According to aggregate weekly estimates from the research department of Home Media Magazine, revenues from Blu-ray sales in the US in 2010 through February were $200.95 million, 59% more than in the same period of 2009. Additionally, thanks to Blu-ray, the revenue from packaged-media sales stopped falling and grew 3% year-on-year.
As to market share, Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue in the first two months of the year. In Jan-Feb 2009, this percentage was 7.6%.
The biggest-selling week was the week ended January 3, with $37.72 million in BD sales. The slowest week was the week ended February 21, with $18.58 million.
It is worth mentioning that Blu-ray sold more in these relatively slow two first months of the year than digital downloads did in the whole of 2009 ($199 million, including both standard-definition and high-definition, according to Screen Digest). In spite of all the continuous hype from tech sites and web pundits about the impending digital domination and the disc's demise, the public seems to see much more value in a movie when it comes on a high-quality physical support with top-notch video, audio and extras than on a downloaded video file.
This part bears repeating:
Quote:
It is worth mentioning that Blu-ray sold more in these relatively slow two first months of the year than digital downloads did in the whole of 2009 ($199 million, including both standard-definition and high-definition, according to Screen Digest).
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
Those figures are misleading no matter how large you make the font.
They're useful, and meaningful. However the manner in which they're stated is obviously done as part of an on-going argument within the industry and among consumers like us. It isn't new proof of anything.
Cable TV revenue is absolutely massive, way more than physical media sales. "Digital downloads" are basically the same thing except that the set top box is programmed differently and consumers can watch what they want at any time.
But even if standard cable packages aren't counted, what about VOD, PPV, and netflix? I doubt that these add up to as much as physical media, but it seems as if the huge print numbers probably don't include them. They also compare combined new and old physical media revenue against only the new method of electronically delivering media.
In other words, those numbers don't indicate that people are voting for physical media with their wallets.
Or here's another example of how those numbers are being bent. A careful reading of just the numbers posted above indicates that DVDs sales are 9 times blu-ray sales. That is the same relative difference as between blu-ray and the streaming (according to the quoted numbers). Yet somehow the conclusion drawn is that people prefer high-def disks. If anything, the conclusion from that line of reasoning should have been that people prefer low-def disks.
And what's that nonsense about "force feeding customers digital downloads"? Nobody is forced to buy anything. Your point would be better made without the ridiculous hyperbole.
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
It would be more meaningful data if they made the comparison between number of downloads vs. number of blu-ray titles sold.
Obviously, this is something more disturbing to disclose for blu-ray.
Or here's another example of how those numbers are being bent. A careful reading of just the numbers posted above indicates that DVDs sales are 9 times blu-ray sales. That is the same relative difference as between blu-ray and the streaming (according to the quoted numbers). Yet somehow the conclusion drawn is that people prefer high-def disks. If anything, the conclusion from that line of reasoning should have been that people prefer low-def disks.
The general consensus is that consumers are just fine with standard definition DVDs and aren't looking for a replacement or alternative any time soon; however, fans of Blu-Ray and fans of digital distribution will both argue that consumers want their format next. But the numbers only support a significant movement toward one of those two formats, and digital distribution is not so much it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler
And what's that nonsense about "force feeding customers digital downloads"? Nobody is forced to buy anything. Your point would be better made without the ridiculous hyperbole.
When asked about blu-ray support and when it's coming, Apple execs like to point people to the iTunes Store for all of their HD needs. Force-feeding may have been a strong phrase, but they sure aren't offering Mac users much in the way of options, are they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemymac
It would be more meaningful data if they made the comparison between number of downloads vs. number of blu-ray titles sold.
Obviously, this is something more disturbing to disclose for blu-ray.
Why would it be disturbing? For every blu-ray disc that costs more than a digital download, there's one that costs less. For the most part pricing is about even. If you're suggesting that counting revenue instead of units sold is skewing the figures in favor of blu-ray, I think you're sorely mistaken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemymac
How does blu-ray compare to SD-DVD sales?
Ten times better than digital downloads as a whole (not strictly HD digital downloads). Honestly, I wish I could tell you. But the googles can't even find the number of DVD units sold last year, let alone blu-ray discs.
