Is that giant sucking sound Blu-Ray going down the drain?

[SCDVD]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=365&tag=nl.e550

Couldn't happen to a better company. Next time Sony, why don't you hire a real marketing person instead of a good-old-boy insider kiss ass? An entire book could be written on the many ways you guys actually worked at screwing it up for Blu-Ray. Well, congratulations; it worked!

[rumplestiltskin]

I love it. Now the fanboys of BluRay (and HDDVD, as it had the same misconceptions) can post their arguments why they want to dump more of their money down the toilet.

DL'd videos on my AppleTV look great on my 32" LCDTV. I can store 1000 movies on one hard drive and copy them over to my AppleTV as needed (or simply stream from my Mac to my AppleTV).

I haven't viewed a DVD in over a year; my DVD player and my VCR are starting to look like my old MacPlus - interesting technology in their day but their day has gone bye-bye.

[ricoman]

Yeah, well one article prediction hardly makes it a done deal. I have a 50" and 32" HDTV and on the big screen the BD makes a difference. More people are buying HDTVs and after this Christmas season, Bluray players. BD movies are already just a few dollars more than regular DVDs and if you keep an eye out, there are plenty of sales. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for BD to die. Now if only blank discs and burners would come down...
To quote Samuel Clemens: "Rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

[rumplestiltskin]

Loss leaders are always cheap swill. HDTVs will sell because no one is carrying anything but HDTVs. The mfr's aren't making SDTVs because it's a pain (and more expensive) to make a tube TV that will play ATSC content.

BluRay isn't selling where I live. Big TVs are; Digital cable is; Digital satellite is.

I hope you enjoy your BluRay copy of DieHard4 the next thousand times you watch it.

[SCDVD]

Yeah, well one article prediction hardly makes it a done deal. I have a 50" and 32" HDTV and on the big screen the BD makes a difference. More people are buying HDTVs and after this Christmas season, Bluray players. BD movies are already just a few dollars more than regular DVDs and if you keep an eye out, there are plenty of sales. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for BD to die. Now if only blank discs and burners would come down...
To quote Samuel Clemens: "Rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

[ricoman]

Loss leaders are always cheap swill. HDTVs will sell because no one is carrying anything but HDTVs. The mfr's aren't making SDTVs because it's a pain (and more expensive) to make a tube TV that will play ATSC content.

BluRay isn't selling where I live. Big TVs are; Digital cable is; Digital satellite is.

I hope you enjoy your BluRay copy of DieHard4 the next thousand times you watch it.

No need to get nasty Rumpledforeskin, I was merely making an observation and giving a different opinion. Why are you fanatics so bitter like you take it personal or something? What the hell do you care if BD or HD or whatever makes it or not? Mostyly I rent bluray discs, cost me no more than a regular dvd. I got my player cheap on ebay. All I know is that I rented Ironman and the Hulk bluray from Blockbuster and they looked and sounded terrific on my 50 incher. And I don't drink coolaid, that's for children. I had a nice brew and a cigar while I watched the movies. Have a nice day!

[poisondeathray]

I agree Sony screwed up.

But Blu-Ray quality on newer releases is top notch. I am willing to pay for that - not a fanboi, just a fan of quality.

I love it. Now the fanboys of BluRay (and HDDVD, as it had the same misconceptions) can post their arguments why they want to dump more of their money down the toilet.

DL'd videos on my AppleTV look great on my 32" LCDTV. I can store 1000 movies on one hard drive and copy them over to my AppleTV as needed (or simply stream from my Mac to my AppleTV).

I haven't viewed a DVD in over a year; my DVD player and my VCR are starting to look like my old MacPlus - interesting technology in their day but their day has gone bye-bye.

Guess what source your "downloaded" videos that "look great" came from?

AppleTV is a joke. 720p. AVC Main. 5mpbs max. It can't even play it's own Apple HD Movie trailers because of these limitations - LOL you might as well stick to DVD

At least use a PS3 or XBOX360, that way you can get full 1080p and AVC High

[PuzZLeR]

Guess what source your "downloaded" videos that "look great" came from?

