-
Blu ray is doing well even during the slow season
Generally year to year the period between the 1st and 2nd quarters of the year disc sales slow after the holiday season. This year was not any different for DVD, but Blu ray sales have bucked the trend this year. While over 300 million disc where sold in the last two months of last year, disc sales were also up for the first two months of this year, holding a steady pace equal to the before holiday sales. What is astonishing is the Blu ray market share of some of the biggest titles released this year. Star Trek had a whopping 73% share of the entire disc sales for this title coming from Blu ray. Up was 55% of the entire disc sales coming from Blu ray. Night at the Museum 2 had 68% of the entire disc sales coming from Blu ray, and Inglourious Basterds had 52% of the entire disc sales coming from Blu ray. Blu ray disc sales for the first two months of this year are up 76% over last year at this time. There is no doubt in my mind that Blu ray is no longer a niche product.
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=4245
-
Those are very surprising numbers for the Blu-ray share of total sales, given that the biggest percentages I'd seen before the holidays were still in the high-30% range. Also, the Nielson Videoscan YTD Blu-ray market split was still below 20% for the overall market, as of January.
This seems to indicate that at least for the big blockbuster movies, Blu-ray has made huge inroads. No doubt this trend benefited from the big disc price reductions on those new release titles during November and December, and the brisk sales of Blu-ray players and HDTVs during the holiday season. I have noticed that BD prices on new releases have gone back up for many titles, but you also have a larger selection of older catalog titles with reduced pricing.
Also, I think that the BD-DVD-Digital Copy combo packs have had at least some market impact. I see that with Disney titles, the digital copy codes can now be used to also access those titles online. Very smart approach.
I agree that Blu-ray is no longer a niche product, and that has been the case for probably more than a year. I think the big picture question now is how much longer the DVD format will remain viable.
My understanding is that sales of Blu-ray players surpassed those of DVD players almost a year ago. Now, you have higher end manufacturers like Oppo and Denon phasing out their DVD players. With Blu-ray price points on course to dip below $100 by the end of the year, mainline manufacturers will have little reason to continue making standalone DVD players once the price points get that close.
With the DVD format, the hardware sales for DVD players surpassed VCRs about two years before the DVD sales surpassed VHS tapes. And once that happened, it took about three years before the studios discontinued VHS releases. Understanding that the VHS and DVD pricing structures were completely different, and the situation with Blu-ray differs because BD players can also play DVDs, it would seem that the DVD format has about 4 or 5 years of viability left, if past trends serve as an accurate indicator.
-
I bet DVDs are here to stay - they're cheap to make, they're cheap to buy, and there's hundreds of thousands of films available in this format. DVD players however might become obsolete, but since Blue Ray spinners can play DVDs, the both formats will be just as widespread. I think it's quite logical, really..
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
I bet DVDs are here to stay - they're cheap to make, they're cheap to buy, and there's hundreds of thousands of films available in this format. DVD players however might become obsolete, but since Blue Ray spinners can play DVDs, the both formats will be just as widespread. I think it's quite logical, really..
I wouldn't bet on that. The key here is the year-to-year growth of the Blu-ray format, which has been about doubling every year. Studios and retailers alike do not like dual inventories. Once the DVD format reached majority status in 2003 (roughly two years after DVD player sales surpassed VCR sales), VHS got phased out very quickly even though more consumers at that point owned VCRs than DVD players. It was a forced migration, and the studios and retailers wanted that because there's little money to be made for anybody in supporting a rapidly declining format. I see a similar scenario playing out for the DVD format.
