How Blu-Ray could do better.

[BHvrd]

Stop making lazy ass transfers and include PCM and HD Dolby Digital on every disc. End of story. These are defaults and necessary on EVERY DISC.

The Dvd "special edition" fiasco isn't needed this generation. Like Laserdisc.....if your going to release a definitive edition, call it "Criterion" and call it a day. You could put commentaries and extra content on these editions.

Point is PCM, HD Dolby Digital and GREAT video transfers should be on every disc.

Fuckers.



EDIT: Sorry I meant to put this in off-topic, can someone move it please.

[Gamereviewgod]

Also, stop using BD-Live. It's crap. Servers are slow, registering is a pain, and the content has been nothing short of junk. Picture-in-picture is also a pain. Don't make me watch the entire movie over just to see a few short featurettes.

Edge enhancement and grain reduction needs to stop. It's insulting, especially with Band of Brothers where it was intentional.

And yes, Warner needs to get on the uncompressed audio as well. TrueHD, PCM, DTS-HD, don't care. One of the above. HD audio should also be 7.1 on new releases, not 5.1. If Lionsgate can do it, so can every other studio.

[maxlords]

I can't argue with these statements. I can't believe how GREAT some of the transfers are and how incredibly bad others are. Seriously...should I have to look up reviews of the TRANSFER to Blu-Ray before i buy a movie? I think not. And yet I do. I've returned several discs before opening em based on the reviews (grabbed em on sale while available).

It's just sad.

I haven't even tried BD-Live, but that PiP featurette thing REALLY pisses me off. Several other things that piss me off about Blu-Rays:

Bare-bones Blu-Rays when there's a comprehensive DVD. Why do this? The info is there...throw it on the disc for god's sake.

Standard def featurettes

Hi-def featurettes...but only PiP.

Insanely high prices on stuff I already own on DVD. Should I have to pay $70 for Firefly when it's $20 on DVD? That seems excessive.

Load times on stand-alone units. Why in the world in this day and age should I literally have to wait 3-5 MINUTES for a Blu-Ray disc to load on my Blu-Ray player when the same movie loads in 30 seconds on DVD. It's not like the system is buffering the movie. It's brutal. My Samsung Blu-Ray players sounds I shit you not like a damned dot-matrix printer when it's booting up and it takes FOREVER. I can leave the room, check my email, come back and it's STILL not done on some discs.

Multi-standards. Pick a damned standard and stay with it. Don't evolve the format over and over and keep making me upgrade my firmware. That's just silly.

[mnbren05]

I agree with the previous comments. I hate how long my stand alone takes to load up a blu ray disc. Honestly, 3 mintues for Hancock?! The dvd was under 15 seconds in my crappy ancient dvd player. BD Live is indeed crap, pip sucks ass, and the menus also bug me as the seem to lag when you use them making you often miss your selection.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

It takes 3-5 minutes to load the discs on some standalone players? That would really piss me off, I'm glad that the PS3 doesn't take long at all.

[Volcanon]

I would suggest, really, how about being relevant?

Blue ray doesn't look any different on my 25 inch TV, but costs four times as much and gets shitty releases. DVD's time has not yet come.

Blue-Ray is the 3DO of movie data formats.

[BHvrd]

I would suggest, really, how about being relevant?

Blue ray doesn't look any different on my 25 inch TV, but costs four times as much and gets shitty releases. DVD's time has not yet come.

Blue-Ray is the 3DO of movie data formats.

If I wasn't going for full HD video/audio I would agree with you. In many peoples cases you are correct. Dvd is still relevant, but on a whole for the HD stuff it doesn't quite hold up.

Being a somewhat video/audiophile I know the format is honestly great and has what it takes, just the way they produce the things is so half ass. They really are trying to pull one over on the uninformed masses (AGAIN), but it really pisses the ones who know off.

I swear! Will anything ever be as good as Laserdisc?! I say yes.....Blu-Ray if they get their act together.

[Rob2600]

It takes 3-5 minutes to load the discs on some standalone players?