Are you sure about this? If iTunes movies were encoded from BD or DvD their value would be worthless (maybe even illegal).

I would think even iTunes movies come from the same source as BD's (even DvD's) source - the uncompressed Master itself. It's only the limited specs of AppleTV that yield weaker quality, not the source.

Which leads to the next point.

AppleTV is a joke. 720p. AVC Main. 5mpbs max. It can't even play it's own Apple HD Movie trailers because of these limitations - LOL you might as well stick to DVD

I fully agree. I HATED mine and gave it away last year. H.264 Main Profile without CABAC, and no anamorphic, etc, makes AppleTV very similar to an economy car disguised (and priced) as an awesome sports car - either get a real sports car or save your money and get a real economy car...

Don't listen to those stories of some of the complex (or hacked) content working - it won't on every box, and not without the occasional stutter at best. And it's NOT guaranteed by Apple...

I'm no "fanboi" either, but I'm cheering for BD to succeed for the same reasons as Poisondeathray's - may the best quality win.

[deadrats]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=365&tag=nl.e550

Couldn't happen to a better company. Next time Sony, why don't you hire a real marketing person instead of a good-old-boy insider kiss ass? An entire book could be written on the many ways you guys actually worked at screwing it up for Blu-Ray. Well, congratulations; it worked!

preposterous!!! one lousy article does not the end of blu-ray make. HD downloads? that's what they think will take the place of blu-ray? here's a question for whoever believes that crap: a full quality 90 minute movie, at 1080p, is somewhere in the region of 30 gigs in size, who the hell has a internet connection fat enough to allow them to download such a file in a reasonable amount of time? i've downloaded a couple of full blu-ray rips and it took days, even with a cable connection. and then there's this reality, once you download it, where are you going to watch it? on your 22" monitor? please!!! people are going to want to burn it to disk and view it on their 40"+ HDTV's.

the reason blu-ray sales are kind of sluggish are simple really:

most of the current blu-rays are re-releases of movies long ago released on dvd and no one wants to repurchase the same movie, especially since the movie was originally shot on lesser quality film and then authored from said inferior masters. however with newer releases, such as resident evil 3, bram stoker's dracula, pirates of the caribbean, spiderman and the x-men, that were filmed on the highest quality film and authored to 1080p from pristine masters, the difference is profound and given the choice between buying the movie on dvd or blu-ray, one would have to be nuts to buy the dvd version.

and yes, i'm talking from experience, i own those blu-rays, have watched them with my PS3 on my HDTV and you are nuts if you think an upscaled dvd or watching them on my pc can compare.

[guns1inger]

Guess what source your "downloaded" videos that "look great" came from?

Are you sure about this? If iTunes movies were encoded from BD or DvD their value would be worthless (maybe even illegal).

I believe the implication is that these files were not downloaded through a legitimate source such as iTunes, but perhaps via a more dubious channel. In which case they would most certainly have been take from BD sources in most cases.

[PuzZLeR]

Guess what source your "downloaded" videos that "look great" came from?

Are you sure about this? If iTunes movies were encoded from BD or DvD their value would be worthless (maybe even illegal).

I believe the implication is that these files were not downloaded through a legitimate source such as iTunes, but perhaps via a more dubious channel. In which case they would most certainly have been take from BD sources in most cases.

My comments were assuming legal content available for AppleTV since I personally don't care for the other stuff. But, having said that, for "questionable" content, then I fully agree with Poisondeathray.

[wulf109]

I wonder what 1920x1080 would look like on a SD DVD in regular vob,ifo,etc files. A DL disk does provide 7.95GBs. On many retail disks the movie is 5.0-5.5GBs,the rest is special features.

[poisondeathray]

Yes Gunslinger is correct, I meant it as a joke anyway... hence "downloaded" quotation marks....