Those "hundreds of thousands of films available" (actual number is around 110,000) are the exact reason why the DVD will get phased out at some point. Consumers who want them have already bought them, which effectively caps the market demand for catalog titles on DVD, leaving new releases as the primary market. Yet for new releases, the trend has moved decidedly towards Blu-ray, and catalog titles are now the fastest growing segment for Blu-ray sales. The cut rate prices you see on DVD catalog titles are more a sign of weakening market demand than anything.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
I wouldn't bet on that. The key here is the year-to-year growth of the Blu-ray format, which has been about doubling every year. Studios and retailers alike do not like dual inventories. Once the DVD format reached majority status in 2003 (roughly two years after DVD player sales surpassed VCR sales), VHS got phased out very quickly even though more consumers at that point owned VCRs than DVD players. It was a forced migration, and the studios and retailers wanted that because there's little money to be made for anybody in supporting a rapidly declining format. I see a similar scenario playing out for the DVD format.
Those "hundreds of thousands of films available" (actual number is around 110,000) are the exact reason why the DVD will get phased out at some point. Consumers who want them have already bought them, which effectively caps the market demand for catalog titles on DVD, leaving new releases as the primary market. Yet for new releases, the trend has moved decidedly towards Blu-ray, and catalog titles are now the fastest growing segment for Blu-ray sales. The cut rate prices you see on DVD catalog titles are more a sign of weakening market demand than anything.
I see what you're saying, but I don't think VHS and DVD is a fair comparison. VHS is not even a disc, it's inconvenient to use, it's bulky, it's unattractive. DVD and Blu Ray are exactly the same apart from Blu Ray being higher quality. I see it more like SACD vs CD
-
By the way, has anyone heard of 5D DVD?
From wiki - "The 5D DVD, being developed in the Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia, uses a multilaser system to encode and read data on multiple layers. Disc capacities are estimated at up to 10 terabytes, and the technology could be commercially ready within ten years."
Looks like this war's never gonna end..
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
I see what you're saying, but I don't think VHS and DVD is a fair comparison. VHS is not even a disc, it's inconvenient to use, it's bulky, it's unattractive. DVD and Blu Ray are exactly the same apart from Blu Ray being higher quality. I see it more like SACD vs CD
Its not the disc, its the format that Wooch is commenting on. VHS was bulky, but people found a way to store them. When DVD came, THEN the hassle of storage became an issue when compared to those thin disc. Now DVD has matured, sales are slowing, nobody is making much money from it, and it is not secure, so it is a persistant target for piracy. Everyone wants it to go away, the studios, the retailers, and the manufacturers.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
By the way, has anyone heard of 5D DVD?
From wiki - "The 5D DVD, being developed in the Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia, uses a multilaser system to encode and read data on multiple layers. Disc capacities are estimated at up to 10 terabytes, and the technology could be commercially ready within ten years."
Looks like this war's never gonna end..
Then there is holodisc and several other high capacity disc technologies out there. Fugetaboutit! The Blu ray disc is the last movie on disc we will see. When the broadband community gets their act together, digital downloads will be the next step. However, Blu ray still has tons of life in it, and other uses as well.
The only way a new disc technology gets released to the market is when the studios approve of it. Nobody is talking about Blu ray's replacement in Hollywood. But we are preparing for a digital eco system that allows you to watch a movie on any display device, mobile or stationary, whenever you want.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Its not the disc, its the format that Wooch is commenting on.
Exactly my point - DVDs are discs, VHS are cassettes - two totally different mediums being compated. Of course no one wanted VHS when people could have the convenience of watching DVDs.
Now, DVDs and Blu-ray are exactly the same apart from quality.
If you like, Video CD and DVD is a much fairer comparison.
Of course DVDs will come to an end at one point, but not the same way VHS did.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
Exactly my point - DVDs are discs, VHS are cassettes - two totally different mediums being compated. Of course no one wanted VHS when people could have the convenience of watching DVDs.
Now, DVDs and Blu-ray are exactly the same apart from quality.
If you like, Video CD and DVD is a much fairer comparison.
Of course DVDs will come to an end at one point, but not the same way VHS did.
