9 reasons why Blu-ray will succeed
Is success in the cards? The Dark Knight Blu-ray sold 600,000 copies on launch day.
(Credit: Warner Bros.)I've been seeing a lot of articles lately about Blu-ray's fuzzy future, how it's doomed, and how its success will be short-lived even if it does take off. Well, that may well end up being the case, but I gotta say, from where I'm sitting, there's a far greater probability that Blu-ray will do just fine--for a long time. And I'm not saying that because I'm a fanboy or a shill for Sony. I'm saying it because a lot of simple market factors point toward it doing just fine. Here are nine reasons why I'm right.
1. Digital downloads will not eliminate the need for discs anytime soon.
Let's address this first since this is the biggest factor that people cite when trumpeting Blu-ray's defeat. If you haven't noticed, here at CNET we spend a good amount of time covering new streaming video platforms and services and really enjoy testing these new products. Everything from Hulu to Netflix streaming video to Slingbox to Apple TV to Vudu all show promise. That said, all these products have some limiting factors, including lack of content selection, pricing hurdles, and most particularly, bandwidth issues, which affect video and audio quality.
Case in point: The other night I was running Netflix's video streaming service on my Xbox 360. I fired up the movie, The Adventures of Baron Von Munchausen on a large rear-projection TV. It looked like crap. How crappy? Well, bad enough for my wife to say, "Get that off the screen right now." (The hazard of watching virtually everything in HD is that everyone in your household over the age of 7 becomes a video snob).
Next, I tried The Wiggles to better results. The program had brighter scenes and less movement, so the picture wasn't quite as soft and pixelated. My 5-year-old could handle it just fine. However, I had to leave the room after 5 minutes in extreme pain. (It was due to the content, not video quality. Man, that's some bad music).
Now, I'm sure folks who've got Verizon's Fios installed in their homes are getting a much better picture when they stream their Netflix video. But I'm dealing with cable internet from Time Warner in Manhattan and while it's acceptable for streaming video onto a 22-inch computer monitor, the pipe really isn't fat enough for blowing things up too far beyond a 32-inch set without things getting pretty fuzzy. (Our video guru, David Katzmaier says he's happy with the bandwidth he's getting from Time Warner in Brooklyn, but he says he, too, runs into some pretty rough pictures, especially those that involve a lot of action sequences).
I can't see Time Warner and other cable Internet providers suddenly delivering more bandwidth anytime soon (if anything, my connection seems to have gotten worse in recent months). DSL is even worse in a lot of cases--unless you're willing to pay ridiculous rates for top-of-the-line bandwidth offerings, which are usually geared toward businesses not consumers. And there's also plenty of talk about ISPs throttling back on bandwidth to police illegal downloads of music and yes, movie and TV shows.
The incoming Obama administration is reportedly going to be offering incentives to providers for building out broadband offerings and increasing bandwidth (eventually, anyway). Whether that has any impact or not, I still think we're a good 3-5 years away before the pipes really get fat enough for many of these IPTV/ streaming video services to reach their full potential and move from niche to mainstream status. In that time prices for both Blu-ray players and discs will look a lot like what you see today on their DVD brethren (see reasons #4 and #5).
2. Having one clear standard is a big advantage.
One of the problems with digital video streaming and downloads is that there's no standard for the industry to coalesce around. It's all a hodgepodge of stuff with various factions competing against each other with the consumers stuck in the middle of it all. That will slow adoption.
3. Blu-ray isn't going to be replaced by another disc format anytime soon.
When both Blu-ray and HD-DVD were in the midst of their little battle for the right to be crowned winner of the next-generation DVD format wars, there was lots of chatter about skipping this generation of disc technology and moving on to something that offered capacity beyond the 50GB you could store on Blu-ray discs. My favorite was "holographic storage," discs, which could carry like 10 times the amount of data.
The problem is, no one's got the money or marketing power of Sony and its allies to bring out a new disc format, even if it is technically better. Also, Blu-ray is plenty good enough and will be for the next five years, if not longer, especially when they start adding special layers and all that fun stuff companies do to eke more out of a technology.
Yeah, Blu-ray's got plenty of downside competition from DVD, but there's no upside pressure coming anytime soon from some higher-end format. This is it for a while, folks. Blu-ray is the de-facto standard for high-definition discs.
4. Prices for large-screen HDTVs will continue to drop.
Yes, we're dealing with a serious recession here. But people are still buying HDTVs (maybe not as many, but there are certain necessities in life, and a good TV is one of them; it's the American way). And with prices becoming more affordable for sets 50 inches or bigger, you've got a growing base of installed users who are ultimately going to want to get the best picture they can out of their TVs. Eventually, DVD isn't going to cut it for people with large-screen TVs. And at the end of the day, Blu-ray looks significantly better than DVD--or pretty much anything else, including most HDTV broadcasts--on TVs 50 inches or bigger.
5. Prices for Blu-ray players will continue to drop.
By this time next year, there will be several sub-$100 Blu-ray players on the market. Once you get to those price points it becomes much more of a no-brainer for consumers to purchase a Blu-ray player. Yes, you 'll be able to buy a decent DVD player for $60. But if you tell someone you can have a player that plays back "HD" discs and DVDs, he or she will think hard about shelling out the extra cash. And it will also help if...
6. Prices for Blu-ray discs will drop to near DVD price levels.
In a small number of cases, we're already finding examples of Blu-ray versions of movies that cost virtually the same as their DVD counterparts. In the coming months, you'll see the prices for Blu-ray discs gradually drop with the gap between Blu-ray and DVD prices narrowing. They have to. This is how businesses work. You get the cost of production down to the point where you can spur demand and still manage to turn a tidy profit.
