Blu ray is doing well even during the slow season

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No, not the format itself, but I was saying that Blu Ray players are still inferior to many DVD players. But I can excuse this since Blu Ray is a new technology.

Sorry man, but this is incorrect upon closer look. There is no DVD player that has the capacity to pass 60 mbps worth of video information, and 20 mbps for audio...ZERO. Every Blu ray player must be able to do that, from the most expensive, to the cheapo players. There are ZERO DVD players out there that can pass 8 channels of 24/192khz audio, but every Blu ray player must from the top of the line, down to the cheapo model must be able to, it is part of the specification for Blu ray.

Most TVs are HD, yes, but the average size being above 40"? Okay.. whoever did this survey is either far from reality or simply ignored the middle and lower class.

He is right when it comes to America. In the UK and pretty much all of Europe, the average screen sizes are from between 30-42". Here is the US, the average screen sizes where the most sales are stand from 40-55", with the top creeping to 60" in some cases. The smallest set in my house is 52", and the largest is a projection screen of 130". All of my displays are between these sizes. My best friend who almost never watches television has a 52" set. Everyone I know here has at least a 42" model. Just by looking in your audio and video magazines, it is apparent that screen sizes in Europe that are hot sellers are far smaller than the top selling models here.

[klif570]

Sorry man, but this is incorrect upon closer look. There is no DVD player that has the capacity to pass 60 mbps worth of video information, and 20 mbps for audio...ZERO. Every Blu ray player must be able to do that, from the most expensive, to the cheapo players. There are ZERO DVD players out there that can pass 8 channels of 24/192khz audio, but every Blu ray player must from the top of the line, down to the cheapo model must be able to, it is part of the specification for Blu ray.

Haha, well obviously you can turn it round any way you like.. Blu-Ray players can play Blu Ray discs..wow! No one said they can't pass 60mbps.. what I said was that with poor loading times, poor CD quality playback, and may I add, firmware issues, they are inferior to DVD players. Simple

He is right when it comes to America. In the UK and pretty much all of Europe, the average screen sizes are from between 30-42". Here is the US, the average screen sizes where the most sales are stand from 40-55", with the top creeping to 60" in some cases. The smallest set in my house is 52", and the largest is a projection screen of 130". All of my displays are between these sizes. My best friend who almost never watches television has a 52" set. Everyone I know here has at least a 42" model. Just by looking in your audio and video magazines, it is apparent that screen sizes in Europe that are hot sellers are far smaller than the top selling models here.

Probably does make sense when I take into account that around 15% people in the US are below povery line, they probably don't even have TVs. Most of the rest is the '' I'm better than you'' type and buy as large as they can.. even if they almost never use it..like your friend. Did you suggest he buys Blu Ray already?

Smoke comes from a different perspective than Wooch and I. My pal does not have a Blu ray player yet(get on the ball Smoke!!!)

Exactly what a Blu Ray fanboy would say.

And don't forget, the consumer is now seeing resolution that is equal to projected 35mm film, and getting audio as close to the master as we have ever been. Everyone wins here, not just Sony and Hollywood.

Sounds very good indeed. But I don't need to watch a TV show and see everyones pores on screen, thank you very much. I do agree however that sci-fi and live recordings are nice in the new format, which I won't be able to copy for my dear friends..ahhh.

I can tell you this right now, we are not going to another disc format ever.

Another fanboy thing. Same what people said when DVDs came along..

[klif570]

So I just went to Amazon and checked Blu Ray content..nearly 7000 titles! Impressive. Then I checked DVDs (and that excludes DVD n Blu combos) - nearly 400.000 Doesn't look like DVDs are going anytime soon

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So I just went to Amazon and checked Blu Ray content..nearly 7000 titles! Impressive. Then I checked DVDs (and that excludes DVD n Blu combos) - nearly 400.000 Doesn't look like DVDs are going anytime soon

While you are cherry picking your facts, I have some more for you. Naturally one format would have more titles than another when one is 13 years old and the other just barely four. Keep in mind wise one, there were far more titles on VHS than DVD four years after DVD hit, and VHS still died. I cannot tell you how many times I heard your line when DVD hit the market. People really do have short memories.