When asked about blu-ray support and when it's coming, Apple execs like to point people to the iTunes Store for all of their HD needs. Force-feeding may have been a strong phrase, but they sure aren't offering Mac users much in the way of options, are they?
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
What's with the overinflated sense of self entitlement? As if a product that doesn't offer what you want is "forcing" you to do anything.
A more valid point would be that it is unwise for Apple to not offer blu-ray support. Perhaps it is even stupid of them. That could be a well reasoned argument. But this "force feeding" nonsense is just that, nonsense.
Quote:
Ten times better than digital downloads as a whole (not strictly HD digital downloads). Honestly, I wish I could tell you. But the googles can't even find the number of DVD units sold last year, let alone blu-ray discs.
Unless I'm missreading the numbers you posted, it would seem to be: "Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue" I'm assuming that "packaged media sales" in this context is referring to just video, and almost entirely composed of DVD and blu-ray. Does that seem correct? If so, my previous re-characterization of those statistics seems spot on, DVD sales are roughly 9 times blu-ray sales.
Well, some standalone blu-ray players cost less than the blu-ray drives. Most consumers will get much more going with standalone players vs. having a blu-ray drive in their PC/Mac with half-cooked playback software support. Blu-Ray playback on HTPC ain't that easy with constant changes in the profile and security. Now, once you ripped the blu-ray disc to a media file, we have something compatible with everything, even from a standalone blu-ray player with streaming capability.
It has been almost 4 years since the HD media optical disc market was introduced, but it is still very slow to consumer adoption. With download streaming, rental and purchase, being more easily accessible to consumers, optical discs sales in general will suffer at end of day.
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
A DVB-T tuner is available as an optional extra for the PS3, so that would squash your Sony theory, and they do have a movie download service available in some countries.
Well, some standalone blu-ray players cost less than the blu-ray drives. Most consumers will get much more going with standalone players vs. having a blu-ray drive in their PC/Mac with half-cooked playback software support. Blu-Ray playback on HTPC ain't that easy with constant changes in the profile and security. Now, once you ripped the blu-ray disc to a media file, we have something compatible with everything, even from a standalone blu-ray player with streaming capability.
What constant change to Blu-ray profiles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemymac
It has been almost 4 years since the HD media optical disc market was introduced, but it is still very slow to consumer adoption. With download streaming, rental and purchase, being more easily accessible to consumers, optical discs sales in general will suffer at end of day.
The adoption rate of Blu-ray is greater than that of DVD, Digital downloads are only available to those with broadband, which isn't that high as people like to make out. Yes downloads will take over, but it will be a while longer until that happens, much longer
The much larger Digital Download includes Music Download which greatly inflate the total revenue of Movie Download.
While US is the largest economy in the world, it has one of the worst High Speed Broadband penetration / bandwidth in first world. When you compare to place like Japan / Korea or Even Hong Kong. Stream or Digital Download has never taken up.
In terms of Quality, Stream and Download will properly never ( or in the near future ) catch up to Blu Ray. While US still have to get HDTV first before seeing any benifits of BluRay.
I guess BluRay will still wins out. Layering Network for Streaming and Download TAKES MUCH longer then BluRay prices decrease. But my guess is BluRay will never be what DVD is today.
As I mentioned before, I just got a full HD display. I bought an AV>HD upscaler, but it's a piece of junk. The picture quality is horrid. Playing a DVD on my MacBook Pro plugged into the display looks tons better. unfortunately, I absolutely need a region-free player. Living in Hong Kong, I have about an equal number of Region 1, Region 2 and Region 3 discs. My MacBook cannot be made into a region-free player (damn you, Apple!). I am planning on getting a Mac Mini, but it will suffer from the same limitation.
So I'm considering buying a region-free upscaling DVD player (nearly all players sold here are region-free). I could get a cheap upscaling DVD player with HDMI for ~$30 or I could get a BD player for ~$150? Is it worth it to get the Blu-ray? Will Blu-ray players soon go below $100?
Or I could buy a region-free external DVD reader for the Mac Mini, and just have that plugged in all the time. Kind of silly when the Mini already has a DVD reader.
I still think we'll see Blu-ray BD-RE drives on iMacs, Mac Pros and possibly higher-end MacBook Pros very soon.