While people aren't going to buy as many Blu-ray discs as they did DVDs (plenty will rent from Netflix and other outlets), they're still going to buy some. Given the choice of renting an HD movie on demand for $6 and buying the disc for $15-$20, you're going to get your share of folks buying a tangible, physical product. And let's not forget that the price for watching movies in theaters is getting ridiculous ($12.50 per person here in Manhattan). Buying a pristine copy of the movie for $15-$20 is going to seem like a bargain, especially for a family of four--or more.
7. Sony will sell lots of PlayStation 3 game consoles.
As Sony trims the price on its PS3, it will sell more of them. Many more. And every PS3 has a Blu-ray player in it (and we still think it's the best player out there). This has always been Sony's Trojan horse for the platform. Don't forget it.
8. Sony can't afford to have Blu-ray fail.
Sony won the war with HD DVD, and now it's got to take that win to the bank. Sony and its partners will do everything in their power to make it succeed. That's a lot of marketing juice.
9. Sony and its partners will figure out a way to have Blu-ray resonate with the public.
In several market research studies, Blu-ray has run into a basic problem: a high percentage of consumers don't understand just what Blu-ray is and what it does for them.
I always liked the name HD DVD better than Blu-ray because I thought the name translated better to the average consumer. Some argue that Blu-ray is a better name because it connotes something new and different (and presumably better). Well, when you have people misspelling your brand's name (Blue Ray), you have a problem.
I would encourage Sony to embark on a whimsical, self-deprecating ad campaign that educates consumers about its platform and teaches them how to spell its product correctly. As we used to say here at CNET--whenever we saw our site incorrectly referred to as c-net, C|Net, or CNet--spelling is telling. When everybody knows how to spell Blu-ray correctly, the format will be a success. I'll bet my old HD DVD collection on it.
As always, feel free to agree or disagree with me and list your reasons you think Blu-ray will make it, fade away, or muddle about in a place between success and failure, forever eliciting praise and criticism.
Note: For more reasons why Blu-ray isn't doomed, read Matthew Moskovciak's excellent post recounting what early critics had to say about DVD and how it relates to Blu-ray today.
Additional reading: See CNET's Quick Guide to Blu-ray and current list of top-rated Blu-ray players.
Hunkered down in New York City, Executive Editor David Carnoy covers the gamut of gadgets and writes his Fully Equipped column, which carries the tag line "The electronics you lust for." He's also the author of "Knife Music," a novel. E-mail David. Follow David on Twitter.
1: Sony PS3 is not all that great because:
A: I waited for a clear HD wars winner before I purchased. I bought a PS3 because at the time it was the least expensive Blue-ray player. Well, I'm pretty unhappy with that purchase. The PS3 falls pretty short for an "Entertainment Unit". I should have waited for one of those "Sub $100 Blue-ray players" you claim will be available. I thought the PS3 would be better than it is. Did you know there's no zoom function when playing a movie on the PS3? Even $25 DVD players have a zoom. Older widescreen DVD movies may not scale properly, and without a zoom function you might as well forget about playing them in the PS3.
B: Have you tried using the browser in the PS3? What a piece of junk. Crashes all the time, no back or forward buttons in the browser (you have to use the controller buttons). Who wants an "entertainment unit" that requires you to use those crappy game console controllers? Cripes, half the time the browser won't even display a graphically busy page without running out of memory. Sony should pay another company to make a browser for them because apparently they have no idea how to do it themselves.
C: What's the Bluetooth for? I love the idea, but if you buy a Bluetooth device, and it works on the PS3, there's not really any support for it. For example, I have a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse, but I can't use them in any games, and browsing isn't any better because you can't move the browser window, zoom or go back or forward by using the mouse anyways. There's no "driver setup" for you to customize the devices. The only thing their good for is if you need to enter text in a window. I suppose it's fine for a headset, at least games are building in support for them. Speaking of games...
D: The PS3 games suck. This is supposed to be an entertainment unit right? Not just a video game console? When I have guests over, I would like to enjoy some local multiplayer games with them. Most of the multiplayer games are the same old console deathmatch garbage that has been around for years. This is fine for kids playing the game console daddy bought them, but for an adult to shell out $400 or more for the system, $200 for accessories and another couple hundred for games this is not the type of game you'd want from an "entertainment unit". To this day the best "entertainment unit" I've ever seen is the old Amiga computer system. This had games for multiplayer, sequential (or turn based) multiplayer, split-screen multiplayer and awesome games for multiple people to play in a living room. Even the old Nintendo and Atari systems did a better job. I don't know about you, but my guests don't bring a PS3 system with them when they come over.
Many of the PS3 features are good ideas, but poorly executed.
So, if you think the PS3 is going to be Blue-ray's savior, I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.
2: Here in Canada new Blue-ray movies cost AT LEAST $10 more than their DVD counterparts. DVD movies, especially those filmed digitally, look great on my 42" LCD TV. Blue-ray looks marginally better. HD is nice, but those regular DVDs have been getting a lot better in recent years. I'm not paying more for a new movie in Blue-ray format than I would pay for a DVD. I have a movie collection of over 450 movies. Of those, maybe 20 are Blue-ray. The only Blue-ray movies I own were purchased for $16 CDN or less, and they're all older movies. I can get a new release DVD movie on special for $19 CDN, most new release Blue-rays are over $30CDN.