Blu-ray will be here for at least a few years, and I agree with deadrats' comments. The situation (at least in Canada & US) is that the infrastructure cannot handle massive downloads. Not every has a 100/100 FiOS connection. People are spread far apart, unlike denser regions like Tokyo, for example. So your monthy 60GB bandwidth limit will allow you, what, 1-2 movies a month?...but oops ran over the cap so can't use e-mail or surf now... In principle, the internet distribution system for HD movies is great, but we won't have it for a few years at least.

[PuzZLeR]

I wonder what 1920x1080 would look like on a SD DVD in regular vob,ifo,etc files. A DL disk does provide 7.95GBs. On many retail disks the movie is 5.0-5.5GBs,the rest is special features.

Well, it would look like, well, a DvD! :P

But, jokes aside, if DvD can handle that higher rez you could get great quality for about a 20 minute movie on one DL. You'd need to go more modern than MPEG-2, such as using H.264 or VC-1, to get 30-50 minutes.

Most encoding BD content on DvD-DL would go with 720p and H.264 to fit a full movie at very respectable quality.

[poisondeathray]

I wonder what 1920x1080 would look like on a SD DVD in regular vob,ifo,etc files. A DL disk does provide 7.95GBs. On many retail disks the movie is 5.0-5.5GBs,the rest is special features.

You can't with regular DVD spec. (vob's ifo etc...) Max is 720x480 for NTSCland

If you meant make an AVCHD (h264) disc from a blu-ray source to a DVD9 playable on a standalone blu-ray player or PS3, yes you can do that.

[PuzZLeR]

@Poisondeathray: We do indeed live in a very big country with very little per capita population. And as for bandwidth limits, I would bet you're referring to Rogers - it took them two years to finally come out of the closet and admit to their ceilings after they couldn't hide them any longer. It wasn't only overall quantity, but quantity limits PER FILE. At one point, I had difficulties just downloading (legal) content that was only 20MBs.

It's too bad. I kind of enjoyed blasting them about it. I didn't really care that much for the downloads, just that I loved listening to their reps squirm. Now it's no longer any fun when they actually tell you you're capped...

Anyhow, I don't see full quality HD downloads being smoothly realistic for some time yet on this side of the ocean. In the meantime, BD is the only feasible solution for high quality, legal, and nicely delivered TRUE HD quality content.

[orsetto]

Just a little perspective from someone still connected to the retail side of things: BluRay is a dog at retail. The only reason the players suddenly dropped like a stone is to keep pace with the expected dramatic drop in 42-50" displays next month. While BluRay is saddled with a number of unnecessary albatrosses courtesy Sony, at this point any HiDef disc alternative would still be a hard sell. The studios don't really want to spend the money for *proper* HiDef mastering or remastering, which is leading to a lot of consumer blowback from the very collectors and gearheads the studios are courting. Consistency is sorely lacking: for every "Spiderman" there's a "Journey To The Center Of The Earth". And that's just the new releases- catalog is far worse, and catalog is what the studios balance their books with. Catch-22.

That's not to say BluRay isn't making inroads: it is, slowly, and if the economy were still booming it might have turned around by now. The biggest current problem is that the most successful penetration of BluRay is via NetFlix rentals, which is the worst-case scenario for the studios. For BluRay to become a solid profit center, Hollywood needs it to be the dominant format at Blockbuster and for WalMart to sell it through at DVD rates. Cultural trends indicate this won't happen anytime soon, consumers are opting for a smorgasboard of HD delivery options while holding to standard DVD as the no-brainer default video format. HD media (BluRay or otherwise) will not be replacing DVD anywhere near as quickly as DVD replaced VHS or CD supplanted LPs and cassettes.

[guns1inger]

There were three main reasons that laser disc didn't take off

1. Expense - it was far too expensive to purchase media, especially when compared to the reigning format of the time, VHS.

2. Is was, for the most part, presented in the original aspect ratio. When so many people still hate widescreen today, or struggle with the fact that they still get black bars on their new widescreen TV (or worse, watch 4:3 stretched from side to side to fill the screen), how must it have been in the days of P&S VHS ?

3. Most people were happy enough with VHS quality, and didn't really care about the extras that came, especially given the difference in cost to get them. It simply wasn't perceived as value for money.

So what has changed ?