I cite the following reasons:
1) Downloading full-length movies are already pushing at the very limits of Internet bandwidth--and that's with 480p quality video. Until we put in more server farms, turn on a lot more network connections, and start the migration to IPv6, all that downloading of 720p video could grind the Internet to a halt rapidly.
2) Thanks to substantially simpler licensing terms, the cost of licensing Blu-ray technology is really cheap nowadays. You can get BD-Live (Profile 2.0) compliant players for well under US$200, and we may see even Wi-Fi-enabled players drop under US$200 later this year.
3) Mac hardware are pretty much HDCP-compliant anyway as of the middle of last year. Right now, all Apple needs is add in some extensions to MacOS X 10.6.x and programs like iTunes and QuickTime easily become software players for Blu-ray discs, and these same extensions could turn iMovie and Final Cut Pro into full-blown Blu-ray disc mastering programs.
As a follow-up to my post, I bought a $150 VDigi Blu-ray player (BDP Mini 6). It's nice. I'll let you know how it goes. One thing that irks me is that it didn't come with an HDMI cable. I guess you get what you pay for...
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
The adoption rate of Blu-ray is greater than that of DVD, Digital downloads are only available to those with broadband, which isn't that high as people like to make out. Yes downloads will take over, but it will be a while longer until that happens, much longer
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
As I mentioned before, I just got a full HD display. I bought an AV>HD upscaler, but it's a piece of junk. The picture quality is horrid. Playing a DVD on my MacBook Pro plugged into the display looks tons better. unfortunately, I absolutely need a region-free player. Living in Hong Kong, I have about an equal number of Region 1, Region 2 and Region 3 discs. My MacBook cannot be made into a region-free player (damn you, Apple!). I am planning on getting a Mac Mini, but it will suffer from the same limitation.
So I'm considering buying a region-free upscaling DVD player (nearly all players sold here are region-free). I could get a cheap upscaling DVD player with HDMI for ~$30 or I could get a BD player for ~$150? Is it worth it to get the Blu-ray? Will Blu-ray players soon go below $100?
Or I could buy a region-free external DVD reader for the Mac Mini, and just have that plugged in all the time. Kind of silly when the Mini already has a DVD reader.
Cheap blu-ray players are no better than cheap DVD players when it comes to upscaling SD video contents to 1080p resolution. Good upscaling players do a very good job. The results may not be as good as reference blu-ray material, but it can definitely compete with average blu-ray quality contents when using a clean SD material on good scaler.
Another option you may want to explore is output 480i content directly to your tv and see if your TV can do a better job upscaling the SD content. Some HDTV's do use quality video processor, which may be better than what's in your blu-ray/SD dvd player.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
I have a Panasonic 10a dating from 2006. I use it for watching movies; I'm not interested in some of the fancy stuff you can do with the often included extras. In that time I upgraded firmware only once and that was because a disc from one studio wouldn't play without a firmware upgrade.
I do perhaps agree with you, though, about BD totally replacing DVD. IMO, it's going to be a very successful niche product, like LD but much more robust, with probably about 1/2 of the optical disc market. What's driving BD sales is the general acceptance, availability and affordability of large size 1080p flat panel displays.
As for downloads, as someone else has pointed out, the infrastructure isn't here yet and for many areas it will never be.
I guess some people still can't accept that HD-DVD lost out to BD.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
Lolwut? That argument died two years ago when Profile 2.0 was completed. And that's about how long ago I ran a firmware update for my blu-ray player (May 30, 2008 to be exact).
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
What's with the overinflated sense of self entitlement? As if a product that doesn't offer what you want is "forcing" you to do anything.
A more valid point would be that it is unwise for Apple to not offer blu-ray support. Perhaps it is even stupid of them. That could be a well reasoned argument. But this "force feeding" nonsense is just that, nonsense.
I already said "force-feeding" was an over exaggeration on my part; however, your analogies are bogus as no one is asking for those things. People have been begging Apple to adopt blu-ray for years. It wouldn't be such a big deal if not for the fact that millions of professionals rely on their Final Cut Studio suite, a product they hardly touch now that they control that market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler
Unless I'm missreading the numbers you posted, it would seem to be: "Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue" I'm assuming that "packaged media sales" in this context is referring to just video, and almost entirely composed of DVD and blu-ray. Does that seem correct? If so, my previous re-characterization of those statistics seems spot on, DVD sales are roughly 9 times blu-ray sales.