There is a long history of product introduction, and product sunset that supports the notion that DVD will disappear just like VHS did. First it starts with a newer better product being introduced. Then there is a period of co-existence where the new and the old get the same support. After a time, you see the extra content dropped from the older product as sales slide downwards, and the new product sales trend upward. Then the manufacturing support for the older product dries up as profits slide, and eventually the product is dropped. We already have two manufacturers who have or will stop making DVD players. We are already seeing extra content on Blu ray not found on DVD. All consumer product introduced in the last 40 years has undergone this type of lifespan. Cassettes to CD, VHS and Laserdisc to DVD, and now DVD to Blu ray.
VHS and DVD are both carriers of movies even if the technology was different. Whether it was on tape, or on a disc, they both carried movies to your house. They are both video formats, so it is quite a apple to apples comparison.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
There is a long history of product introduction, and product sunset that supports the notion that DVD will disappear just like VHS did. First it starts with a newer better product being introduced. Then there is a period of co-existence where the new and the old get the same support. After a time, you see the extra content dropped from the older product as sales slide downwards, and the new product sales trend upward. Then the manufacturing support for the older product dries up as profits slide, and eventually the product is dropped. We already have two manufacturers who have or will stop making DVD players. We are already seeing extra content on Blu ray not found on DVD. All consumer product introduced in the last 40 years has undergone this type of lifespan. Cassettes to CD, VHS and Laserdisc to DVD, and now DVD to Blu ray.
In short, it'll get replaced by the new technology, like everything else. When the time comes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
VHS and DVD are both carriers of movies even if the technology was different. Whether it was on tape, or on a disc, they both carried movies to your house. They are both video formats, so it is quite a apple to apples comparison.
As for this, they are both ''apples'' if you can't tell the difference between VHS and DVD.
The main reasons people upgraded from VHS are 1. size 2. ease of use 3 much better quality.
Now let's compare DVDs vs Blu Ray ones again:
1. They are exactly the same in (physical) size.
2. They are equally easy to use...oh wait, Blu Ray can't be coppied and they take longer to load, Blu Ray laser life is even shorter than that of DVD, CD playback is rubbish too ..but let's still say they are the same.
3. And finally, the only advantage Blu Ray has over DVD is higher quality, which is only noticeably better if your screen size is 30-32in and above. Now then, there millions of people who don't have big screens, millions who don't have upscaling TVs yet, let alone 50inch plasmas. Will they buy Blu Ray? Or would they be happy with 1080i/1080p?
I think they would be, but they will be forced to buy Blu Ray if a particular film is only available in the new format. And since many companies have invested so much in the new design they will be pushing their new product further.
The way I see it is that Sony, Panasonic, LG, etc are happy with their new product; film companies are happy because of the advanced copy protection, and consumers are happy because they have the latest toy on the market and can laugh at those unfortunate ones who are still using DVDs. But what about people who don't want to, or have no reason to upgrade? :17:
-
Klif570, you are making the same argument as I did in this thread (post # 53) couple of months back:
http://forums.audioreview.com/showth...hlight=walmart
I think we all agree that DVD will eventually be phased out. The sticky point seem to be the time frame this will happen. I agree with you that Blu and DVD will coexist toghether at least in the short run, and looking at sale price of discs from each format point to that direction.
For example, Bestbuy and Walmart now reguraly have Bluray discs on sale for $10 and DVD for $5 where DVD cover titles that are not yet available on Bluray.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
I see what you're saying, but I don't think VHS and DVD is a fair comparison. VHS is not even a disc, it's inconvenient to use, it's bulky, it's unattractive. DVD and Blu Ray are exactly the same apart from Blu Ray being higher quality. I see it more like SACD vs CD
Don't get overly fixated on the physical form factor. The similarity between the VHS/DVD and DVD/Blu-ray coexistence is that both situations require retailers, studios, rental outlets, mail order sites, etc. to maintain dual inventories. In these cases, the newer format is more lucrative because 1) consumers are willing to pay more for the improvements; and 2) the newer format can draw revenues from sales of catalog titles, whereas the older format increasingly relies solely on new releases.