[pixelthis]

So I just went to Amazon and checked Blu Ray content..nearly 7000 titles! Impressive. Then I checked DVDs (and that excludes DVD n Blu combos) - nearly 400.000 Doesn't look like DVDs are going anytime soon

THIS is an exelent example of false logic.
You make a connection that is baseless(the number of discs out there) to how popular
and long lasting they will be, with no facts to support your supposition, and then declare it to be true, without proving anything.
Sound like a few on this board.
There were quite a few laserdiscs out there, took a year for them to leave.
Turntables are still out there, but the mass market disapeared overnight.
CAR SALES must be up , and there is a market for new cars.
Why? Every vacant lot in the country has new cars parked all over it.
Truth is one day broadband will "hatch", and hard medias' days will be numbered,
probably in months , if not days.
Also, you think that just because there are 400,000 titles out there that there is a market for that many discs.
The market is driven by demand, not by what manufacturers want to sell.
If they make too much of something, they are either stuck with it, or its freebie time.
Or they can be party poopers and burn the excess, like farmers did during the great depression.
How much of something there is has nothing to do with how long it will be around, how popular it is, or anything, really.
This is what happens when a bunch of socialist teachers, who understand nothing
about economics, try to teach it to students.
Get a book by MILTON FREIDMAN, or Harry Brown, anybody who is not a member
of the DEMOPUBLICAN party.
And when you learn basic economics, try to teach sir talky.
Then get back to me.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Haha, well obviously you can turn it round any way you like.. Blu-Ray players can play Blu Ray discs..wow! No one said they can't pass 60mbps.. what I said was that with poor loading times, poor CD quality playback, and may I add, firmware issues, they are inferior to DVD players. Simple

Poor loading times are a thing of the past with the newer players, and Pioneer and my PS3 make damn good CD players as do many others, don't really know what you are talking about, but you are entitled to your opinion. Firmware upgrades were not possible with DVD, and I would rather have a firmware upgrade than having to replace the player because it didn't function correctly, or you could not add a feature to it. Secondly, the only firmware upgrades I have had to do over the last year was to add features to an already feature rich product. I knew quite a few DVD players that were unsuitable for CD playback as well. Seems to me you enjoy making mountain out of a molehill, anyone who has updated a computer knows a firmware upgrade is a piece of cake. I could probably train my dog to do it.

Probably does make sense when I take into account that around 15% people in the US are below povery line, they probably don't even have TVs. Most of the rest is the '' I'm better than you'' type and buy as large as they can.. even if they almost never use it..like your friend. Did you suggest he buys Blu Ray already?

Nice. In your abundance of intelligence you managed to broadly(and inaccurately) describe many Americans character without meeting every American. This broad brush is almost as bad as saying folks that live in the UK do not know good food, or all have bad teeth. Neither of these kinds of comments describe all people in either country do they?

Many of us how have done well (and have worked damn hard) don't think we are better than anyone else. I personally am not defined by my job, salary, or the toys I have. I buy large screens because that is what I want, not because I want to be better than anyone else. My friend purchased his 52" television (and yes a PS3 as well) because it was a bargain, and because that is what he wanted, no matter how often he watches it. He has the right just as much as you do right?

According to the last records I have read from the Economic Research Council, 22% of you Brits are also below the poverty line as of the 2007/08 tally. I am not going to begin to say that they don't have televisions, just like you don't really know that those 15% of our poor don't have one. Assumption is an quick and easy way to make an a$$ out of yourself.

Exactly what a Blu Ray fanboy would say.

Most intelligent folks have no use for name calling and insults. I think this little snip of words tell a lot about you.

Sounds very good indeed. But I don't need to watch a TV show and see everyones pores on screen, thank you very much. I do agree however that sci-fi and live recordings are nice in the new format, which I won't be able to copy for my dear friends..ahhh.

I personally do not like to look at images that have been filtered and compressed to death, and then coated with generous doses of edge enhancement to attempt to sharpen what fuzzy mess is left after the filtering. I do not want to listen to lossy audio forever either, because that is the best the format can do. Limitations bug me, and DVD had a lot of them.