Yes, that seems about right. And SD and HD digital downloads combined equal 1/10th of blu-ray sales.
I have a Panasonic 10a dating from 2006. I use it for watching movies; I'm not interested in some of the fancy stuff you can do with the often included extras. In that time I upgraded firmware only once and that was because a disc from one studio wouldn't play without a firmware upgrade.
I do perhaps agree with you, though, about BD totally replacing DVD. IMO, it's going to be a very successful niche product, like LD but much more robust, with probably about 1/2 of the optical disc market. What's driving BD sales is the general acceptance, availability and affordability of large size 1080p flat panel displays.
As for downloads, as someone else has pointed out, the infrastructure isn't here yet and for many areas it will never be.
There is no question about a robust market for Blu-ray in a niche video enthusiast market. I agree about limitation of download capability for most consumers today in the US market. I know this may not be an issue for few countries out there since they are offered with Gbps or at least 100 mbps connections as normal service. Broadband services in the states will only improve. I saw a commercial the other day that comcast advertising 100mbps service. My current 25mbps comcast service is fast enough for potential streaming for full 1080p solution with DD+ HD audio for sure. So, it might not be true for the mass market, but there is a significant potential market right now for enthusiasts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldCodger73
I guess some people still can't accept that HD-DVD lost out to BD.
Although, I am a fanboy for HD video contents, I am not married to an optical media format. I am more interested in HD media streaming for my home than inserting a disc to watch movies. In the HD-DVD days, I did support HD-DVD because it would have had much better potential for consumer adoption for many reasons. In retrospect, it may not have been the right assessment even if HD-DVD became successful, due to steep down turn in the economy. The progress of blu-ray is a clear evidence even with all the bribery and unfair business practices.
Cheap blu-ray players are no better than cheap DVD players when it comes to upscaling SD video contents to 1080p resolution. Good upscaling players do a very good job. The results may not be as good as reference blu-ray material, but it can definitely compete with average blu-ray quality contents when using a clean SD material on good scaler.
I guess the VDigi player I bought does a good job. I've tested both Blu-ray (Where the Wild Things Are) and DVD (Interstella 5555). Blu-ray looks awesome. DVD looks way better than it ever did on my SDTV. The VDigi does every bit as good of a job as my MacBook Pro does at upscaling the DVD.
Quote:
Another option you may want to explore is output 480i content directly to your tv and see if your TV can do a better job upscaling the SD content. Some HDTV's do use quality video processor, which may be better than what's in your blu-ray/SD dvd player.
My "TV" is an LCD display (Viewsonic VX2433wm). It has no A/V inputs. My HD tuner box (just like EVERY HD tuner box) accepts antenna input only. There's no way to connect my SD content directly.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
But that isn't profile changes causing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemymac
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
In regards to the same stage in the DVD lifetime, Blu-ray has a higher adoption rate. It won't hit the same levels in the end as DVD, but I don't think downloads will really take off for several more years yet. There are major infrastructure, and compatibility issues with the current downloading scheme that need to be addressed before it will take off.
Blu-ray profile 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0 in the works. Most playback issues within profile 2.0 players with profile 2.0 feature on. Obviously, turning off this feature is temporary remediation for many players. This issue along with many others also follow software players used in HTPC. Perhaps, when you buy enough blu-ray movies, you can experience it yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
In regards to the same stage in the DVD lifetime, Blu-ray has a higher adoption rate. It won't hit the same levels in the end as DVD, but I don't think downloads will really take off for several more years yet. There are major infrastructure, and compatibility issues with the current downloading scheme that need to be addressed before it will take off.
Where are you getting your information? Even if you include all US PS3 sales as standalone blu-ray players, it won't beat DVD adoption rate.
Table demonstrated in the link does not count PS2, btw. Blu-ray definitely has been a dud in comparison to DVD adoption.