If anything, VHS's pricing structure (which featured a two-tiered rental pricing and sell-through pricing window, along with revenue sharing agreements with the major rental chains) protected the format even with rapidly declining demand.
The DVD is now a devalued format with lower margins because consumers simply will not pay as much as they used to for a DVD. A devalued format can still justify staying in print if it can maintain a high enough volume to make up for the reduced margins, but DVD sales have been declining.
The SACD analogy does not apply because:
1) SACDs never had day-and-date releases like you see with Blu-ray
2) SACD was supported by less than half of the major record labels, whereas Blu-ray is now supported by all of the major movie studios
3) SACD was supported by only a handful of the major consumer electronics manufacturers, whereas nearly all of the major manufacturers have put out a Blu-ray player
4) Blu-ray's market share is way higher than SACD ever had
The market conditions for Blu-ray are way different.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
As for this, they are both ''apples'' if you can't tell the difference between VHS and DVD.
The main reasons people upgraded from VHS are 1. size 2. ease of use 3 much better quality.
People also upgraded because VHS was subsidized by a two-tiered pricing structure that generated far more revenue per copy. The DVD used a variation of the old Laserdisc pricing structure, which was designed for sell-through. Once the DVD prices began dipping below $30, the market fundamentally shifted because VHS tapes typically carried list prices of ~$80 to $100 during the initial release window.
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
Now let's compare DVDs vs Blu Ray ones again:
1. They are exactly the same in (physical) size.
2. They are equally easy to use...oh wait, Blu Ray can't be coppied and they take longer to load, Blu Ray laser life is even shorter than that of DVD, CD playback is rubbish too ..but let's still say they are the same.
3. And finally, the only advantage Blu Ray has over DVD is higher quality, which is only noticeably better if your screen size is 30-32in and above. Now then, there millions of people who don't have big screens, millions who don't have upscaling TVs yet, let alone 50inch plasmas. Will they buy Blu Ray? Or would they be happy with 1080i/1080p?
The point that you're ignoring is that VHS got phased out when there were still more VCRs than DVD players installed. The studios and retailers will follow the where the demand and the revenue potential are going. Right now, those trends are decidedly shifting towards Blu-ray.
You can point out reasons why Blu-ray is not worth the upgrade, but if the market trends continue in the direction that they have gone, none of them will matter. Also, you points in #2 are issues that have nothing to do with the format itself (i.e., loading times will vary by model and also depend on how the disc was authored, CD playback has nothing to do with the Blu-ray format, etc.).
We're probably less than two years away, if not one year away, from Blu-ray players reaching price parity with DVD players. At that point, anyone buying a video player will be buying Blu-ray. We're already at a point where the average TV screen sizes have gone above 40" and nearly all of the TVs now sold are HD. Household penetration of HDTV is now above 60% and is on track to reach 80% sometime next year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
I think they would be, but they will be forced to buy Blu Ray if a particular film is only available in the new format. And since many companies have invested so much in the new design they will be pushing their new product further.
And that's exactly the same thing that happened to VHS once the DVD took over the market lead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
The way I see it is that Sony, Panasonic, LG, etc are happy with their new product; film companies are happy because of the advanced copy protection, and consumers are happy because they have the latest toy on the market and can laugh at those unfortunate ones who are still using DVDs. But what about people who don't want to, or have no reason to upgrade? :17:
This is how the consumer electronics market has always functioned. They are constantly in a race to develop new devices that consumers want, before their older formats become commodified low margin products. And the studios are always looking for new markets to resell their catalog titles.
Retailers, manufacturers, and content providers have no obligation to indefinitely support formats that consumers have largely abandoned, and are more apt to finding reasons to pull the plug. It has nothing to do with laughing at the "unfortunate ones" still using an older format. By the time the DVD or any format reaches minority status, the successor is no longer some "latest toy" -- it's now the standard. And as with any standard, you can choose to go along with it, or make do with what you have.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokey
Klif570, you are making the same argument as I did in this thread (post # 53) couple of months back:
http://forums.audioreview.com/showth...hlight=walmart
I think we all agree that DVD will eventually be phased out. The sticky point seem to be the time frame this will happen. I agree with you that Blu and DVD will coexist toghether at least in the short run, and looking at sale price of discs from each format point to that direction.
