Sales must continue to grow, and the format must find widespread adoption within the next couple years. Unless that happens the format will be overcome by advancing technology.

Yes this is a major problem. The fewer players pushing the technology within their devices the less likely it is to ever see success. Since this is in the Sony forum I would also say it does hurt the perception of the PS3 console. You want consumers seeing the value of the drive, and not viewing it as a niche technology that kills off one of the major selling points.

You expect competition to speak well of each other?

I don't think that's the only issue.

One of the problem the movie industry is facing is that about 1 years ago retailers ( with the agreement of the movie industry I guess) started slashing heavilly DVD prices in expectation of a new format taking over.

Now that this has been done and they can't go back on DVD pricing, they really need that new format to succeed to sustain their revenue...( cheapest I ever saw a DVD at Best Buy was 8$ till one year ago, now every week they have a list of 50 DVDs or so they sell for 5$ and those aren't trash serie B movies, there's actually quite a few decent movie in the pile every week).

 Blu-Ray in itself isn't going to raise the revenue of movie companies the same way as DVD did though, even when it succeeds people won't buy more Blu-Ray than they did DVD in the past ( whereas DVD exploded their business as suddenly a huge amount of people started buying movies whereas in the past with VHS people mainly rented them to due to poor longevity of the VHS medium).

The only gains movie companies stand to make is they won't need to put out 2-3 DVDs special collector editions but can fit everything in 1 Blu-Ray but the gains there are negligible...

The other advantage I see is that if Blu-Ray takes off, movies companies probably expect it will slow down digital pirating of movies as the larger size of the medium will make it more of a pain to pirate on huge scale ( upload limit for most ISP will prevent the casual user to offer his collection on the net the way people did with MP3).

No it's not. It's an alternative to PC not an alternative to Dell.

The only reason their products are sky rocketing right now is because of the ipod and that it's "in" to have a mac.

Mac's hardware is overpriced and a waste of money. I'm not saying it's bad. Just overpriced.

Saying Apple is overpriced is like saying PS3 is overpriced. One could say that with all the features, he has the best for his money and another one could say he doesn't care about the features so to him it's overpriced. Endless debate.

Also, well I guess Apple will stick to downloads. They don't seem to be that much interested in Bluray, atm.

Yes. But I remember when the first PowerPC powered Mac Mini was released it was far more revolutionary and competitive: its price wasn't higher than a medium quality x86 mini PC and it had the fastest passive cooled GPU available then, a Radeon 9200. The current model is much more expensive and it has crappy intel graphics in every model and sub par optical drive in the entry level model. It looks like Apple feared it could have too much success and crippled it... I hope current success make their fears vanish and they release a Mac Mini "III" competitive like the first one.

About the blow to BD: I was just observing that Apple is very prudent on some features and while I disagree on "jurassic combo" choice, I can understand they don't adopt BD now, it's still too expensive, considering the fast obsolescence and thinner profit margins on all PC's, also Macs, compared to other electronics, and leaving Sony, that needs it to have success much more, to bear the financial weight of the early phases of its adoption, would make sense for a lot of industries, not only Apple. In this case you must only add Steve Jobs attitude and need to appear always posh: if he doesn't want it, it isn't cool. Obviously HE will decide if and when it will be ready, and although I'm not a big Apple fan (but I'm always at my ease within a few minutes when I have to use a mac), I have no problem with this, moreover I'm always quite amused by people getting mad at Jobs. 

Yes ofcourse.. because the apple pc with the same specs as the normal pc deffo offers so many things a regular pc does not.

Right... In the OPPOSITE WORLD.

Now i'm not hating here, but you can't compare it like that. The ps3 has a lot of things it's competitors does not. The mac does not. It has a different os but that's about it. Besides getting the ps3 for the price it's at is dirt cheap (if it were a pc.)

I have bought several PCs in my life and I can say that, from the perspective of a typical PC purchaser, the Mac is really not any more expensive than a PC ... When you compare the price of a Mac and a PC that is sold at an electronics store or from a company like Dell or HP there really isn't much of a price difference.

Again, PS3 could have features someone wouldn't care about and could consider it overpriced because all they want to use it for, is play the games. Some people think that those features are amazing and it's totally worth the price considering everything that comes with the PS3.

Apple offers a lot that others don't and the fact that everything is already ready to use out of the box and their computers are eco-friendly, save energy AND have quite a lot of power... It isn't something you'll find often in competition, as they often sacrifice one for the other. Plus, you have to see that the price isn't of only the hardware, it's also about everything that's in it (features, software, uniqueOS). Like HappySqurriel said, it's not that pricy.

So no it's not any different, if you look at it with an open mind... If you can't understand then fine, be that way.

Yes they are. Macs costs between 2 and 3 times as much for the same hardware. Atleast here.