1. BluRay is more expensive than DVD. Yes, the differences aren't as great as they were (and this has been addressed by pushing the retail cost of DVDs back up to close the gap in our market), but BD is still higher than the pocket change range that DVDs had come down to. BD players have now come down to under AUD$400, but they are still 4 times the cost of mid-range upscaling DVD player.

2. While most people are used to widescreen as a concept, they still aren't all that fussed about extras. While the number of LCDs and plasma screens in the home is growing very quickly, the proportion of quality screens is relatively low. Most are buying very cheap plasma and LCDs at sub 1080p resolutions and with low-end processing engines.

3. On these cheap televisions, with a AUD$100 upscaling DVD player, the quality difference between DVD and BD doesn't justify the cost. Keep in mind that a full changeover means a new TV, new player and new amplifier if you want a full 1080p multichannel HDMI flow.

The members of this forum do not represent the great unwashed. For the most part we are far more literate and appreciative of the quality differences, and understanding of how video can look, how it should be displayed etc. The proportion of luddites to the enlightened here is probably close the exact opposite of the real world. Out there people have brought a widescreen HDTV because they have been told that the football/soccer/cricket/olympics etc will look better. Most won't actually see the difference between BD and upscaled DVD, certainly not in a way that represents value for money. I know too many people who have compromised quality for size, and bought a low quality 50" instead of a high quality 40". And it shows.

I haven't brought into BluRay yet, simply because my life has other priorities, and the value proposition has not be right. I can certainly see the difference, and some of the recent releases have been jaw dropping in their quality. As the price continues to fall, I will step into the arena - assuming of course that BD still exists (said with sarcasm, as I don't see it disappearing soon).

It is unreasonable to think that BD will be adopted at the same rate that DVD was. And even with DVD, it took quite a while before the general masses began buying it in earnest. And until BD offers more to the general viewer than just better image quality, or falls into the impulse buy space, it won't be sen as a must have item. Until then, for most people, DVD is still good enough.

[videopoo]

Well Said Gunslinger!

[festmaster]

It's not just the quality of the upscaling DVD players that will keep BluRay from becoming mainstream, it is also the cheap $25 DVD players that people put on their 2nd, 3rd and 4th TV's that will keep them from putting buying BluRay disks. I can envision eventually buying at BluRay player ($75 is my current price level) for my 50 inch TV to play rentals, but I cannot envision buying any disks. I want any disks I purchase to work on every player and DVD is the only format that will do that. Even when I eventually replace the 19 inch TV's in the bedrooms with ATSC flat panels, they will still be only 19 inches and BluRay will offer absolutely no advantage over DVD for that size picture.

[rumplestiltskin]

Sorry that someone had problems with their AppleTV. I have not. In fact, I've patched it so it now has the Perian and WMV components so anything that plays on my Mac now also plays on my AppleTV (and, therefore, my 720p TV).

I'm not going to get into the horsepower arguments of "my 1080p is bigger than your 720p". Let's just say my 720p provides exceptional performance with 720p media (from podcasts and other sources) and, with the AppleTV, it plays things that will probably never be available on BluRay because knowledge-industry items (have you seen how many videos there are to watch through the iTunes store?) rarely have the profit potential necessary for George Lucas to find a reason to re-edit his lame special effects into (see Star Wars, THX1138).

I think I didn't articulate my point in my previous post. I was not getting nasty; rather, my comment about watching Die Hard 4 a thousand times was aimed at the absurd notion that someone would actually want to [i]own[i/] a BluRay video and pay good money to do so. The garbage films sold at $5 are worth their price (well, maybe not). Rather than spending money on a static library of videos, would it not make more sense to connect ones TV to the Internet and gather not only entertainment but knowledge, news, etc.?

We'll see which way it goes but I'm betting that the golden convergence won't be stopped by the studios putting their muscle behind Bluray.

Ciao!

[DereX888]

lemme see what is this fuss about

Right from the start:

Blu-ray is in a death spiral. 12 months from now Blu-ray will be a videophile niche, not a mass market product.