Sorry that your dear friends now have to actually buy what they watch. They may have to get a gym membership just to take the wallet out of their pockets and purchase a disc. Ahhhh to bad so sad.

Another fanboy thing. Same what people said when DVDs came along..

I am afraid you are wrong about that. Before DVD even came along, we in Hollywood were already trying to get a HD on disc format off the ground. The Warner and Toshiba alliance beat us to the punch with DVD, so we knew there was going to be another disc format after DVD. In conversations I have had with various fellow executives in Hollywood, it is pretty much universally agreed that we will not be another disc format after this. This is why Disney(the studio I work for) created Keychest, and the remaining studio created the DECE, better known as the Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem.

http://www.decellc.com/

http://www.gadgetell.com/tech/commen...-in-the-cloud/

No sir, I am afraid after Blu ray, we are done with the disc that is for sure. But while it is here, Hollywood intends are exploring the technology until there is nothing left to explore. As far as the DVD, well DVD players do not last forever. When they break and you go out to look for another player and discover there are Blu ray players that are just as cheap, and can play both DVD AND Blu ray disc, what do you think smart people will do? Over the Christmas holiday Blu ray players outsold DVD players here in the US, and while DVD sales are down 25% Blu ray sales are up 76%. Those of us who have been following consumer electronics for decades can really see the handwriting on the wall for DVD pretty easily. Those that love the taste of sand probably cannot see it very well.

[klif570]

anyone who has updated a computer knows a firmware upgrade is a piece of cake. I could probably train my dog to do it.

I would love to see that!

According to the last records I have read from the Economic Research Council, 22% of you Brits are also below the poverty line as of the 2007/08 tally. I am not going to begin to say that they don't have televisions, just like you don't really know that those 15% of our poor don't have one. Assumption is an quick and easy way to make an a$$ out of yourself.

Doesn't look like true facts to me. Most people I know are on medium income, while all Americans I've spoken to always mentioned how there are extremely rich areas and a few miles further - a latino town. Have you even heard about the two Americas thing? Or are you one of those stuck up snobs who'd rather pretend it's all nice?

Most intelligent folks have no use for name calling and insults. I think this little snip of words tell a lot about you.

Fanboy is not an insult, and if you are one, you will be called as such. You started this thread on how good Blu Ray sales are, and keep saying how Blu Ray is the last format ever.. what is it if not fanboyism? Haha thanks for the laugh.

And no need to compare VHS again, no one liked to sit and rewind those bulky things for 15 minutes.. If VHS was upgraded to, lets say, VHS-X, offering higher quality, do you think people would have switched the way they switched to DVDs? That's the point here why people upgraded and why VHS can't be compared to DVD. Blu Ray doesn't have this advantage over DVD.

So I've said pretty much all that I wanted. Those who agree with me will see my point, those who have bought Blu Ray probably don't want to see it. Sure, DVD format will be replaced, and so will Blu Ray..that's how it is with technology. But that's when time comes, and now with 400.000 DVDs vs 7000 Blu Ray on Amazon, I think we still have a long way to go.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I would love to see that!

So would I! LOL

Doesn't look like true facts to me.

Well, they have the statistic's to prove so, and I am just guessing, but you have not conducted your study on the issue have you?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...y-1831088.html

I think the words With 20 per cent of the population still stuck in poverty, the report calls for sweeping reform of the tax and welfare systems under which higher earners would finance more generous, universal benefits. sums it up nicely.

Most people I know are on medium income, while all Americans I've spoken to always mentioned how there are extremely rich areas and a few miles further - a latino town.

First as a Latino (and part British as well), I must take umbrage to the connotation of your usage of Latino town. Unfortunately the poor in this country come from many cultural backgrounds and races, not just the Latino culture. Southern Florida is full of pretty wealthy Latinos, and usually the wealthy dwell among the wealthy regardless of race or culture here. Just to correct you on some basic misconceptions, our poverty rate is 13.2% not 15%, and the poorest in this country are not Latinos.

Your misleading statement attempts to paint an inaccurate picture of America's income breakout. Even though it is shrinking, the middle class in this country represent the lion share of the population. However, our middle class has sub categories within it, but this is not the proper discussion to outline that.