From what I understand, first generation Blu-ray players were actually just small computers running Linux. They took a few minutes to boot up.

Is this true for current Blu-ray players as well?

[aclbandit]

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I want 7.1 audio because it can; if it's possible, WHY NOT? I want GOOD video transfers -- my copy of Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange looks AMAZING-- a totally wicked remastering. I would like to see this sort of awesomeness done with the films of "now"-- if you can make a 70's movie look that good, modern stuff should be cake. Seriously.

[aclbandit]

It takes 3-5 minutes to load the discs on some standalone players? That would really piss me off, I'm glad that the PS3 doesn't take long at all.

100% Agreed. I didn't have any idea there was this problem with standalones.

[maxlords]

Keep in mind I'm NOT a Sony fanboy....I just got a Blu-Ray player (stand-alone) less than a month ago and I was unconvinced that it would be worthwhile...only got it cause it was on sale when I got a new TV.

1. You have a 25" TV. Is it even HD? Blu-Ray looks the same as DVD on an SD TV.

2. Blu-Rays are roughly 30-40% more expensive, not 400% more expensive.

3. A lot of good titles have been coming out for Blu-Ray in the last 6 months or so...but the selection still isn't great...because it's currently a limited market.

4. Blu-Ray looks siginificantly crisper and cleaner than regular DVDs. Most of the fine detail not visible in DVD is visible in Blu-Ray. Of course, it was also visible in HD-DVD. However, the smaller your TV, the less you'll notice.

On a 25" TV there is no difference between 720p and 1080p to the naked eye. There's only a slight difference between 480p and 1080p to the naked eye on a screen that size. DVD transfers are 480i and can be upscaled to 480p with a progressive scan DVD player. I have a 26" HDTV and progressive scan looks a fair bit clearer on it.

When I hook up the Blu-Ray player and the progressive scan DVD player to my 40" 1080p HDTV is when you see the difference. Progressive scan looks SIGNIFICANTLY clearer on the 40" screen...much more than on the 26". There's a marked imporvement that you can't see as well on the 26". Blu-Ray looks flat out amazing on the 40" TV too. Everything is crisp and crystal clear on movies like The Dark Knight and National Treasure. I compared the DVD releases of Batman Beyond, I Robot, and National Treasure to Blu-Ray as well. I have the DVDs and the Blu-Rays of all 3. They are all much much clearer and cleaner. Text is easier to read and more crisp. Fine details are more visible. Blurring is significantly decreased on the edges of objects. In short, it is a significant increase in quality. And with HD-DVD dead, unfortunately, there's no other HD option. The new movies I buy will be Blu-Ray. I won't be replacing my DVDs unless I can do it REALLY cheap, but I won't be buying stuff on DVD if it's on Blu-Ray....and the transfer is good :D


Blue ray doesn't look any different on my 25 inch TV, but costs four times as much and gets shitty releases.

[GM80]

You know ... I own both Blu-ray and HD DVD players and movies, and there's not a single factor for which I prefer Blu-ray (other than the library these days, obviously).

For example, HD DVD had their "profile" finalized from the start, including Internet connectivity. Firmware updates were only to fix minor bugs and playback difficulties in players, not to add new features like "Profile 1.2" or "BD-Live" support.

Anyway, we're obviously moving forward with Blu-ray now, but I agree with most of what's been said in this thread. I wish studios would get their act together and start really working the technology, and I wish manufacturers would make fast reliable players.

[Rob2600]

2. Blu-Rays are roughly 30-40% more expensive, not 400% more expensive.

I think Volcanon was referring to the players. DVD players cost under $45 now. The cheapest Blu-ray player is around $220.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I suppose this is uber-obvious, but they need to lower/normalize the market pricing for the movies if they want to get the widest birth of adopters/library re-purchasers.

It's getting closer every year ... but if standard DVD releases are $15-$20 for the standard edition, I do NOT want to pay $30-$35 for the same content (or even just an extra, exclusive featurette) on Blu-Ray.

I think $5 more for the Blu Ray is reasonable. I know that we'll get there eventually, but until then I'm going to continue to purchase the bulk of my collection on DVD.