3: You're right about the name, but forget about educating people...just change it. The name Blue-ray just plain and simple sucks. Look at device names throughout history: Wire recorder, reel to reel, cassette, 8 track tape, LP records (and 45s), VCR, USB Flash Drives. These names are descriptive. What does Sony come up with? Betamax (duh) and now Blue-ray. Look Sony, get a brain and fix the name. At the very least take the stupid hyphen out. What would be wrong with Blueray? Who puts a hyphen in their product name? You're ASKING for people to spell it wrong!
4: The players are STILL expensive. At this time LAST YEAR Toshiba had $130 HD DVD players on the market, AND many HD DVD movies were available for just over $10. Are Blue-ray players and movies worth more just because Sony designed them? Like all Sony products, overpriced.
And finally I have to say, that's it, I am refusing to use the hyphen any more. From now on, it's going to be Blueray to me. Hyphenated product names are just as dumb as hyphenated citizenship.
the web browser is great now i fact please return your ps3 and shut up we dont need idiots using it
You said it best.
Most the games (not all) that are on X360 are on ps3 (minus your halo and gears of war)
People like you should be banned from posting comments until you do your research.
[CNET Editors' note: Personal attacks deleted.]
that really drives the point home!
I'm sorry tho...HD DVD is dead =X hahah yea...it's not returning from the dead...I don't believe that all major movie studios will waste their time switching to HD-DVD even if by some sort of miracle HD DVD happens to return.
K...not a big deal, but no great games? Are you kidding? Yes, there are not as many exclusives as Xbox 360 may have, but the few that are there, are pretty awesome. Heavenly Sword, God of War, Gran Turismo 5, MGS4, Ridge Racer 7, LiTTLE BiG PLANET, plenty more... and theres going to be plenty more coming soon.
We can go on and on talking about how PS3 is a great entertainment system, but we all have things to do...unlike you , just trashing the PS3 for no good reasons. All your points are either incorrect or just ignornantly overlooked =P
I'm guessing ur not too knowledgeable about the PS3. . . Helpless. . . You don't deserve to own a PS3 ! ! !
GO RETURN IT IF YOU CAN . . . Or JUST SELL IT ! ! !
Thank You...(plz dont) COME AGAIN (talking about stuff that u have no clue about) =P
[CNET Editors' note: Personal attack deleted.]
Personally, I don't see the point of paying a penny more for a Blu-Ray DVD than for a normal DVD. I love my 46" HD TV, I love HD channels, but a regular DVD looks great in HD -- and I have about 800 of them.
To put the $400 into perspective, when I got married in 1991, I purchased a Proscan (RCA) 27" TV for $800 (US) and a Pioneer Laser Disc player for $900. This was expensive for the time, with LD movies running $30+ and VHD running $20, but the picture and sound was much better than VHS. Not to mention that the LD's didn't lose quality as did VHS.
Then came DVD with its superior quality. In the late 90's, I bought my 1st DVD player. A LOW END Panasonic for $350. With DVD movies running $25 or so, and a huge improvement over LD, it looked fantastic on 27". Fast forward to January 2007. My new PS3 loaded with a Blu-ray just blew us away on our recently purchased Toshiba 56" DLP. After a firmware update, the DVD upconversion on the PS3 was the best DVD amping I've seen.
So my point? The cost is actually cheeper in todays $$$ when compared to my DVD, LD and especially to my Dad's first VHS ($800 in 1976 with $30-$40 movies & $5+ rentals). It's called progress my friend. If you enjoy watching movies (I'm not discussing the games because the original article was about the Blu-ray format) then you have no other choice at this time, unless you want to watch so called "HD" on your 17" laptop, then maybe downloads are for you. I enjoy owning a collection of discs, let's call it a collection or hobby if you will, and I know many other people do as well. Otherwise DVD would have failed terribly as you expect Blu-ray to do.
The 8-Track and Cassette may be gone, but even with iPod and the likes, CD sales are still stronger than many predicted. Some people still enjoy the superior quality of the CD, which can easily be ripped to your favorite portable player at any quality you desire.
So yes, Blu-ray will be here for a while. And yes, prices will come down just as any technology has.
A) Are you buying a PS3 solely for bluray? Thats a big reason I bought mine, but if it was the only reason, I would have used any common sense I had to wait. I also play games, stream music from my computer, download movie trailers, etc (Hence, entertainment system). On the zoom issue...you could just set up your PS3 properly to upconvert, or...just use the zoom button on the TV remote. You did get a decent tv with zoom right? So you could use your bluray properly right? There are very few HDTVs out there without zoom. I actually had to look the zoom issue up because I never thought to use the PS3 to zoom when there is a remote right in front of me.
B) The PS3 is an entertainment system, not a pc. if you want to surf the web, why don't you go on craigslist and get a used pc for $100. I know that sony wants everyone to think that it does everything. That's marketing. Did the marketing of shamwow convince you to buy one of those as well? just because it can do it, doesn't mean you should. If you want the PS3 to run like a pc, why don't you hack it, and make it into a pc?
C) and D) The amiga is the best home entertainment system? Are you drugged up on nostalgia? Try getting your adult friends to spend all night playing the original nintendo with you. Fat chance. Get a pc if you want sequence based games, or do your research and find the games that fit you. If you have a system based on horsepower and graphics, thats generally what people are going to program the games for. That said, there are plenty of more strategic and less graphics intensive games out there if you bother looking and doing your research.