Have you even heard about the two Americas thing?

I know it much better than you I suppose.

Or are you one of those stuck up snobs who'd rather pretend it's all nice?

My racial and cultural background would make that quite impossible.

Fanboy is not an insult, and if you are one, you will be called as such.

This kind of play ground like activity is below the radar for me, sorry. Senseless name calling is kids play, and an activity not worthy of mature intelligent adults. Labels are for people without the intellectual capacity to figure out subtleties and shades.

You started this thread on how good Blu Ray sales are, and keep saying how Blu Ray is the last format ever.. what is it if not fanboyism? Haha thanks for the laugh.

I started this thread to outline how Blu ray disc and player sales are bucking sales trends that extend back several decades in this country. I said that the Blu ray disc format will be the last disc format because it is the last disc format that Hollywood is willing to support. It is almost unanimous among the good people that work in film industry (of which I am one) and make those kinds of decisions in that the industry, it longer wants to support another disc based format after Blu ray sunsets. The next direction the industry is headed is cloud based digital downloads that are available on demand, that is where the industry is headed. Now every disc based technology that get's its 15 minutes of fame is not going to be used by the film community. Do you remember this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc

Optiware started working on this technology long before Blu ray and HD DVD were conceived, and it did not live up to the hype it created.

InPhase has been working on this since 2000, a full six years before Blu ray and HD DVD hit the market, and just when DVD was beginning to take traction. Guess what, 3 times the company has announced products, and three time they failed to deliver.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InPhase_Technologies

Or how about this goody that was supposed to be a Blu ray and HD DVD killer before they were even born. This was supposed to be what was going to replace DVD, but they could not get the 50GB version to work properly, so Sony and Toshiba went on with their plans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Multilayer_Disk

When the content owners say they are going to be through with disc based technology after Blu ray(and have shown they mean it by developing their own system of delivery), you can pretty much bet they mean it.

And no need to compare VHS again, no one liked to sit and rewind those bulky things for 15 minutes.. If VHS was upgraded to, lets say, VHS-X, offering higher quality, do you think people would have switched the way they switched to DVDs? That's the point here why people upgraded and why VHS can't be compared to DVD. Blu Ray doesn't have this advantage over DVD.

I think even your assumptions about VHS are probably off the mark as well. Hmmm, lets see...In the US, the penetration rate of those things you say no one liked was in 90% of households. My last VCR could rewind an entire T-180 tape back in about a minute, a far cry from your 15 minute comments. Hyperbole is often unhelpful in these kinds of discussions.

Unless your memory was cloudy, there were higher resolution sources in the market the same time as VHS was. It was called the Laserdisc. While it enjoyed a lot of popularity with videophiles, it was a resounding thud in the market place. Do you remember S-VHS? That would be your VHS-X. If my memory recalls, that was a resounding thud as well. So maybe folks made the switch for different reasons than you think. How about format maturity? You know, the thing that happens when all of the studios back catalog titles in their vaults have already been released time and time again, much like what has happened with DVD. Sales began to slide on both blank and pre recorded movie tapes, and every one in the food chain began to scramble for another cash cow that VHS was. De ja vu, it is happening all over again. See a trend here?

So I've said pretty much all that I wanted. Those who agree with me will see my point, those who have bought Blu Ray probably don't want to see it. Sure, DVD format will be replaced, and so will Blu Ray..that's how it is with technology. But that's when time comes, and now with 400.000 DVDs vs 7000 Blu Ray on Amazon, I think we still have a long way to go.

Your constant citation of 400,000 of mostly inactive titles is both misleading, and at the same time irrelevant. Your look is a reverse look of DVD, not a forward look. The DVD marketplace is not selling all of those 400,000 titles or we would not be seeing year over year declines in sales since 2005. The only things selling right now is the top 100 most recently released titles according to my copy of NDP. The rest of those 399,900 titles are basically collecting dust, and are a mere pittance of overall DVD sales. Funny, that was the same thing happen to VHS in 1997 when good ole DVD hit the marketplace.