[Bojay1997]

Also, stop using BD-Live. It's crap. Servers are slow, registering is a pain, and the content has been nothing short of junk. Picture-in-picture is also a pain. Don't make me watch the entire movie over just to see a few short featurettes.

Edge enhancement and grain reduction needs to stop. It's insulting, especially with Band of Brothers where it was intentional.

And yes, Warner needs to get on the uncompressed audio as well. TrueHD, PCM, DTS-HD, don't care. One of the above. HD audio should also be 7.1 on new releases, not 5.1. If Lionsgate can do it, so can every other studio.

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but I actually attended an industry panel on Blu Ray and the new BD-Live features before the holidays and when I raised the question of why they were putting resources into developing BD-Live functions that literally a handful of people were going to use instead of focusing on high quality transfers with great audio and hopefully slightly better pricing, everyone looked at me like I was insane. Admittedly, most of the attendees worked for major studios and post houses that make money on authoring discs and hosting BD-Live servers, but you'd think someone would have agreed with me. The guy from Disney in particular seemed very proud of the fact that they had spent several months and thousands of dollars on creating a BD-Live chat and virtual weather system for the main menu on Sleeping Beauty. The fact is, half the industry is convinced that Blu Ray is an interim step into a download only world and the other half is convinced that they have to appeal mostly to anal cinema fanboys with very obscure content. Personally, I have an HD TV and a Blu Ray player and I would love to just get a simple disc with great audio and video for $20 per movie instead of the $35 MSRP which translates into $25 at retail even on Amazon.

[cyberfluxor]

I swear! Will anything ever be as good as Laserdisc?! I say yes.....Blu-Ray if they get their act together.
Long live Laserdisc! Seriously, imports have 1 side with dub and 1 side sub without much load. I still can't put my finger on it but for some reason I still love my LDs (maybe due to fewer/no opening commerials/ads?). Some DVDs have menus I can not stand or incompatibilities with subtitles for whatever reason between players. Then there are several different releases of the same movie beyond just WS and FS editions...

One of my friends has a PS3 and I enjoy watching his Blu-Ray movies on it. Maybe due to the fact I don't own one or mess around with the many releases in the stores I'm not familiar with all of the above mentioned lameness.

[Chainclaw]

I've only got about 30 or so Blu-Ray movies, but a good portion of them look about the same as a DVD on a player with a really good upscaler. Specifically the older James Bond movies.

Most of my Blu-Rays were gifts, I still actually buy DVDs over Blu-Rays most of the time. When a new DVD comes out, it will usually be on sale for $10 for a week or so, while the Blu-Ray will be at MSRP, at $30 - $40. That matches the 400% markup on price stated earlier in this thread.

And why aren't there more TV shows on Blu-Ray? I know not everything is HD, but a lot of stuff nowadays is.

[PingvinBlueJeans]

Bare-bones Blu-Rays when there's a comprehensive DVD. Why do this? The info is there...throw it on the disc for god's sake.
I hate that.

I was excited to see Sony reissue La Femme Nikita on Blu-ray since it needed a better transfer and the old MGM Special Edition DVD has been OOP awhile. I'm not sure about the new transfer, but when the BD came out it was barebones. WTF?

[Kitsune Sniper]

Keep in mind I'm NOT a Sony fanboy....I just got a Blu-Ray player (stand-alone) less than a month ago and I was unconvinced that it would be worthwhile...only got it cause it was on sale when I got a new TV.

I've seen no Sony bashing in this thread, which is good.

My biggest issue with Blu-Ray (and HD-DVD, when it was still around) was the cost of the media. You'd think they would've figured out how to make cheaper discs by now, but nope, they refuse to lower the price. It's just like when DVD was new, remember? Normal discs were $30 or more. SE's were much more expensive.

I do, however, have one criticism for Sony: They should work harder to make BluRay Recordable discs and burners much more affordable if they want the format to thrive.