PS3 already was bluray's savior. Without PS3, toshiba was outselling sony 3 to 1. Anybody who doesn't think bluray will catch on now is stuck in a tech fantasy where half the country without broadband doesn't exist, and downloading movies suddenly gets easier and 50 times faster. Also, almost all my games do split screen...I don't know what your problem is.
The PS3 isn't as easy as it should be to use, I'll give you that, but mostly, you seem to be a whining.
2: If Bluray doesn't look substantially better than DVD, then you don't have it set up right. Have someone help you, because it might be more difficult than it should be. Try making sure that all the resolution settings available for your tv are checked in the PS3 menu, and that you have the 1 hdmi cable or the 5 composite cables hooked up.
3: Why do you bother complaining about the name? The laser in bluray is past the blue end of the spectrum ergo blue light ray, blu ray for short. Get it? Gay? yes, but it is descriptive.
yep, bluray is a rip off compared to hddvd...but your stuck with it. oh well.
2. You can zoom. You have to go to the ps3 settings and set the scale.
3. I'm pretty sure the bluetooth is used for the controllers.
one area I do agree with is the lack of fun "local" multiplayer games..Party Games if I must.
FYI. I purchased Dark Knight for $24.95 at HMV when I was in Toronto, and most other new releases in BD were only about $5.00 more than their DVD counterpart. Next time you want to buy Blu-ray you can search the internet first for bargains. You don't even have to use the PS3's browser if you don't want to.
And don't be shy about asking for help.
Although your post proves you are well versed in Blu-Ray technology, I just find it ironic the misspelling, and being the narcissistic person that I can be, I had to comment.
Although I don't agree with all of your comments, you still do have some valid ones. I hold the save view that there are many flaws in Blu-Ray but not for the same reasons.
1. I would have bought a PS3 simply for gaming and perhaps Blu-Ray (Used to own a Playstation 2 - but gave up on Playstation consoles after they refused to make it backwards compatible with PS2). I am now disenchanted with the entire Sony franchise and refuse to buy anything bearing their names. My $1000 Super VHS broke after 1 year of use and wanted almost $400 to fix it. I could have bought 2 new ones for that price. No thank you. My Samsung LCD TV is a better value than my fathers Sony LCD with essentially the same panel. Sony used to have great products ~15 years ago but I feel their value proposition is all but gone with outsourcing to Southeast Asia..
2. The name is not that big of an issue for me personally. Sony could have called this 'The Blob' but if it was vastly superior technology at the right price, then sign me up. Which brings me to my third point.
3. I simply marginal improvement is worth the price of entry. I have seen many movies in DVD format that were simply stunning and I don't think this is the technology that is going to replace my 100+ DVD library. I've heard many of the older Blu-Ray movies are actually NOT any better than regular DVDs. Naturally, from this statement, you can infer I have a nice collection of older films and classics.
Zoom?? You want it to zoom?? Usually that is a feature built into a TV, plus, why in god's name would you want to ZOOM in on your image? It only makes the imaged look like crap!
Look at Amazon for cheaper prices on Blu-ray (NOT BLUE-RAY) movies. And think about the prices of DVDs over the years. When DVD was in its 3rd year, they were MORE expensive than Blu-ray is now! Blu-ray is ahead of the game with prices, and they are dropping! Don't compare HD DVD disc prices, they were that cheap so that they could get rid of their stock since no one was supporting it anymore and it was dying out!
PS3 games actually have the same percentage of high rated games as the 360! The PS3 also has some of the most highly anticipated and highly reviewed games out there. Look at Metal Gear Solid 4, LittleBigPlanet, Resistance, Uncharted, etc. PS3 games are awesome! Just cause you don't know a good game when you see one doesn't mean they suck.
Bluetooth is for the keyboards in games that require typing, like Home, LittleBigPlanet, etc..., or for headsets for chatting in games, like LittleBigPlanet, Metal Gear Solid 4, Home, Socom, Resistance, etc., or for mice for navigating, etc. And the bluetooth works very well.
The browser? You complain about the browser?? Why would you want to look at your TV to browse the net when you have a computer? Even so, it is actually pretty good, and they are always updating it.
As for the name... ***!?!?! Are you retarded or something? What about the name Bluetooth? or Blackberry, or Macintosh, or Vista, or XBOX, or Wii? Blu-ray actually makes more sense than most of these names. The Blu is for the Blue-violet color of the Ray, or laser that it uses to read the disc, which is how it can handle the 50GB of storage on it. It uses a blue ray to read the disc. And since you can't copy-write the name of a color, they call it Blu-ray.
Now grow up, smell the HD, and keep your ignorant and obscene thoughts to yourself. The name is Blu-ray. Live with it. If you don't want to join it, fine. But it is going to be a big hit!
Aye its plenty of multiplayer games in the PSN Store and there are games to you have SingStar, BUZZ QUIZ TV, HIGH VELOCITY BOWLING.
You're getting a lot of flack, because the PS3 has proven itself since it's launch. Sure, it may be #3 in sales, but the thing has got a lot going for it. I'm a proud PS3 Owner. When I purchased it in December 2007, I was a bit leery, and tired of looking for a Wii. Now, I'm glad I didn't go the Wii route. The games are incredible! Most of the "issues" you've described have been long fixed with updates (2.53 is the current update).
1. The PS3 can upscale to near HD resolutons, (by turning the feature on), and perform the ZOOM and angle features on regular DVDs(which have the angle feature). Of course, Component/HDMI cables are required to get this type of better picture.