In regards to downloads, there was stat on the amount of download users by Netflix subscribers. You may be able to make better extrapolation of expected adoption number for existing and future download services. I am not sure how much valid it is to keep bringing up "intrastructure not ready" statement so blindly. Most people I know do have broadband services at home. Actually, I do not know anyone who does not. For those who do not, how much % of optical movie disc sales would be contributed from those without broadband service at home?
Comments
According to aggregate weekly estimates from the research department of Home Media Magazine, revenues from Blu-ray sales in the US in 2010 through February were $200.95 million, 59% more than in the same period of 2009. Additionally, thanks to Blu-ray, the revenue from packaged-media sales stopped falling and grew 3% year-on-year.
As to market share, Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue in the first two months of the year. In Jan-Feb 2009, this percentage was 7.6%.
The biggest-selling week was the week ended January 3, with $37.72 million in BD sales. The slowest week was the week ended February 21, with $18.58 million.
It is worth mentioning that Blu-ray sold more in these relatively slow two first months of the year than digital downloads did in the whole of 2009 ($199 million, including both standard-definition and high-definition, according to Screen Digest). In spite of all the continuous hype from tech sites and web pundits about the impending digital domination and the disc's demise, the public seems to see much more value in a movie when it comes on a high-quality physical support with top-notch video, audio and extras than on a downloaded video file.
This part bears repeating:
It is worth mentioning that Blu-ray sold more in these relatively slow two first months of the year than digital downloads did in the whole of 2009 ($199 million, including both standard-definition and high-definition, according to Screen Digest).
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
This part bears repeating:
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
Those figures are misleading no matter how large you make the font.
They're useful, and meaningful. However the manner in which they're stated is obviously done as part of an on-going argument within the industry and among consumers like us. It isn't new proof of anything.
Cable TV revenue is absolutely massive, way more than physical media sales. "Digital downloads" are basically the same thing except that the set top box is programmed differently and consumers can watch what they want at any time.
But even if standard cable packages aren't counted, what about VOD, PPV, and netflix? I doubt that these add up to as much as physical media, but it seems as if the huge print numbers probably don't include them. They also compare combined new and old physical media revenue against only the new method of electronically delivering media.
In other words, those numbers don't indicate that people are voting for physical media with their wallets.
Or here's another example of how those numbers are being bent. A careful reading of just the numbers posted above indicates that DVDs sales are 9 times blu-ray sales. That is the same relative difference as between blu-ray and the streaming (according to the quoted numbers). Yet somehow the conclusion drawn is that people prefer high-def disks. If anything, the conclusion from that line of reasoning should have been that people prefer low-def disks.
And what's that nonsense about "force feeding customers digital downloads"? Nobody is forced to buy anything. Your point would be better made without the ridiculous hyperbole.
This part bears repeating:
And yet Apple continues to force-feed their customers digital downloads as a sad alternative to blu-ray, which they're waiting to "really catch on" before adopting.
It would be more meaningful data if they made the comparison between number of downloads vs. number of blu-ray titles sold.
Obviously, this is something more disturbing to disclose for blu-ray.
How does blu-ray compare to SD-DVD sales?
Or here's another example of how those numbers are being bent. A careful reading of just the numbers posted above indicates that DVDs sales are 9 times blu-ray sales. That is the same relative difference as between blu-ray and the streaming (according to the quoted numbers). Yet somehow the conclusion drawn is that people prefer high-def disks. If anything, the conclusion from that line of reasoning should have been that people prefer low-def disks.
The general consensus is that consumers are just fine with standard definition DVDs and aren't looking for a replacement or alternative any time soon; however, fans of Blu-Ray and fans of digital distribution will both argue that consumers want their format next. But the numbers only support a significant movement toward one of those two formats, and digital distribution is not so much it.
And what's that nonsense about "force feeding customers digital downloads"? Nobody is forced to buy anything. Your point would be better made without the ridiculous hyperbole.
When asked about blu-ray support and when it's coming, Apple execs like to point people to the iTunes Store for all of their HD needs. Force-feeding may have been a strong phrase, but they sure aren't offering Mac users much in the way of options, are they?
It would be more meaningful data if they made the comparison between number of downloads vs. number of blu-ray titles sold.
Obviously, this is something more disturbing to disclose for blu-ray.