[Iron Draggon]

Multi-standards. Pick a damned standard and stay with it. Don't evolve the format over and over and keep making me upgrade my firmware. That's just silly.

That's the one that pisses my partner off the most, and I don't blame him for being pissed, especially after what he spent to be an early adopter. The cost of the discs alone should be reason enough to have a finalized standard. He bitches all the time about getting new discs that he can't play, even after upgrading his firmware for the umpteenth time. If I were him, I'd just say fuck it all and sell the player and all the discs and let Sony burn in hell for it all. And with his hot temper, I'm surprised that he hasn't done just that yet. I dunno why he hasn't. With anything else, it would've been returned by now.

[Trebuken]

Couple things:

Firefly on Blu-Ray is virtually identical to the Standard DVD, I have both and was very disappointed. The audio gets a slight boost but no way should you pay $70 if you own the original.

Disney makes the best Blu-Rays. Their transfers are flawless. If they want to focus on lame interactive features I'm OK with it because I will ignore them and I am willing to pay a bit more for a Disney transfer.

I do believe there is some double-dipping attempts being made by not releasing a definitive edition or transfer first, but I also understand the financial side of it. These transfers are currently absurdly expensive when done correctly. They need to make some money with initial release before being able to invest in something more. Also with the original Star Trek on HD-DVD and the Blu-Ray special features there is alot more that can be done this to enhance a release and some of that can take time people don't want to wait...

[RPG_Fanatic]

It's getting closer every year ... but if standard DVD releases are $15-$20 for the standard edition, I do NOT want to pay $30-$35 for the same content (or even just an extra, exclusive featurette) on Blu-Ray.

I think $5 more for the Blu Ray is reasonable. I know that we'll get there eventually, but until then I'm going to continue to purchase the bulk of my collection on DVD.


I think the price of movies is the main factor people aren't really buying them. Like frankie said people see the Blu-ray at $35-$40 and then see the DVD version at $15-$20 most are going to buy the DVD version.

[NE146]

I'll tell you what would make blu-ray "better". It's when it's cheap and easily used for data storage. When I can have a double stacks of 100 bluray discs on my desk that I have zero qualms about zipping through, then it will rock :p

Because right now the only thing it's really being used for is to hawk movies, and there are people out there who really don't give a crap about movies and will never buy them no matter what. Myself included.

[jdc]

I've never been a technologically proficient person and tend to avoid getting into those frays, but I've been playing Blurays on my PS3 for two years now. It's hooked up to a great LCD tv and I really like what I see with new release movies. Great audio and super crisp visuals. The only reason to buy an old movie on Bluray seems to be if I don't have it on another format. I can't see $35 worth of cleaning up being done on them. I picked up Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains The Same....and it wasn't exactly as razor sharp (not even in the same league) as the new John Mayer offering. Speaking of which, I'm hoping that we'll be seeing more concerts on Bluray. To me, that's where Bluray REALLY shines.

[swlovinist]

Great Thread, yeah the whole Blu Ray thing will hopefully get better as time goes on. It will be the next format jump for physical copies of stuff, but DVD will be around due to having such a large userbase and being so inexpensive to make. I predict at least another solid ten years.

My biggest complaints

Price
The whole Live Menu thing

I want to watch a movie, not connect to the internet to do some dumbass thing that should be on the disc. At the price they are charging, people dont want lazy ports, which is 50/50 with some of the older movie titles. Hopefully the price will get alot better with cheaper Blu Ray players coming out, making the market bigger. I have to agree with the whole keeping the DVD library for now, there needs to be cheaper Blu Rays with better features before I start converting my humble DVD library. At this point, I am perfectly fine with watching a DVD on my PS3 in HDMI, which doent look bad at all.

[CDiablo]

I dont like Blu for a number of reasons most recently being:

Im a big fan of John Carpenters "The Thing". Though I am no supporter of Blu, I figure its best to get the movies that mean the most to me on Blu(Im sure I will buy Starwars.....again). The original "The Thing"(both DVD and ironically HDDVD) had an amazing 70 minute documentary on the development of the film(from start to finish). I get the Blu for Christmas, its not there. The Blu version is inferior to the DVD version.......way to go douche company(whoever released the disk).