2. The Browser and input issues have been resolved through recent updates.
3. The PS3 is a great "media server". I know, I'm using it as one - by using ORB. www.orb.com - a great piece of sofware you run on your PC - I even went a step further and configured it in a different way. Only drawback - PC/Laptop with software has to be on and the internet connection has to be active.
4. Your misspelling of Blu-Ray. Sorry, chum, the name is hyphenated - there are a few hyphenated products out there. HD died a painful death last Jan/Feb. Sony does tend to be overpriced, but you do get what you pay for. Also, the system's price may be around the $299 ball park in by April.
5. The games, movies (the Dark Knight - WOW) and a 1080p TV with this thing rocks!!! Resistance (FOM & 2), Devil May Cry 4, Call to Duty, God of War, -RE5(coming soon!!!), not to mention loaning out your processor power for protein folding research - what a novel, cool device! My first movie with my New TV last September? (Nightmare before Christmas - My PS3 had me basking in true high-def beauty!
Please, go back to the Sony website and review. Blu-Ray players and movies will drop in price because of not only the economy, but also the interest and desire to have a cleaner, crisper, sharper, louder movie and game experience - and that my friend, will certainly sell several million more PS3's this year.
1. Digital downloads will not eliminate the need for discs anytime soon.
WRONG! They most definitely will. I'm of course including both legit services and other options. You can't deny that bittorrent is wildly popular and the torrent community is extremely efficient with TV rips coming within hours of a show broadcasts. As technology improves, lag time will get MUCH shorter. And as soon as the studios figure out the whole DRM situation (i.e. not using any) then Digital downloads will take over - no distribution costs = higher profit margins. And bandwidth is catching up.
2. Having one clear standard is a big advantage.
While this point is not wrong, your application is flawed. Blu-ray did beat HD-DVD, but it won't necessarily be THE standard in this generation. It's competition isn't just a competing disc format, but other distribution methods. It won the first battle, but hasn't won the war. Don't hang that "Mission Accomplished" banner too quickly. We all know what happens when you do that.
3. Blu-ray isn't going to be replaced by another disc format anytime soon.
Moot point. A new disc format doesn't have to replace an old one. It can be replaced by anything that provides the same experience. When VHS was around, we didn't say "DVD won't replace it because it's not another tape format" did we?
4. Prices for large-screen HDTVs will continue to drop.
How is this exclusively helping Blu-ray and not any other newer formats? High-Def is High-Def whether it comes from a disc, a hard drive, the internet, or a shoe if someone figures out how to store and transfer data from one.
5. Prices for Blu-ray players will continue to drop.
Probably your only valid point. Congrats. But dropping prices don't necessarily equal sales.
6. Prices for Blu-ray discs will drop to near DVD price levels.
Yeah, but they're not right now. And I don't think people want to rebuy their whole movie collection one more time. The switch from VHS to DVD was dramatic: VHS looks like crap. DVD is watchable. Blu-ray is a luxury. And in this economy, Blu-ray is going to take a beating.
7. Sony will sell lots of PlayStation 3 game consoles.
Actually, they won't. Check the numbers - they're getting slaughtered by the Wii, and the 360 is already in more homes. The complete lack of software for the PS3, combined with development woes means it's going to keep getting rocked. That people buy them primarily to play games, whereas watching movies is a bonus, not the other way around.
8. Sony can't afford to have Blu-ray fail.
Why don't you ask them about Mini-disc, Betamax, Memory Sticks, UMDs, Super-Audio CDs and more obscure things like SDDS, Multi-Media CD, Hi FD? They're last successful format was the 3.5 inch floppy.
9. Sony and its partners will figure out a way to have Blu-ray resonate with the public.
This is not even a valid point. It's they equvalent of saying "It'll work just because". It won't.
This whole article = fail
1. Take a look at current US broadband infrastructure. Around 70% of people have broadband according to the FCC, but broadband is only described at 328 kb/s or higher. We've all seen how pushed to the limit the current backbone is. Imagine everyone downloading their movies all the time. The current structure can't handle it. Will downloads eventually take over? Yes. In the next 10 years? No. And that's all Blu-ray needs.
2. You obviously didn't understand the unified comment. While Blu-ray plays on any blu-ray player (since standardization), there's a cornucopia of movie download services, none of which have the same films, requirements, or installations. Consumers don't want to sign up at 50 different services....they want one simple method they can learn and understand. Blu-ray gives them this.
3. The author was simply showing that the format doesn't have to contend with this issue. For awhile I was curious about the chinese-made discs, but that doesn't appear to be catching on.
4. HDTVs help Blu-ray more than any other format because 100% of Blu-rays require HD. Other formats don't. As people buy HDTVs they're going to notice how the other formats (be it stream, VHS, DVD) don't look nearly as good on their HDTV. For some people, it'll be good enough, but as prices drop, Blu-ray will be the logical progression. Download is the only possible contender here, and no major service is doing downloads, just streams.
5. Yep, and I commend you for accepting it. I also agree about sales, one can never really be sure.
6. They are notably higher, but if you're looking for deals, you can find them. Amazon frequently runs $10 and $15 sales on Blu-ray. Stuff always starts higher at early adoption for the videophiles and then it comes down. I agree people won't repurchase their DVD collection, at least not immediately. But with each player sold, people will have the choice with each new movie they buy...and the transition will start. Already has if you look at sales figures.
7. Blu-ray isn't adversely affected by the PS3 selling fewer than Xbox or Wii. It's not a logical comparison. We're looking at Blu-ray adoption. Since the other two systems don't have an HD movie format (Xbox it could be argued, however), the PS3 isn't really competing with the other consoles in this market. Every PS3 sold, regardless of why the person bought it, has added to Sony's Blu-ray coffers.