What a bullshit.
Blu IS A NICHE and always has been.
12mths from now it will be in the same niche, with maybe 1% of more users.

With only a 4% share of US movie disc sales and HD download capability arriving,

4% share of disc sales is actually high considering not even 1% of households have a BR player.
And "HD download capability" is arriving where exactly? In USA?! ROTFL!
You can't even download SD quality highly compressed videos at current "broadband" speeds as delivered on average by crappy american ISPs and you dream of HD quality downloads? In next 12mths?! Bwahahahahaha!!!

$150 Blu-ray disc players are a good start, but it won’t take Blu-ray over the finish line. The BDA is stuck in the past with a flawed five-year-old strategy.

Another delusion. What 5-yr strategy?! Something either sells or it doesn't!
Yes, those who don't know the history are bound to repeat the same mistakes... but NO ONE knows what becomes hit or miss for sure, regardless of "strategy".
If anything, we can only base some assumptions on the previous similar history tidbits, thats all.
For example DVD sales din't took off not until the dvd players dropped below $100, but until the new movies on DVD discs cost the same (and few even less) as the same on VHS. Yet it doesn't mean the history will repeat itself exactly the same in BR case either.
In general consumers are not stupid. They'd probably buy even $200 BR players *if* the movies in this format cost the same or less as DVDs, assuming they already have HD TV. Contrary to what you might think, 'people' CAN count their money... but I can't stress it enough: the key is HD TV sets here, not the quality or price of BR discs and players. Until at least half of the households is "HD TV ready" (HD tv sets and HD cable/broadcast) they are not going to buy any BR players or discs. Obviously there is no advantage (as it was with DVDs) to use HD player on a SD TVs.
Currently no country in the world has HD TV dominating its market. Most of the world doesn't even have HD TV (I know, Africa and such technological shitholes don't count for tech progress even if half mankind is living in a "third world" - 'scuse my political incorrectness here but its true).
10 years from now we can talk about HD... Blu won't be here anymore by then.

and so on... not to mention crap like AppleTV (what a freaking joke LOL)
it is such bullshit post that I don't even have mood to analyze it or discuss it further.

(and I am huge *antifan* of Blu and S*ny Corp. if anyone asks)


/edit:

Robin Harris has been selling and marketing data storage for over 20 years in companies large and small

I retract my statement about 'people not being stupid'. Clearly there are plenty of idiots if such bullshitter like this guy could sell his bullshit for over 20 years

[PuzZLeR]

$150 Blu-ray disc players are a good start, but it won’t take Blu-ray over the finish line. The BDA is stuck in the past with a flawed five-year-old strategy.

Another delusion. What 5-yr strategy?! Something either sells or it doesn't!
Yes, those who don't know the history are bound to repeat the same mistakes... but NO ONE knows what becomes hit or miss for sure, regardless of "strategy". If anything, we can only base some assumptions on the previous similar history tidbits, thats all.

You make some fine points, except here IMO. "Strategy" isn't just "strategy" and a blind hit-or-miss, or should be based on history alone (this could be death). A proper strategy is one that can bend and stretch according to (mostly unexpected) changes. This is what the author has a point in I believe - a failure of Sony to implement an emergent strategy.

[DereX888]

$150 Blu-ray disc players are a good start, but it won’t take Blu-ray over the finish line. The BDA is stuck in the past with a flawed five-year-old strategy.

Another delusion. What 5-yr strategy?! Something either sells or it doesn't!
Yes, those who don't know the history are bound to repeat the same mistakes... but NO ONE knows what becomes hit or miss for sure, regardless of "strategy". If anything, we can only base some assumptions on the previous similar history tidbits, thats all.

You make some fine points, except here IMO. "Strategy" isn't just "strategy" and a blind hit-or-miss, or should be based on history alone (this could be death). A proper strategy is one that can bend and stretch according to (mostly unexpected) changes. This is what the author has a point in I believe - a failure of Sony to implement an emergent strategy.