[Half Japanese]

I dont like Blu for a number of reasons most recently being:

Im a big fan of John Carpenters "The Thing". Though I am no supporter of Blu, I figure its best to get the movies that mean the most to me on Blu(Im sure I will buy Starwars.....again). The original "The Thing"(both DVD and ironically HDDVD) had an amazing 70 minute documentary on the development of the film(from start to finish). I get the Blu for Christmas, its not there. The Blu version is inferior to the DVD version.......way to go douche company(whoever released the disk).

That would be Universal, but I think the doc may be there. Shitty thing with Universal is that they've been putting their extras on certain discs in such a way that you can only view them while the movie is playing, sort of like a less-focused picture-in-picture commentary. I know the Doomsday disc is also like this, but Doomsday is far less highly-regarded than The Thing (and rightly so, though I think Doomsday is fantastic in its own right), so you're less likely to hear people bitching about it.

[rbudrick]

I do agree with most of what is said in this thread, but only partly agree that the industry is trying to pull one over on the public (yes, they are trying, but I don't think they are succeeding, and righteously so). See, I often see the masses as drones who just follow the trends, but, especially in an economic crunch, people educate themselves before making big purchase. Because of this, people see the inherent flaws in the newer standard and for the most part, refuse to switch over. For most people, there is simply no fair benefit for the cost.

If anyone had one pull over on them, it's the early and current adopters, who are paradoxically, the ones that usually are the video and audiophiles of the masses and should know better. Strange how that works out, honestly.

The public is simply not (yet? I dunno) interested in Blu-Ray. It's just NOT worth it for almost everyone.

Sony will NOT lower their prices any time even remotely soon. They are in a huge financial crunch right now and Blu-Ray is supposed to be their long term salvation. Of course, I think this is blinding them in the short term which will severely hurt their long term (drag out longer their period of being in the red).

Blu Ray is at a crucial stage right now where it could really prove something to the masses, but if the studios show they don't give a fuck, the people DEFINITELY won't give a fuck.

Sometimes seeing that people are paying attention restores my faith in them...until I walk into WalMart and look at the "quality" of the customers (the staff at Wal Mart stores are generally excellent and invariably many tens of IQ points above the customers imo and in my experience). ;)

-Rob

[jdc]

Exactly, rbudrick. People definitely KNOW that Bluray is better and looks and sounds awesome. You'd have to have been blind, deaf and living under a rock not to notice. BUT....the majority of people don't feel the need to spend the extra money RIGHT NOW just to watch a movie in its premium form when a regular dvd on the ol' CRT set, a pizza and a couple of beers will do just fine on a saturday night. I happen to have adopted Bluray from the get go and am in love with it, my wife simply thinks that it "looks nice". My friend just got a Bluray player on boxing day (Canada LOL)....and you'd think it was the second coming of Christ.

[otaku]

I've watched a few blurays on my ps3 and have found the loads to be pretty quick (though not quite as quick as some of my dvd players) I think its pretty cool stuff, I love the quality of video on my 1080p big screen. Improvements are welcome though

[XRKacy]

who cares about bluray, DVD is good enough, anything else, as they say, is just vanity

[BHvrd]

who cares about bluray, DVD is good enough, anything else, as they say, is just vanity


Exactly!

While we're at it, all women should stop wearing makeup, old mean should stop dying their hair, teenagers should just let pimples grow all over their face and babies shouldn't wear diapers, it's all vanity after all.

Sorry i'll stop wanting things that are better right this moment! *shits himself*

[scooterb23]

If there's one thing I'll always love about the internet...it's the "let's take someone's comment so far to the extreme, that it is nearly impossible to continue having an intelligent conversation about the point originally made" response.

I was going to try and comment about how Blu-Ray really wasn't as big of a step up as VHS to DVD was... but I really don't want to have to try and defend my point when someone else will assuredly bring up the surface of the goddamn sun as a rebuttal.