8. Again, illogical comparison. With the exception of Betamax, Sony hasn't invested nearly as much into the other proprietary formats. This really is more make or break. Considering in this case they no longer have a direct competitor the way HD DVD was, the mass majority of people who still want solid media alone will help Blu-ray skate through. Sony makes alot of crap proprietary formats, but this isn't one of them. People had a choice.
9. I can't defend 9. HD DVD was a better name. While I'm a techie, and think Blu-ray sounds cool...your common consumer doesn't know what it is. HD DVD is pretty self-explanatory.
1. The sheer amount of fiber already layed out and being layed out is much bigger than you may be aware of. Combine that with better codec and better distribution methods (bit-torrent for instance), and your counter-point is now a moot point.
2. Now you've just taken one chunk of my argument out of context. But to torpedo your answer, there's one relative online distribution standard: Bittorrent. it's not going anywhere. Even with the recent throttling efforts in Canada, there will always be workarounds.
3. You weren't really arguing here. But fact is, this point added no credence to his argument.
4. *yawn* Bittorrent. This is getting too easy.
5. See 3.
6. Sales figured seem indicate that the sales are increasing, but there's not really any room for them to go down right now. When something is new, it's not hard to show the market is "growing exponentially" If one month you sell 2, and the next you sell 8, that's a 300% gain. but it's still only 6 movies.
Also, in a recent study, 1 in 5 people couldn't tell if they were watching SD or HD. Extrapolate that for a second. DVDs are higher resolution, and can be "upconverted" to look reasonably well. Most people don't care enough to rebuy their whole collection. So they might pick up new films if they had no other choice, but cost still gets in the way.
All in all, there's not much reason to switch unless it became mandatory. Just look at how many people haven't bought a digital TV box - even in Hawaii that switched early to avoid conflicting with the nesting season of an endagered bird. yeah. exactly.
7. All I'm pointing out is his point is irrelevant, and misinformed. Latest stats show Xbox still has a 2:1 lead, with the Wii smashing both of them many times over. Let me quote him: "As Sony trims the price on its PS3, it will sell more of them. Many more." I call that wishful thinking. There's not stats or reason to support that claim. Sony's been saying it for years and they've been wrong. Bottom line, they can't get their act together. Every big game company dies at one point, and I think this might be Playstation's time. I'm seeing shadows of what happened to the Sega Saturn/Dreamcast here. It's going to die a slow and painful death.
8. Wrong again. Sony goes Gung-ho with EVERY standard it introduces, screwing over many people in the process (their customers). MD players were on the market for years, even after the iPod all but buried it. Memory Cards are still around and a HUGE annoyance (SD is cheaper and in more devices) Fact is Sony, like Apple, will push anything it can onto it's customer base, especially proprietary, locked gear so it can charge astronomical amounts for substandard product. With the recession coming, that's going to change.
9. You didn't even argue my point there, you just went off-topic. It doesn't matter what they call it, this generation of optical media was dead before it was born.
You should quit commenting because you barely know what was going on.
Love,
Me
you know, I thought megatroid made some ignorant comments, but I believe you surpass him.
lets start off with #5
5. Well, I have to disagree with you, it will mean more sales. if you are so ignorant that you can't see this, well I guess there is no point in me arguing with you. You can just stop reading and don't bother ever reading a story about blu-ray again.
1. that is not going to change the fact that a large pecentage of people do not have access to reasonably priced hi-speed internet. They are not going to put the fibre optics in new loactions, they are going to place it existing locations. Also don't forget that they will have to upgrade the backbones of the internet as well. Having fibre optics in New York and Los Angeles will not reduce the time it takes for the signal to get the data from New York To Los Angeles. Four years ago when I moved to my current location I only had one option for hi-speed internet. That was satellite. When I looked at the p[rices then, it was about $500 for equipment and I think $60/month for 512kbps(if I remember the prices correctly). I realise that the US prices could be lower(I live in canada) but I think you will find most people will find these prices unreasonable.
BTW, if you want to really push the download argument you should be pushing the idea of wireless access. It would be much cheaper to implement than fibre optics since you only have to upgrade the backbones.
2. I believe the author was looking for legal ways to download movies, but I guess you could charge a subscription to it and treat it like cable so I will let that go. Let's go back your original argument. The fact is that Blu-ray is the only HD standard out there right now. I know there will always be better codecs, which will cut down on the downloads, but the quality of streaming "HD" is not near the quality of Blu-ray HD. On a small enough screen I'm sure you can't tell the difference, but if go up to a big screen TV from a 21" monitor/laptop screen, you can see the difference. Then again, you're just going to say bit-torrent again. Well, I would rather pop in a blu-ray and watch then download a movie and wait 8+ hours for it to finish. Also, let's not forget selection. If you want to watch an older movie, your going to have to hope that someone has it available to download on their bit torrent program.
3. well, you think that blu-ray won't take-off and downloads will take over. This means you must agree that blu-ray will almost certainly be that last physical medium for entertainment. the only disagreement is whether or not it will be popular.
4. This won't help Blu-ray exclusively, but it will help Blu-ray more than downloads. The simple fact is that streaming content looks like crap on an HDTV. when you go to bit torrnet, well then the point is moot. It's just a matter of whether you are will to wait hours to watch a show/movie.