For example, Bestbuy and Walmart now reguraly have Bluray discs on sale for $10 and DVD for $5 where DVD cover titles that are not yet available on Bluray.
Thanks for the link, Smokey. Nice to see someone on the same brain-wave length.
Perhaps there is a wider selection of Blu Ray discs in the US, but when I go and check local stores in the UK, I see one shelf of Blu Ray discs and the whole aisle of DVDs.. and if I want a particular film, it's somehow magically been released on DVD and not Blu Ray.
I'm more than happy with the DVD quality, which upscaled to 1080p on a normal size display look nearly identical, but yes, at one point people will have to upgrade anyway. Hollywood never has been happier with the new Blu Ray copy protection and the major companies like Sony have found something new to sell.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Also, you points in #2 are issues that have nothing to do with the format itself (i.e., loading times will vary by model and also depend on how the disc was authored, CD playback has nothing to do with the Blu-ray format, etc.).
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
We're already at a point where the average TV screen sizes have gone above 40" and nearly all of the TVs now sold are HD. Household penetration of HDTV is now above 60% and is on track to reach 80% sometime next year.
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
Thanks for the link, Smokey. Nice to see someone on the same brain-wave length.
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!!!)
Quote:
Perhaps there is a wider selection of Blu Ray discs in the US, but when I go and check local stores in the UK, I see one shelf of Blu Ray discs and the whole aisle of DVDs.. and if I want a particular film, it's somehow magically been released on DVD and not Blu Ray.
There is a wider selection of titles here than in the UK and all of Europe. Japan even has a larger choice of titles than you guys do. Personally, I have never purchased a title at a brick and motar store, they are too expensive. I go to Amazon, which seems to have every title released in the Blu ray format.
Quote:
I'm more than happy with the DVD quality, which upscaled to 1080p on a normal size display look nearly identical, but yes, at one point people will have to upgrade anyway. Hollywood never has been happier with the new Blu Ray copy protection and the major companies like Sony have found something new to sell.
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.
As far as another disc replacing Blu ray...it ain't going to happen. No disc format for movies becomes successful anywhere without the blessing of the Hollywood studios. They own the content. I can tell you this right now, we are not going to another disc format ever. Down the line, it is digital delivery via the internet, but that is quite a few years down the road. It will take quite a few years for the infrastructure of the internet to get big enough to take the huge bandwidth demands of digital delivery. Another uptick in resolution is not too far away, and Blu ray can support that as well. That would be 4K video. There is already a Blu ray disc capable of being played in every Blu ray player in the field that is 100GB, more than enough capacity with AVC to encode to that resolution. After that, perhaps the internet will be ready for digital delivery. I can say this with much certainty, there is not going to be another new disc format after Blu ray. There is still to much exploration of the Blu ray capacity in respect to its specification to even think about it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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..
-
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 :17: Doesn't look like DVDs are going anytime soon
-
I have to say, as long as DVDs are readily available and cheaper then BR, I don't see them going anytime soon. In my opinion, they will only go when they aren't available to the public anymore.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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 :17: 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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
I have to say, as long as DVDs are readily available and cheaper then BR, I don't see them going anytime soon. In my opinion, they will only go when they aren't available to the public anymore.
Commodity pricing always comes just before a format's death. VHS where cheaper than DVD's and were readily available, where is it now?
-
Hey Terrence, my local surplus has a pile of factory refurbished Sharp Aquos BDP's for the magic $100. Please give me your thoughts on this. Break it down one time ese...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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. :17:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Commodity pricing always comes just before a format's death. VHS where cheaper than DVD's and were readily available, where is it now?