[neuropolitique]

If there's one thing I'll always love about the internet...it's the "let's take someone's comment so far to the extreme, that it is nearly impossible to continue having an intelligent conversation about the point originally made" response.

I was going to try and comment about how Blu-Ray really wasn't as big of a step up as VHS to DVD was... but I really don't want to have to try and defend my point when someone else will assuredly bring up the surface of the goddamn sun as a rebuttal.

Exactly!

While we're at it we should all stop living in a democracy, kill all our first born and all move to the surface of the goddamn sun, it's the internet afterall.

Sorry, I'll stop being a jerk right this moment!*puts on SPF2000*

[MachineGex]

Someone mentioned the quality of the transfers to bluray, is there a review site that rates this kinda stuff?

I have noticed sometimes when I get a bluray disc in the mail from netflix it just doesnt seem as sharp as other bluray movies. Most are noticable, but from time to time I have to stop and think if it is a regular DVD or Bluray(when I am watching a movie). Yeah, I know, we watch alot of movies. Bless you my dear friend, netflix.

As for my opinion, price comes first. It is worth around $5-7 more per movie to buy it for Bluray compared to DVD. If a movie cost $14 for DVD, it better not be more than $20-21 for bluray. This is the reason I own only a few select blurays. Money, money, money always seems to be the reason/cause/answer to most problems.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Someone mentioned the quality of the transfers to bluray, is there a review site that rates this kinda stuff?

I have noticed sometimes when I get a bluray disc in the mail from netflix it just doesnt seem as sharp as other bluray movies. Most are noticable, but from time to time I have to stop and think if it is a regular DVD or Bluray(when I am watching a movie). Yeah, I know, we watch alot of movies. Bless you my dear friend, netflix.

As for my opinion, price comes first. It is worth around $5-7 more per movie to buy it for Bluray compared to DVD. If a movie cost $14 for DVD, it better not be more than $20-21 for bluray. This is the reason I own only a few select blurays. Money, money, money always seems to be the reason/cause/answer to most problems.


There's a few good reliable sites for HD disc review that I've been frequenting for years now. These sites are extremely detailed about the transfers and audio- and I've never personally found faults in their technical reviews. They are all extremely discerning of audio and video, more so than any other disc based media review sites I've found. All of these sites are updated multiple times a week and in order of personal preference, here they are.

www.highdefdigest.com - This site only reviews high def discs. They even reviewed HD-DVDs when they were still available.

www.thedigitalbits.com They review Blu-Rays and DVDs. Their technical assessments of DVDs and Blu-Rays are spot on. I've been frequenting this site since 2002 or so- well before they began reviewing HD discs.

www.dvdfile.com Like the digitalbits, they review DVDs and Blu-Ray discs. The least of the 3 but still great.



And also for anyone who cares, I just read this from DVDfile.com, and it pertains to Blu-Ray sales this year. Here's a link to the article....

http://www.dvdfile.com/article/blu-ray-discs-2008-performance-13135

And here's a quote with sales numbers and facts, if you don't want to click the link. They are what they are and I'm just offering them because I was actually surprised by the figures.


From The CES Press Conferences

Blu-ray Disc has been on the market for approximately two years and nine months.

10.7 million players, including the PS3 (about two-thirds of the installed base), have been sold in the United States (personal computer BD drives are not included in that number).

2008 BD player sales are more than 300% greater than they were in 2007.

During the same period in DVD’s history, only 5.4 million players had been sold.

Blu-ray Disc currently enjoys 8% penetration in U.S. households, about double DVD’s penetration for the same period of DVD’s history.

For the same period in their market histories, CD players had a 2% penetration and HDTV displays had 1% penetration.

Over 40 million U.S. households own HDTVs, providing ample BD growth opportunities.

24.9 million Blu-ray Discs were sold in 2008, 445% more than the 5.6 million BDs purchased 2007.

During 2008, Blu-ray Disc more than doubled its market share compared to DVD, selling 13.3 million BDs in the fourth quarter alone.

In 2008, DVD disc sales dropped by 9.4% while BD sales increased by 445%.