6. in you original comment you say that people don't want to rebuy there whole collections again. who are these idiots that are re-buying collections? DVD's WILL PLAY ON BLU-RAY PLAYERS. That means you don't have to buy them again. I understand buying some movies again, but not everything. I still have my VHS collection. and a lot of those I don't have on DVD yet. An example would be independence day. I have it on VHS, I skipped it on DVD and bought it on Blu-ray (mostly because it was cheap)
the studies about the difference between SD and HD, well that doesn't matter. People don't read studies.
as for the DTV converters, if you have cable or satellite, you don't need it. you only need it for older TV's to receive with an antennae.
7. your argument has nothing to do with the article. The fact is that sony is going to sell more PS3's this year. that means there will be more Blu-ray players on the market.
8. The only thing I would disagree with is Sony screwing over it's customers. Sony does try to push their standards, but so does everyone else. People always talk about Sony owning Blu-Ray, but they actually only own about 35-40% of it. Toshiba owned most, if not all the DVD standard. with the amount of money they were losing on the HD-DVD players I would think they owned most, if not all of the HD-DVD standard as well. (Before anyone flames me on this,I am only referring to the patents)
9. Well, I actually like the name. it may be less intuivie, but I still like the name.
" DVD movies, especially those filmed digitally, look great on my 42" LCD TV. "
great, go ahead and enjoy your tiny little tv, and let those of us with big screens enjoy the great picture quality of blu ray.
yeah, I can leave off the hypen too, and I can also leave off the "e" that IS NOT part of "blu"...you're the kind of person the article author is talking about, I guess!
As for the PS3, you said you bought it for Blu-ray. Why do you need a zoom feature? Does your TV lack one? I know non-anamorphic movies are a pain, but the zooming shouldn't be THAT big of a deal. Especially if you're watching Blu-rays.
If you're using it for movies and games, why bother with the web browser? It's not supposed to be a fully functioning computer (consider the ability to browse the internet as a bonus, at least that's how I look at it).
Also, why would it be a Blu-ray savior? I don't think Blu-ray needs to be saved at this point...
If you bought it for playing Blu-rays, remember it has some of the fastest (if not THE fastest) load times, decodes ALL HD audio codecs, it's a profile 2.0 player, and so far I haven't head anyone complain about any Blu-rays not working in their player (save for damaged ones). I'd say the PS3 is a pretty powerful little machine.
As for games sucking, meh, it all depends on taste. While I enjoy the Wii, others hate it. Go figure...
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6886764-1.html
And this one--on pricing of Blu-ray players and discs--isn't too nice either:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-18438_7-10103714-82.html
There are more. And for the record, I did not care who won between Blu-ray and HD DVD.
David wrote in the article in reason #9 "When everybody knows how to spell Blu-ray correctly, the format will be a success."
Megatroid u cant kill Blu-ray ok buddy and keep on zooming into ur dvds that look "marginally worse", who ... does that?? Blu-ray Blu-ray Blu-ray sucesss!!!
[CNET Editors' note: Offensive content deleted.]
Forget the medium, and next time maybe try focusing on the content. So much hype has been stirred up over which type of discs do what, and which ones have the greatest quality, or give you the biggest bang for your buck, etc, etc. I think what people, and hollywood, have really lost touch with, is quality. Not the quality of the picture, but the quality of the content that is represented by that picture.
I mean, when a movie is being sold on a platform of "the best digital quality 3d movie you will ever see!... For at least two weeks!", then we may have certainly dropped something on the way to the present. Oh yeah, meaningful content. Perhaps when people quite focusing on worrying about the type of medium that they're using, they can focus on something thats at least a little more interesting. Something that possible rhymes with "hood gory spline". And no, that isn't the newest 3d digital, more real than real life, amazing quality movie. Thats a feint sense of wit, slapping you in the face, telling you to get a life.
BTW : PS3 sucks. I don't care what you bought it for, you'd get more use out of a toaster oven.
Lol, to start off, saying your amazing PS3 is so amazing simply because it can play movies and old games, is a lot like saying you bought a HD television, so that you can watch local stations in analog. However, I do believe that there is a point in what you said. You obviously don't play the older PS and PS2 games because they surpass all others in high definition quality! I'm sure, that instead you play them because they have good stories, and intriguing ideas. That sense of quality content seems to have been replaced by HD images of late, swapping one for the other instead of incorporating both. So go ahead, keep watching your movies and playing your old games on your brand new PS3! I'll enjoy my toast, knowing I've probably already played every worthwhile game you own, on my PS2... Cuz I didn't have to fork over money for an overpriced machine so that I could watch movies and play old games. 8)
@BaylorX
I'm not sure what the people of Canada have to do with anything... Or how their country looks even remotely like a hat. Now if you're referring to the way Canada sits on Top of America, let me remind you that Alaska sits on top of Canada. So you'd actually be wrong. Or at least, only half right. In a sense, America would also be their hat. Since Greenland, actually sits on top of Canada as well, I think Canada would actually trump America in terms of senseless, if somewhat randomized hat analogies. Then again, who am I to talk? I'm just a simple Californian. I must not understand the complex social hat relationships between countries.
Now, traveling back to the matter at hand, I don't actually own any VHS tapes anymore. Not since I transferred them to discs a few years back. Believe it or not, I actually own DVDs, HD DVD's and even (gasp) Blu-Ray discs too. How you understood me to say that I wouldn't buy anything other than old video formats, is beyond me. I simply said that they are all great quality and its petty to fight over which will succeed, considering that the new (hmm, Blu-Ray?) will phase out the old. Not necessarily because the old wasn't good, but because the new is better. Also, because the new is the new. My point was that the less time we focus on which discs are going to be used, the more we can focus on the content of those discs. Those who try to argue for or against the discs are acting quite pointless, as it won't ultimately matter what they say, because what will happend will happen regardless. A sense of inevitability, if you will.