DVD movies had a lot to offer compared to VHS. VHS quality plain sucked (both video & sound), as you already know. Not only that, DVD was more practical, compact and offered language selection and interactive menus, not to mention it wasn't backward compatible with VHS. When you think about it, there is a lot going for DVD in that a big chunk of the popultion is probably very happy with DVD as far a video quality goes, especially here in Europe where, as you said people don't have massive screens which show off high def. I'm not going to talk about sound because 90% of the consumer base won't hear or won't have the gear to exploit high def sound.
A friend of mine bought a 32" 720p screen back in 2007. We made comparison of DVD vs BR with irobot and granted, the picture was a little better but I wouldn't go as far as saying it was night and day. As for audio (something we all know so well as audiophiles), the public just isn't interested in small incremental increases in sound quality.
I'm just saying, DVD has a lot going for it. Granted, I'm already looking forward to buying BR and actually withholding DVD purchases in favour of future BR purchases, but hey, I'm not average Joe who likely (at this stage anyways) doesn't see massive benefits in buying BRs when DVDs are cheaper.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
I would love to see that!
So would I! LOL
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
Have you even heard about the two Americas thing?
I know it much better than you I suppose.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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?
Quote:
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. :17:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
DVD movies had a lot to offer compared to VHS. VHS quality plain sucked (both video & sound), as you already know. Not only that, DVD was more practical, compact and offered language selection and interactive menus, not to mention it wasn't backward compatible with VHS. When you think about it, there is a lot going for DVD in that a big chunk of the popultion is probably very happy with DVD as far a video quality goes, especially here in Europe where, as you said people don't have massive screens which show off high def. I'm not going to talk about sound because 90% of the consumer base won't hear or won't have the gear to exploit high def sound.
While I agree that VHS video did suck, this is a fifth quarter observation. A great majority of folks that bought into VHS did know it sucked at the time did they? Nope, they had nothing really to compare it to. Those of us who had Laserdisc at the time knew VHS sucked, because we actually had something to compare it to. The sound however was another story. VHS sound was no slouch, especially HiFi tracks. If they were not subject to the Dolby encoder/decoder, they could sound quite good actually. In my early days of recording digital audio, I used a Toshiba VCR's(with a PCM encoder) Hifi tracks as a digital backup to magnetic tape with very good results.
AA, there was a lot going for VHS when DVD hit the market. Most folks were quite satisfied with the PQ on their analog televisions at the time. Most folks believed that DVD was not even going to be as good as Laserdisc, but that proved wrong in the end. Most people did not want to re buy their movies nor buy an expensive player to play them. I might add, if people were so satisfied with DVD, then why the sales drop? And how do you explain the sales rise of Blu ray if everyone is so satisfied with DVD?
Quote:
A friend of mine bought a 32" 720p screen back in 2007. We made comparison of DVD vs BR with irobot and granted, the picture was a little better but I wouldn't go as far as saying it was night and day. As for audio (something we all know so well as audiophiles), the public just isn't interested in small incremental increases in sound quality.
Now you and I both know a 720p television is not a good source for comparison to DVD. Blu rays are a 1080p encoded source that will have considerable degredation with down rezz'd to 720p. You are throwing away quite a bit of encoded information in your comparison, which gives DVD and undeserved additional advantage. Besides that, 720p televisions are at commodity prices here in America, nobody really wants them. A 32" screen is a waste of time with Blu ray resolution, you are not going to see all of the pixels of information on a screen that small. Did you follow the three times height rule for Blu ray viewing? Probably not. Following this rule does make the comparison a little more fair. 5.1 surround sound systems are almost as prevalent as DVD players in this country, it might be different in Europe though.
Quote:
I'm just saying, DVD has a lot going for it. Granted, I'm already looking forward to buying BR and actually withholding DVD purchases in favour of future BR purchases, but hey, I'm not average Joe who likely (at this stage anyways) doesn't see massive benefits in buying BRs when DVDs are cheaper.