I didnt want to elaborate, but I add bit more what I think.
I dont know what S*ny's 5-yr strategy is (if any), but it seems to me that whatever it was it should be either at its EOL (end of life) since we hear about Blu for more than 5 years (feels like decade actually since it was soooooooooo long in the making), or it wasn't 'updated' after the HD-DVD death (which was actually very first ever market war won by S*ny format Historians will note it as Pyrrhic victory I bet ) or there was no any plans/strategy at all (which seems normal for all S*ny 'innovations' if judging from the history, starting with Beta...).
I don't know, but obviously whatever strategy there was or is (or not) for Blu, it CANNOT work because BR players (thus its disc media as well) are just *an accessory* for a high-def television sets, it cannot exist and sell on its own (like DVD players did) hence without boost in parallel sale of HD TV sets there can't be any life for BR outside of miniscule videophiles' niche at all (exactly as it is now). It will become a modern LD. And that was my point. HD TV sets first. S*ny, as one of the largest tv set manufacturers in the world (well, not a manufacturer per se anymore, but you know what i mean) should have been pushing high-def television sets since probably 5 years ago, but it did nOT. As I recall my trips over EU & Asian countries about 4-5-6 years ago, all I saw in stores that resembled "HD" were widescreen *SD* tv sets (even tube ones in the sizes far below 30'' - something unseen in NA, I bet my post about it is still here because I wanted one for my bedroom LOL) while I already had HD-ready (albeit not so ready as it turned out later) widescreen large plasma. And I observed very same in Asia back then too.
So let me recap it: if S*ny had any "5-yr strategy" for BR, it could have been existing only as a part of their HD TV sets rollout strategy. But as we know, just few years old HD TV sets from same S*ny manufacturers are incompatible with S*ny BR players from past 2 years, which tells us simple truth: there isn't and never was any 5-year, nor midterm, nor probably even shorterm strategies at all
It's a S*ny after all They can afford it

Regardless of me being right or wrong, I am sure that by the time HD TV sets are common in *most* households of NA, the Blu will be already replaced with some newer/better format (maybe by S*ny itself even!)
I think Toshiba realised that too and that's why they threw in the towel so quick. Obviously Toshiba is no S*ny, they have no unlimited resources to keep production and marketing of a device and format that *may* finally become popular years later. Toshiba was too small for that, but S*ny can afford it easily (thus who knows - maybe even Blu will still be here in 10 years from now? It all depends on whom and what better format will try to market against it)


IMHO both HD-DVD and BR were doomed from start because they appeared on the market ahead of times, in the world dominated by happy users of SD resolution.
Had the "big american switch" to digital television (and its byproduct - push for High-Def television) had it happened 5 years ago instead of next year, both formats probably would have skyrocket in sales piggybacking on sales of new HD TV sets (specially that officially we weren't in financial shithole back then yet). I think it couldn't have been worse timing for any new format to try to conquer the market than it is now, and even mighty S*ny can't do anything about it.

[yoda313]

a full quality 90 minute movie, at 1080p, is somewhere in the region of 30 gigs in size, who the hell has a internet connection fat enough to allow them to download such a file in a reasonable amount of time? i'

Yep thats a problem with hd downloads right now. It's just too massive and not enough people have super fast internet connections.

I think Bluray will hang around for awhile. Once hdtvs truly saturate the market people will be ready to invest in a new format. It will take some time though. After they get used to widescreen and free ota they will migrate to bluray high def. It will just take time.

I think it would be fool hardy for anyone think to another high def format will come out anytime soon. Even if its SONY itself. Its just not feasible right now.

[DVWannaB]

WOW, surprised some of you are willing to fall on your swords in some fanatical belief that BD is dead. I dont own a BD player of any movies as they are too darn expensive. I didnt buy a DVD player until around 2001/2002, which was maybe some 4 years after acceptance.

From my perspective two things stand out above a bunch of others, with some that I cant probably see, and that is we in the USA are in a recession and folks are watching their spending. A BD player, BD movie and even HDTVs are luxuries at this point in time. People are not going to be running out there to buy these things over the next number of months. Second thing is we are still in the adoption phase of a new technology. People are going to be comfortable with what they have for sometime. Until such time when the economy starts to pick up and people start having confidence in their own future earnings and the prices of the new technology becomes palatable, it is not going to be a market winner. Lets revisit whether BD is a champ or chump around 2010/2011.