Why would it be disturbing? For every blu-ray disc that costs more than a digital download, there's one that costs less. For the most part pricing is about even. If you're suggesting that counting revenue instead of units sold is skewing the figures in favor of blu-ray, I think you're sorely mistaken.
How does blu-ray compare to SD-DVD sales?
Ten times better than digital downloads as a whole (not strictly HD digital downloads). Honestly, I wish I could tell you. But the googles can't even find the number of DVD units sold last year, let alone blu-ray discs.
When asked about blu-ray support and when it's coming, Apple execs like to point people to the iTunes Store for all of their HD needs. Force-feeding may have been a strong phrase, but they sure aren't offering Mac users much in the way of options, are they?
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
What's with the overinflated sense of self entitlement? As if a product that doesn't offer what you want is "forcing" you to do anything.
A more valid point would be that it is unwise for Apple to not offer blu-ray support. Perhaps it is even stupid of them. That could be a well reasoned argument. But this "force feeding" nonsense is just that, nonsense.
Ten times better than digital downloads as a whole (not strictly HD digital downloads). Honestly, I wish I could tell you. But the googles can't even find the number of DVD units sold last year, let alone blu-ray discs.
Unless I'm missreading the numbers you posted, it would seem to be: "Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue" I'm assuming that "packaged media sales" in this context is referring to just video, and almost entirely composed of DVD and blu-ray. Does that seem correct? If so, my previous re-characterization of those statistics seems spot on, DVD sales are roughly 9 times blu-ray sales.
It has been almost 4 years since the HD media optical disc market was introduced, but it is still very slow to consumer adoption. With download streaming, rental and purchase, being more easily accessible to consumers, optical discs sales in general will suffer at end of day.
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
A DVB-T tuner is available as an optional extra for the PS3, so that would squash your Sony theory, and they do have a movie download service available in some countries.
Well, some standalone blu-ray players cost less than the blu-ray drives. Most consumers will get much more going with standalone players vs. having a blu-ray drive in their PC/Mac with half-cooked playback software support. Blu-Ray playback on HTPC ain't that easy with constant changes in the profile and security. Now, once you ripped the blu-ray disc to a media file, we have something compatible with everything, even from a standalone blu-ray player with streaming capability.
What constant change to Blu-ray profiles?
It has been almost 4 years since the HD media optical disc market was introduced, but it is still very slow to consumer adoption. With download streaming, rental and purchase, being more easily accessible to consumers, optical discs sales in general will suffer at end of day.
The adoption rate of Blu-ray is greater than that of DVD, Digital downloads are only available to those with broadband, which isn't that high as people like to make out. Yes downloads will take over, but it will be a while longer until that happens, much longer
While US is the largest economy in the world, it has one of the worst High Speed Broadband penetration / bandwidth in first world. When you compare to place like Japan / Korea or Even Hong Kong. Stream or Digital Download has never taken up.
In terms of Quality, Stream and Download will properly never ( or in the near future ) catch up to Blu Ray. While US still have to get HDTV first before seeing any benifits of BluRay.
I guess BluRay will still wins out. Layering Network for Streaming and Download TAKES MUCH longer then BluRay prices decrease. But my guess is BluRay will never be what DVD is today.
So I'm considering buying a region-free upscaling DVD player (nearly all players sold here are region-free). I could get a cheap upscaling DVD player with HDMI for ~$30 or I could get a BD player for ~$150? Is it worth it to get the Blu-ray? Will Blu-ray players soon go below $100?
Or I could buy a region-free external DVD reader for the Mac Mini, and just have that plugged in all the time. Kind of silly when the Mini already has a DVD reader.
I cite the following reasons:
1) Downloading full-length movies are already pushing at the very limits of Internet bandwidth--and that's with 480p quality video. Until we put in more server farms, turn on a lot more network connections, and start the migration to IPv6, all that downloading of 720p video could grind the Internet to a halt rapidly.
2) Thanks to substantially simpler licensing terms, the cost of licensing Blu-ray technology is really cheap nowadays. You can get BD-Live (Profile 2.0) compliant players for well under US$200, and we may see even Wi-Fi-enabled players drop under US$200 later this year.