Time does not stand still. When these same people go out into the stores and find Blu ray player prices are really close to DVD player prices, what do you think they will buy - yesterday technology, or tomorrows? Studies have found that once a consumer pulls the plug on a BR player, then tend to buy less DVD's. That my friend is what is happening to DVD sales. In 2005 DVD sales experienced a 5% decline. In 2008 a full year after Bluray hit the market, those losses were close to 20%. As of last year, it was a full 25%. Bluray sales are up 76% over last year, which was up 200% from the year before. Clearly folks are moving away from DVD towards Blu ray. There will always be those left kicking and screaming away with legacy technology, but eventually they will have to move over was all of the support for the product dries up. Already three manufacturers are going to quit making DVD players with more to follow from what I am told.
Lastly, Europe is always behind this country in adopting new audio and video devices made in Japan. So it is natural that Europe is still pretty entrenched with DVD, while America is moving on to Blu ray. However, in saying that, Blu ray adoption is higher on both sides of the Atlantic than DVD was at the same time in its life span according to my NDP data, and that is thanks to the PS3.
To put even more perspective to this - Blu ray is having a faster adoption period than DVD, the CD, high-definition TV sets and several other common household technologies.
So perhaps you both may not have as wide a perspective in your own backyards that you think you do. Europe is a big place, and it does not just circle around the UK right?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
VHS sound was no slouch, especially HiFi tracks. If they were not subject to the Dolby encoder/decoder, they could sound quite good actually. In my early days of recording digital audio, I used a Toshiba VCR's(with a PCM encoder) Hifi tracks as a digital backup to magnetic tape with very good results.
I'll take your word for it. I suppose the poor sound I remember is probably from re recorded tapes or recorded programs on tv.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
if people were so satisfied with DVD, then why the sales drop? And how do you explain the sales rise of Blu ray if everyone is so satisfied with DVD?
I'm not saying BR sales aren't going to rise nor am I saying that DVD sales are going to drop. I'm saying DVDs are going to be around for a bit if their passing isn't forced, especially here in Europe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Now you and I both know a 720p television is not a good source for comparison to DVD.
This is precisely my point, as you said yourself that the average screen here is smaller than they are in the US. DVD won't look as bad on a not so big screen, especially if the rez is 720p not 1080p. If I was to buy a sub 40" screen and knew I was going to be watching a good amount of standard def material, I would probably rather a 720p set over1080p.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
You are throwing away quite a bit of encoded information in your comparison, which gives DVD and undeserved additional advantage. Besides that, 720p televisions are at commodity prices here in America, nobody really wants them. A 32" screen is a waste of time with Blu ray resolution, you are not going to see all of the pixels of information on a screen that small.
Again, you are reinforcing my point concerning the necessity of BR with smaller sets. On a side note, he bought the set in 2007 when prices were still fairly dear, which is why it isn't 1080p. Even today, there's probably a good proportion of 32" 720p sets vs 32" 1080p.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Did you follow the three times height rule for Blu ray viewing?
Are you refering to screen size vs. viewing distance? If yes I can tell you we weren't sitting miles away so any gain in PQ was clearly visible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Already three manufacturers are going to quit making DVD players with more to follow from what I am told.
Despite the reported issues of DVD playback quality on BR players, I wouldn't have thought any of them are still making DVD players given the backward compatibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Lastly, Europe is always behind this country in adopting new audio and video devices made in Japan. So it is natural that Europe is still pretty entrenched with DVD, while America is moving on to Blu ray.
Indeed
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
However, in saying that, Blu ray adoption is higher on both sides of the Atlantic than DVD was at the same time in its life span according to my NDP data, and that is thanks to the PS3. To put even more perspective to this - Blu ray is having a faster adoption period than DVD, the CD, high-definition TV sets and several other common household technologies.
I'm guessing that's because BR players are backward compatible with DVDs, because of the popularity of the PS3 and because BR players are fairly cheap at this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
So perhaps you both may not have as wide a perspective in your own backyards that you think you do. Europe is a big place, and it does not just circle around the UK right?