In 2008, DVD disc revenues dropped by $1.50 billion while BD disc revenues increased by $0.48 billion.

DVD revenues have dropped 12.7% since 2006.

Current market research sales estimates for 2009 range from three to six fold increase in BD sales. The most optimistic is Envisioneering Group’s Richard Doherty who estimates 2009 sales to be five or six times 2008 sales.

Eighteen new BD players (eleven of which are Profile 2.0) were introduced at CES, suggesting manufacturers’ faith and wide support of the BD format.

These figures and factoids have provoked more upbeat articles from unbiased publications: “Blu-ray discs seen as bright spot in glum season,” Peter Svensson, Associated Press; “Blu-ray's Future Appears Bright,” Wendy Sheehan Donnell, PC Magazine; “CES bullish on Blu-ray,” Ben Fritz, Variety; “Blu-ray may save day as DVD sales slump,” Carl DiOrio, Reuters; “Sony U.S. Sales of LCD TVs, Blu-Ray Players Robust in December,” Ian King and Fred Fishkin, Bloomberg.

[Phyeir]

It's pretty much been said, but the biggest issue here is price. Sony has basically set themseves up for the same situation that they do with game system, where you take the hit at first, build the audience, and then push forward and make money. Only that with no current gen competition, Sony feels they can just put themselves out there as the best option and think that the value will draw in the customers. But with things as they are, somehow, being able to live in a house or having the money to turn on the TV just seems to be a bigger focus than a few extra pixels.

I speak with sarcasm above, but that's how most people see Blu-Ray right now, the better but not worth it choice. I like Blu-Ray monies, the quality is excellent, but when I can get a DVD for 5 dollars, why would I get Blu-Ray movies for 30?

[Rob2600]

10.7 million players, including the PS3 (about two-thirds of the installed base), have been sold in the United States (personal computer BD drives are not included in that number).

Blu-ray Disc currently enjoys 8% penetration in U.S. households

Over 40 million U.S. households own HDTVs

What I find interesting is roughly 33% of U.S. households have an HDTV, but only 8% of U.S. households have a Blu-ray player...and that includes the PS3.

That means less than 1/4 of households with an HDTV own a Blu-ray player. Why is that? What are the other 3/4 of HDTV owners watching instead?


Are they buying HD content from iTunes? Are they streaming HD content from Netflix? Or are they just satisfied watching upscaled DVDs?

[TheDomesticInstitution]

What I find interesting is roughly 33% of U.S. households have an HDTV, but only 8% of U.S. households have a Blu-ray player...and that includes the PS3.


The article says that by the same time in DVD's lifespan, only a fraction of the amount of DVD players have been sold. Couldn't you then apply the same logic and say, well out of all the people who own TV's why don't more people own DvD players? Were people just content watching their VHS tapes?

The summarization that I take from these figures is that, Blu-ray when compared to DVD on a similar timeline is actually being adopted faster. But maybe there's other things that I am not taking into account or maybe I'm missing something altogether.

Of course, in the long run, we'll see if Blu-ray continues to maintain it's level of adoption that it's currently enjoying.

[scooterb23]

What I find interesting is roughly 33% of U.S. households have an HDTV, but only 8% of U.S. households have a Blu-ray player...and that includes the PS3.

That means less than 1/4 of households with an HDTV own a Blu-ray player. Why is that? What are the other 3/4 of HDTV owners watching instead?


Sports.

We have 4 HDTVs in our house, no Blu-Ray players. We're perfectly happy with our DVDs as they are, and see no reason to upgrade at this time.

[Rob2600]

Couldn't you then apply the same logic and say, well out of all the people who own TV's why don't more people own DvD players? Were people just content watching their VHS tapes?

True, but I'd think Blu-ray and HDTV would go hand-and-hand. The format is tailor made for people with HDTVs. That's why I figured the adoption rate among HDTV owners would be much higher.

I guess HDTV owners have too many other, cheaper options: again, iTunes HD content, Netflix streaming HD content, whatever HD-DVDs are still being sold, and as Scooterb23 pointed out, HD cable/satellite.