[SCDVD]

"Strategy" isn't just "strategy" and a blind hit-or-miss, or should be based on history alone (this could be death). A proper strategy is one that can bend and stretch according to (mostly unexpected) changes. This is what the author has a point in I believe - a failure of Sony to implement an emergent strategy.

I think that is a very insightful point. Strategies have to be managed and adjusted as market realities and other factors change. I believe that one of the reasons companies can't make mid course adjustments to strategy is their internal politics. Perceived "orders from on high" prevent operating management from making strategy adjustments for fear they will be criticized (or even fired). Often very large companies have plans with lofty titles such as - "Corporate Strategic Road Map" blah, blah, blah. These "master plans" can severely constrain those responsible for individual products and marketing strategies for those products. So even if they have the good sense to know that certain marketing strategies need to be changed to adapt to market conditions, they can find that they are not allowed to make adjustments because it doesn't fit the overall corporate "master plan."

[joecass]

Interesting how heated the discussion gets concerning Blu Ray. Reminds me of the digital/analog debate that went on for years when audio CD's came out. I think the whole 'digital' video revolution is all nonsense designed to extract hard earned cash from an unsuspecting public.
Though I'm very happy with all my electronic gadgets, I still have no option to record HDTV unless I rent an HD dvr from my cableco. Using a
high end computer to record HDTV sounds like a cumbersome and expensive proposition. Same goes for buying Blu Ray players and movies.
I haven't rented anything from Blockbuster or Netflix in years. Makes no sense anymore. Download HD content over the Internet ? Out of the question. If it were fast, convenient and able to be archived onto an inexpensive disc, I'd consider it. But, HDCP gets in the way. What was the purpose of inventing High Definition video if all you can do is watch ?
I'm sure as hell not gonna go out and spend $300 on a Blu Ray player and possibly $25-$30 on ONE movie that I will watch...... once.
So, if Blu Ray dies like Toshiba's HD DVD did, who really cares ?
Someone needs to invent ONE machine that does everything..... play, record and copy HD content onto hdd, disc, tape or some new media that can handle anything and be backwards compatible with what we own now.
Toshiba came out with some newly designed machines in Japan that do it all, in HD format. HDD, HD burner/player, digital tuner, backward compatible with standard DVD's. Matsushita (Panasonic) is a step below Sony, they have the capability, but won't step up to the plate. So whatever happens with Blu Ray, you either go with it or wait for the next so-called revolution.

[videopoo]

Someone needs to invent ONE machine that does everything..... play, record and copy HD content onto hdd, disc, tape or some new media that can handle anything and be backwards compatible with what we own now.
Toshiba came out with some newly designed machines in Japan that do it all, in HD format. HDD, HD burner/player, digital tuner, backward compatible with standard DVD's. Matsushita (Panasonic) is a step below Sony, they have the capability, but won't step up to the plate. So whatever happens with Blu Ray, you either go with it or wait for the next so-called revolution.

Good luck trying to convince Hollywood Studios! LOL

The real underlying problem are the Studios....they just won't accept any deliver with out some form of DRM attached to it.

[PuzZLeR]

Well, due to this thread, I will now pick up an up-sampling DvD player this Boxing Day as I do my Annual Rape & Pillage of electronics stores. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that blu-ray is the ultimate "real" experience, and this "simulation" would only be for my existing DvD content, but I've never seen one in action and I'm just curious.

Does it really improve DvD that much? Does it only work with MPEG-2 streams? What about DivX streams (or other MPEG-4) if the player is DivX Certified? Would this tech also enhance this content? I imagine it would need more processing. (Shall I ask about H.264 players that should be out sometime in the future...?)

I just want to know what to expect since the info available is simplistic and rather "consumer-centered", which doesn't benefit anyone in this forum. I would much rather hear a brighter opinion from here.

Thanks for any feedback.