With only 7000 titles, Blu ray has a pretty long future ahead of it. Even if there are never 400,000 Blu ray titles on the market, Blu ray will do quite well. It does not have to rely on a vast amount of catalog titles to succeed, it has all these other things to bring to the table other than just titles - things that could have never been done on DVD. D-Box, 3D, 4K, high resolution music and the use of meta data extension for more audio channels already built into the format gives it far more room to grow than good ole DVD every had.

These formats are just like actors. They enjoy their celebrity for a time, and then they fade away as they age to be replaced by something younger, sexier, and generally more appealing. While there are old things that can live (like vinyl) their best years are behind them, not in front of them. Some folks minds are like that as well.

[klif570]

Well, they have the statistic's to prove so, and I am just guessing, but you have not conducted your study on the issue have you?

As they say, lies, damn lies and statistics.. Sometimes they are far from the truth.

I think the words With 20 per cent of the population still stuck in poverty, the report calls for sweeping reform of the tax and welfare systems under which higher earners would finance more generous, universal benefits. sums it up nicely.

Claiming benefits doesn't really mean that people live in poverty. It's different in every country, but even if you have a minimum-average salary you are in many cases still entitled to benefits in the UK. Could they define poverty I wonder? One might be poor because he doesn't have a TV, or one might be poor because he/she is a single parent and can't work.

Just to correct you on some basic misconceptions, our poverty rate is 13.2% not 15%, and the poorest in this country are not Latinos.

And here it says it's 23.8%..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty...ther_countries

I know you gotta love statistics..

My racial and cultural background would make that quite impossible.

Good to hear that

My last VCR could rewind an entire T-180 tape back in about a minute, a far cry from your 15 minute comments.

1 minute or 15, the point here is that no one liked how inconvenient VHS were..and how much more DVDs had to offer, unlke Blu Ray, which only offers higher quality.

Hyperbole is often unhelpful in these kinds of discussions.

I was emphasising the point there. And in fact, compared to DVDs they did feel like taking 15 bloody minutes..and then you find out you just rewinded the wrong side haha...

Your constant citation of 400,000 of mostly inactive titles is both misleading, and at the same time irrelevant.

Fair enough, I can compare Lovefilm with over 60.000 DVDs and over 1000 Blu Ray..

Anyway, from what I've read it seems like Blu Ray is going to conquer the States much quicker than Europe

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

As they say, lies, damn lies and statistics.. Sometimes they are far from the truth.

Yes, and sometimes they are the truth, and you have folks in denial. Every source I read pointed to 20%+ poverty rate, they all can't be lies right?

Claiming benefits doesn't really mean that people live in poverty. It's different in every country, but even if you have a minimum-average salary you are in many cases still entitled to benefits in the UK. Could they define poverty I wonder? One might be poor because he doesn't have a TV, or one might be poor because he/she is a single parent and can't work.

The reasons one is poor is pretty irrelevant in this discussion. The with 20% of the population in poverty is.

And here it says it's 23.8%..


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty...ther_countries

I know you gotta love statistics..

Wikipedia is good for static or non movement information, but when you start to quote them for stats that change from year to year, it is completely unreliable. The reliability comes when a year the stats were derived from is clearly shown. You noticed that I went directly to an online version of your local news to get my information. Wiki does not state the year those stats were from, but mine stats pretty clearly it is from 2007-2008. The 13.2% poverty rate for the US is from 2008, and here is a wiki timeline that tracks the year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US...e_timeline.gif

1 minute or 15, the point here is that no one liked how inconvenient VHS were..and how much more DVDs had to offer, unlke Blu Ray, which only offers higher quality.

I think you missed my point. Folks do not buy products they find inconvenient, and they certainly do not buy 200 million of them world wide. Rewinding came with the turf, and frankly I never heard anyone complain about rewinding a tape since it was done automatically. The two main reasons I heard for moving to the new format was better quality, and smaller footprint when stored.

I was emphasising the point there. And in fact, compared to DVDs they did feel like taking 15 bloody minutes..and then you find out you just rewinded the wrong side haha...

I do not understand this, but okay. I didn't know there is a wrong side on VHS, the cartridge only had one way to fit in the player.