3) Mac hardware are pretty much HDCP-compliant anyway as of the middle of last year. Right now, all Apple needs is add in some extensions to MacOS X 10.6.x and programs like iTunes and QuickTime easily become software players for Blu-ray discs, and these same extensions could turn iMovie and Final Cut Pro into full-blown Blu-ray disc mastering programs.
What constant change to Blu-ray profiles?
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
The adoption rate of Blu-ray is greater than that of DVD, Digital downloads are only available to those with broadband, which isn't that high as people like to make out. Yes downloads will take over, but it will be a while longer until that happens, much longer
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
As I mentioned before, I just got a full HD display. I bought an AV>HD upscaler, but it's a piece of junk. The picture quality is horrid. Playing a DVD on my MacBook Pro plugged into the display looks tons better. unfortunately, I absolutely need a region-free player. Living in Hong Kong, I have about an equal number of Region 1, Region 2 and Region 3 discs. My MacBook cannot be made into a region-free player (damn you, Apple!). I am planning on getting a Mac Mini, but it will suffer from the same limitation.
So I'm considering buying a region-free upscaling DVD player (nearly all players sold here are region-free). I could get a cheap upscaling DVD player with HDMI for ~$30 or I could get a BD player for ~$150? Is it worth it to get the Blu-ray? Will Blu-ray players soon go below $100?
Or I could buy a region-free external DVD reader for the Mac Mini, and just have that plugged in all the time. Kind of silly when the Mini already has a DVD reader.
Cheap blu-ray players are no better than cheap DVD players when it comes to upscaling SD video contents to 1080p resolution. Good upscaling players do a very good job. The results may not be as good as reference blu-ray material, but it can definitely compete with average blu-ray quality contents when using a clean SD material on good scaler.
Another option you may want to explore is output 480i content directly to your tv and see if your TV can do a better job upscaling the SD content. Some HDTV's do use quality video processor, which may be better than what's in your blu-ray/SD dvd player.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
I have a Panasonic 10a dating from 2006. I use it for watching movies; I'm not interested in some of the fancy stuff you can do with the often included extras. In that time I upgraded firmware only once and that was because a disc from one studio wouldn't play without a firmware upgrade.
I do perhaps agree with you, though, about BD totally replacing DVD. IMO, it's going to be a very successful niche product, like LD but much more robust, with probably about 1/2 of the optical disc market. What's driving BD sales is the general acceptance, availability and affordability of large size 1080p flat panel displays.
As for downloads, as someone else has pointed out, the infrastructure isn't here yet and for many areas it will never be.
I guess some people still can't accept that HD-DVD lost out to BD.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
Lolwut? That argument died two years ago when Profile 2.0 was completed. And that's about how long ago I ran a firmware update for my blu-ray player (May 30, 2008 to be exact).
The AppleTV doesn't include a TV tuner either. Maybe sony is force feeding us physical media because the PS3 doesn't include a tuner. The iPhone, iPod, and AppleTV all lack a CD player as well. My refrigerator doesn't microwave food. Damn them for force feeding us refrigeration!
What's with the overinflated sense of self entitlement? As if a product that doesn't offer what you want is "forcing" you to do anything.
A more valid point would be that it is unwise for Apple to not offer blu-ray support. Perhaps it is even stupid of them. That could be a well reasoned argument. But this "force feeding" nonsense is just that, nonsense.
Unless I'm missreading the numbers you posted, it would seem to be: "Blu-ray accounted for 11.7% of packaged-media sales revenue" I'm assuming that "packaged media sales" in this context is referring to just video, and almost entirely composed of DVD and blu-ray. Does that seem correct? If so, my previous re-characterization of those statistics seems spot on, DVD sales are roughly 9 times blu-ray sales.
Yes, that seems about right. And SD and HD digital downloads combined equal 1/10th of blu-ray sales.
I have a Panasonic 10a dating from 2006. I use it for watching movies; I'm not interested in some of the fancy stuff you can do with the often included extras. In that time I upgraded firmware only once and that was because a disc from one studio wouldn't play without a firmware upgrade.