Actually, I can also speak for Switzerland and France as I'm there half the year. When I head back, I'll have a good look in video stores and tell you the position of BR relative to DVDs. Here, BR shelving represents maybe 20% of the total shelving (DVD + BR) in the popular high street shops. I've no doubt that figure is higher in the US.
I have however, noticed the spread of BR on such online sellers as Amazon UK. They had massive sales last Christmas, often up to 70% off on popular titles.
BTW, seeing as I can use you:) is there any chance you can get info on release dates for the Alien quadrilogy films in BR?
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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 :17: 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.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
My racial and cultural background would make that quite impossible.
Good to hear that :smile5:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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
-
Well there is one comparison with SACD that could prove true...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Now DVD has matured, sales are slowing, nobody is making much money from it, and it is not secure, so it is a persistant target for piracy. Everyone wants it to go away, the studios, the retailers, and the manufacturers.
If piracy indeed is so prevalent, then the inability to copy BR may be its Achilles Heel. Since DVD has been cracked, and piracy doesn't seem to go away, then there will always be room for DVD and it may never completely go away... not until HD digital content matures and that is effectively cracked. Kind of ironic really.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
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?
Quote:
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.
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
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
If piracy indeed is so prevalent, then the inability to copy BR may be its Achilles Heel. Since DVD has been cracked, and piracy doesn't seem to go away, then there will always be room for DVD and it may never completely go away... not until HD digital content matures and that is effectively cracked. Kind of ironic really.
What is ironic(but predictable) is how you can screw up a perfectly good discussion with a pile of stupidity.(a really bad habit of yours)
SACD died from lack of support from the music industry, not because it could not be copied. You cannot build a format on the backs of boutique recording companies. Sony didn't really support the format with the proper post production tools until it was too late in the game.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Blame it on Wiki! I doubt very much those numbers were from the great depression period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
You heard? Ok, well, I heard something different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Haha, and when you're faced with facts you call me ridiculous. Fair enough, well for your information, out of those 60.000 DVDs I can rent any one I want! And my choice for Blu Ray here is just above 1000.
I think I shall leave you in your dream world..really no point in discussing anything further.
-
Fine forget the comparison to SACD....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
What is ironic(but predictable) is how you can screw up a perfectly good discussion with a pile of stupidity.(a really bad habit of yours)
SACD died from lack of support from the music industry, not because it could not be copied. You cannot build a format on the backs of boutique recording companies. Sony didn't really support the format with the proper post production tools until it was too late in the game.
...that still doesn't change the fact that DVD is the pirate's choice. As long as piracy is such a rampant problem, DVD will remain. That is, until someone finds a better way to crack BR. That's what is so ironic.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klif570
Blame it on Wiki! I doubt very much those numbers were from the great depression period.
The water must be cold in de- nial. Even with faced with facts you are still in denial.
Quote:
You heard? Ok, well, I heard something different.
Great BS move.
Quote:
Haha, and when you're faced with facts you call me ridiculous. Fair enough, well for your information, out of those 60.000 DVDs I can rent any one I want! And my choice for Blu Ray here is just above 1000.
I think I shall leave you in your dream world..really no point in discussing anything further.
What facts???? You made a statement with no factual support whatsover. Sure you can rent anyone of 60,000 DVD's, but the reality is even in rentals there are not 60,000 active titles, which makes your point is misleading(I see a trend here). So your MO is to throw up a bunch of numbers and pretend that is your facts. That is pretty ludicrous, and armed with the data it borders on foolishness.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
...that still doesn't change the fact that DVD is the pirate's choice. As long as piracy is such a rampant problem, DVD will remain. That is, until someone finds a better way to crack BR. That's what is so ironic.
Two stupid statements in a row, you are on a roll chum!
-
Why don't you just address the point instead of dismissing it with insults?
|