Fair enough, I can compare Lovefilm with over 60.000 DVDs and over 1000 Blu Ray..

Don't be ridiculous. 60,000 DVD titles are not active anywhere on this planet. According to my NDP report that covers world wide disc sales, only the last 100 released titles are active and generate revenue. The remaining titles basically are dormant, or selling just a small trickle of units. With Blu ray being a newer format, there are far more titles that are currently active than DVD according to my latest sales snapshot for the last quarter of 2009.

Anyway, from what I've read it seems like Blu Ray is going to conquer the States much quicker than Europe

This is par for the course for all AV formats that have been manufactured over the years, there is nothing new about this statement. DVD sales will drop quicker here, and last there, just like VHS did. VHS stayed active in Europe long after it died here in the states. DVD grew quicker in the states, and Europe was slow and last to adopt the format.

[kevlarus]

So would I! LOL
When the content owners say they are going to be through with disc based technology after Blu ray(and have shown they mean it by developing their own system of delivery), you can pretty much bet they mean it.

.
.

With only 7000 titles, Blu ray has a pretty long future ahead of it. Even if there are never 400,000 Blu ray titles on the market, Blu ray will do quite well. It does not have to rely on a vast amount of catalog titles to succeed, it has all these other things to bring to the table other than just titles - things that could have never been done on DVD. D-Box, 3D, 4K, high resolution music and the use of meta data extension for more audio channels already built into the format gives it far more room to grow than good ole DVD every had.

This is my issue with where the content holders are heading, vis a vis, episodes/movies downloaded to your device (blu/ps3/computer). So you have this huge storage device and X amount of movies etc. that you've bought. First, you'll need at least 2 of those devices so you can mirror them (IF the device supports that) -- if the drive ever dies (being electronic, it will at some point), you just lost all those movies. Now if the download allowed 1 copy to be burned (blu burners are just coming out now), then you get to have a physical copy to play at your leisure. I do not subscribe to the idea of a central repository of "did you buy this title" due to security concerns etc. etc. as most here should be aware.

And having DVDs around is a moot point. Writing is on the wall. Price differential between the players is dropping like a rock allowing the content producers to retire the DVD (as far as their concerned) for future releases. And, unfortunately, so many will think it cool/great to download movies over the internet. They'll prolly want to watch a copy of the HD/5.1 on their 1.25" cell phone over bluetooth or something crazy.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

This is my issue with where the content holders are heading, vis a vis, episodes/movies downloaded to your device (blu/ps3/computer). So you have this huge storage device and X amount of movies etc. that you've bought. First, you'll need at least 2 of those devices so you can mirror them (IF the device supports that) -- if the drive ever dies (being electronic, it will at some point), you just lost all those movies. Now if the download allowed 1 copy to be burned (blu burners are just coming out now), then you get to have a physical copy to play at your leisure. I do not subscribe to the idea of a central repository of "did you buy this title" due to security concerns etc. etc. as most here should be aware.

The studios are not going to support this model going forward. Keychest and DECE are streaming formats that will allow a viewer to purchase a "liscense" to view movies and televisions shows anywhere they want, on any device they want without downloading and storing it. So there is no need for big hard drives for storage or backup. If you bought a liscense for a Disney movie like Up, you will be able to watch it on cable, iphone, your Blu ray player, your computer, your mobile video device, or any other device that is capable of streaming video and audio. This is were we are headed going forward.

And having DVDs around is a moot point. Writing is on the wall. Price differential between the players is dropping like a rock allowing the content producers to retire the DVD (as far as their concerned) for future releases. And, unfortunately, so many will think it cool/great to download movies over the internet. They'll prolly want to watch a copy of the HD/5.1 on their 1.25" cell phone over bluetooth or something crazy.

You and I agree about DVD, the writing is on the wall for that format. Personally if people think it is cool to stream movies to the cell phone or mobile devices, I say more power to them, and they should be able to do it. It would not be my choice of how to view movies or televlsion programs, but for those who want it, I say they should be able to have it.

Digital sell through of movies I think it pretty dead at this point, but digital download renting is holding pretty steady.

HD is pretty useless on a 1.25" screen, there are not enough pixels in a screen that small to make HD useful.