I do perhaps agree with you, though, about BD totally replacing DVD. IMO, it's going to be a very successful niche product, like LD but much more robust, with probably about 1/2 of the optical disc market. What's driving BD sales is the general acceptance, availability and affordability of large size 1080p flat panel displays.
As for downloads, as someone else has pointed out, the infrastructure isn't here yet and for many areas it will never be.
There is no question about a robust market for Blu-ray in a niche video enthusiast market. I agree about limitation of download capability for most consumers today in the US market. I know this may not be an issue for few countries out there since they are offered with Gbps or at least 100 mbps connections as normal service. Broadband services in the states will only improve. I saw a commercial the other day that comcast advertising 100mbps service. My current 25mbps comcast service is fast enough for potential streaming for full 1080p solution with DD+ HD audio for sure. So, it might not be true for the mass market, but there is a significant potential market right now for enthusiasts.
I guess some people still can't accept that HD-DVD lost out to BD.
Although, I am a fanboy for HD video contents, I am not married to an optical media format. I am more interested in HD media streaming for my home than inserting a disc to watch movies. In the HD-DVD days, I did support HD-DVD because it would have had much better potential for consumer adoption for many reasons. In retrospect, it may not have been the right assessment even if HD-DVD became successful, due to steep down turn in the economy. The progress of blu-ray is a clear evidence even with all the bribery and unfair business practices.
Cheap blu-ray players are no better than cheap DVD players when it comes to upscaling SD video contents to 1080p resolution. Good upscaling players do a very good job. The results may not be as good as reference blu-ray material, but it can definitely compete with average blu-ray quality contents when using a clean SD material on good scaler.
I guess the VDigi player I bought does a good job. I've tested both Blu-ray (Where the Wild Things Are) and DVD (Interstella 5555). Blu-ray looks awesome. DVD looks way better than it ever did on my SDTV. The VDigi does every bit as good of a job as my MacBook Pro does at upscaling the DVD.
Another option you may want to explore is output 480i content directly to your tv and see if your TV can do a better job upscaling the SD content. Some HDTV's do use quality video processor, which may be better than what's in your blu-ray/SD dvd player.
My "TV" is an LCD display (Viewsonic VX2433wm). It has no A/V inputs. My HD tuner box (just like EVERY HD tuner box) accepts antenna input only. There's no way to connect my SD content directly.
It's more of changes in implementation causing playback issues even in standalone players. It requires constant firmware update on standalone players to stay compatible.
But that isn't profile changes causing that.
In regards to when and how, I do not see Blu-ray becoming dominant to DVD. We are likely to witness downloads taking its place as dominant format over both optical solutions prior to Blu-ray can become the major consumer format. Blur-ray is still a niche format even after 4 years and not gaining the market as projected. Should we wait another 4 years to be convinced?
In regards to the same stage in the DVD lifetime, Blu-ray has a higher adoption rate. It won't hit the same levels in the end as DVD, but I don't think downloads will really take off for several more years yet. There are major infrastructure, and compatibility issues with the current downloading scheme that need to be addressed before it will take off.
But that isn't profile changes causing that.
Blu-ray profile 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0 in the works. Most playback issues within profile 2.0 players with profile 2.0 feature on. Obviously, turning off this feature is temporary remediation for many players. This issue along with many others also follow software players used in HTPC. Perhaps, when you buy enough blu-ray movies, you can experience it yourself.
In regards to the same stage in the DVD lifetime, Blu-ray has a higher adoption rate. It won't hit the same levels in the end as DVD, but I don't think downloads will really take off for several more years yet. There are major infrastructure, and compatibility issues with the current downloading scheme that need to be addressed before it will take off.
Where are you getting your information? Even if you include all US PS3 sales as standalone blu-ray players, it won't beat DVD adoption rate.
Table demonstrated in the link does not count PS2, btw. Blu-ray definitely has been a dud in comparison to DVD adoption.
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...advdsales.html
In regards to downloads, there was stat on the amount of download users by Netflix subscribers. You may be able to make better extrapolation of expected adoption number for existing and future download services. I am not sure how much valid it is to keep bringing up "intrastructure not ready" statement so blindly. Most people I know do have broadband services at home. Actually, I do not know anyone who does not. For those who do not, how much % of optical movie disc sales would be contributed from those without broadband service at home?