EDIT: It'll be interesting to see if HDTV owners continue to buy Blu-ray players or if the majority of them abandon the format in favor of HD streaming and/or downloads.

[maxlords]

Someone mentioned the quality of the transfers to bluray, is there a review site that rates this kinda stuff?

I have noticed sometimes when I get a bluray disc in the mail from netflix it just doesnt seem as sharp as other bluray movies. Most are noticable, but from time to time I have to stop and think if it is a regular DVD or Bluray(when I am watching a movie). Yeah, I know, we watch alot of movies. Bless you my dear friend, netflix.

As for my opinion, price comes first. It is worth around $5-7 more per movie to buy it for Bluray compared to DVD. If a movie cost $14 for DVD, it better not be more than $20-21 for bluray. This is the reason I own only a few select blurays. Money, money, money always seems to be the reason/cause/answer to most problems.


I've been using these review sites:

http://www.blu-ray.com/

http://www.highdefdigest.com/

As for the HDTV question....a lot of people are using their HDTVs for either cable/satellite TV or gaming, or as big ass monitors. Blu-Ray is secondary or tertiary for most people due mainly to cost.

Looking at the DVD adoption rate versus the Blu-Ray adoption rate....I'd say a lot of that has to do with a couple of factors.

1. The availability of media. When DVD came out it was a LOT harder to find DVDs, a lot fewer places stocked DVD players, and it was a major transition for most people. Blu-Ray players have been EVERYWHERE pretty much since release, Wal-mart has had a kiosk pretty much since the beginning for discs, and we're all much more used to disc based media.

2. Disposable income usage. People are a LOT more willing to blow disposable income on tech these days compared to when DVD came out. As tech keeps increasing exponentially, people's willingness to shell out for it has been rising. This could also account for the initial Blu-Ray to initial DVD sales comparisons.

Finally....The Thing is my favorite movie of all time and I was pissed about the release quality/extras too. :D

[savageone]

I'm confused at you guys talking about Blu Ray load times? Every Blu Ray I've watched (on my PS3 that is) doesn't have any load times.. You put the disc in, forced to sit through a warning screen or two, get to the menu, hit "play movie".. Very much the same as most any DVD.

Is this really different on stand alone Blu Ray players?

[Icarus Moonsight]

Ignore Blu-Ray. Then maybe it will go away? Worked for HD-DVD. With upconvert standard DVD players what's the point anyway? 5.1 vs 7.1? Bah. It's all a mess.

I wish they still sold CRT HDTVs or at least, that they were not so hard to come by. I might have actually bought one of them by now. Almost had me when those Philips 32inch WS CRTs were on clearance... almost.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Finally....The Thing is my favorite movie of all time and I was pissed about the release quality/extras too. :D


Ok, so I was a little perplexed on why everyone was bitching about The Thing on Blu-ray. I own the HD-DVD version and thought it was a good port of the special edition DVD. The transfer is a tad grainy- but I don't expect it to be much better than it is, given the original source material. But it seems that the HD-DVD extras are not carried over to Blu-ray, so thats' why a few people are pissed. Well I'm glad I've got the HD-DVD.

[neuropolitique]

True, but I'd think Blu-ray and HDTV would go hand-and-hand. The format is tailor made for people with HDTVs. That's why I figured the adoption rate among HDTV owners would be much higher.

I guess HDTV owners have too many other, cheaper options: again, iTunes HD content, Netflix streaming HD content, whatever HD-DVDs are still being sold, and as Scooterb23 pointed out, HD cable/satellite.



EDIT: It'll be interesting to see if HDTV owners continue to buy Blu-ray players or if the majority of them abandon the format in favor of HD streaming and/or downloads.


I think, and have no proof of this, that most people with an HDTV did not buy because it's HD. TVs go bad. If you're in the market for a new TV, you really have no choice anymore but to buy an HDTV. Also, many people have bought LCDs and plasmas because of their form factor, not HD. In both cases the TV being HD is a rider on. Those folks have no interest in HD content.