Now, I believe your argument is that I'm insane if I think Blu-Ray doesn't look "magnitudes" better if I blow it up to a "good size display", which is more like saying that eventually you can prove that on a screen large enough, that you can find magnitudes of difference. However, I think that you may be shocked to find that in the midst of such modern times, that isn't the size that "most people" need or use, as was my restriction. So your the exception to the argument. Good for you. I know I can watch my DVD's HD DVD's and Blu-Ray disc all on my 42" Television set. Now, that my friend, is more than a necessity, its a luxury. ;)
@ps3owner
I'm sorry, I don't speak moron. :D
Toaster2s suck. I don't care what you bought it for, you'd get more use out of a bottle of glue!
I'm glad you wrote this last reply to your original comment. You made your point much more clearer.
Not a lot of games out for that toaster oven, though...
Now, here's how Blu-Ray can win: Everyone hates disks. They harken back to the bad old days of computers without hard drives. Let the Blu-Ray disk be simply the delivery medium to upload the legally owned content to a digital player. Then stow away the disk, hopefully to never need it again (until a new player is bought). This same thing can be done with online digital delivery, and the business model that FINALLY develops it will win--Blu-Ray or online delivery.
--mark d.
By the way, I bought "The Dark Knight" on Blu-Ray, and for a couple of bucks more it came with a code to redeem a digital copy of the movie from iTunes. It's not an HD copy, but it's still good quality, especially since I mostly watch it on my iPhone on planes. I can watch that movie over and over.
Time will only tell with that.
But Blu-ray was always the better format over HD-DVD. HD-DVD had some advantages:
1. A clear name
2. Cheaper players that had advanced features before the Blu-ray players
3. Cheaper discs.
But there was one advantage that Blu-ray had over HD-DVD. Capacity. I'm not sure you can over-rate that advantage. It allows you to store larger movies, more bandwidth, better and more add-ons. And think of computer storage. Just remember... you always need more capacity. So, Blu-ray had to win.
feqw mmore to say consumers are really dumb when it comes to actal products people still dont understand the concept of bluetooth see there is too much ignorance but the fact is that we all just want better and affordable format see the thing is blue ray is a disk hard drives have been out longer and will continue to be out for a really long time there is nothing to replace it unless a blu ray hard drive lolz but that most likely wont happen no need really the problem is format and codecs im tired of all these codecs floating around there should be just one player one file type etc but the thing is if we where able to take our divres to a store and they download it there with a quick download and a back up licence boom never lose a movie even through a hard drive failure etc thats it really
I do however know that many people run off of supposed 10 Meg service here and when I stream to my 360 it looks like crap. I really like NetFlix and its Blu-Ray service for an extra buck per month.
I also like owning a copy on disc of the movie/media because when people come over and want to watch movies on my 52 inch Samsung LCD (thanks Cnet for the review) they can pick a movie and it seems more personal. (Makes a great piece of Art if you have the shelving for it!)
I think someday as tech gets older it will be much like iTunes/digital online in that most people will store them to a device or if the internet gets more bandwidth stream them from a server...
When my kid is 23 like me there will probably be Super Blu or Ultra HD, lol!
Will Blu-Ray stay relevant? Probably not.
If the studios backing Blu-Ray were smart...and to this point, they have not been...they would drop prices on media pronto. I'm still buying loads of HD DVD's while they are cheap, and I'm not dropping $30 on BD's anytime soon.
funny enough, i like my ps3, but... as blu-ray players were only $200 usd this thanksgiving i picked up a couple. work great and less noisy than ps3.
Personaly the convieniance and 'price' of downloading media (generaly HD) has prevented me purchasing a BR player. but then again I must be one of the few who genuinely dont want to own pysical media.
"Can't we all just get along"?!
It seems people are concerned Blu-ray will fade away, if downloading takes off. Even if Hi-def downloading becomes popular, I can imagine people wanting to save their movies on (BD) discs, instead of filling up their HDDs. Blu-ray might lose some ground to services like Netflix and Blockbuster, but I can't see this bullying Blu-ray out of the business anytime soon. If anything, it will keep Blu-ray on its toes to develop better content and create some healthy competition. Hurray to that.
I agree that the name "HD DVD" is more self explanitory than "Blu Ray",I own both formats and think the better format lost.
-
by cobratronik
January 15, 2009 9:06 AM PST
- Right on, David. It's highly fashionable at the moment to prematurely pronounce the death of Blu-ray. As they say "if it bleeds, it leads" (in so much as any tech-death story is capable of bleeding). I would however allow the outside possibility that Blu-ray may never completely replace DVD. This of course, is far from saying it is a dead format. Like you my household has embraced Blu-ray, and if given a choice of formats we'll pick Blu-ray over DVD/streaming video every time. Having said that, I'd say that for a majority of people the audio-visual superiority that Blu-ray offers is not immediately compelling enough for the choice to be a no-brainer, given the current cost differences. I think you're right on target about Sony's marketing being critical in determining Blu-ray's long-term fate. Perhaps Blu-ray could become like Apple, with a highly stable but smaller market share (a boutique brand if you will). Only time will tell. In any case, viva Blu-ray!
-
Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 5 pages (151 Comments)