Well there will be BR sales, BR will be one option amongst many others. I don't know if that's really all that much of a victory, but I guess you gotta' take what you can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guartho
Which would seem to make it even more impressive that Blu-ray is outdoing DVD at the same point in their respective lives.
Ultimately we'll have to see how the long term trends play out. Their is a market for those who want the highest quality. But their seems to be little excitement for BR amongst the majority of the consumer market for which up-converted DVD is perfectly fine.
Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guartho
Speaking just for me I'll be happy as long as Blu-ray remains viable enough that it's available for all the "must-own" titles that I come across.
Since it's doing better than DVD did at this point with more competition than DVD had I think I'll be happy.
Marz, before I get into why music on discs is so last millennium, have you actually bought a BR player yet?
Frank, for you, and others, let's put your highly offensive and elitist persona in the spotlight for the time being and hopefully have it go away not only for you but for others as well.
First, yes I do own a Blu-ray player, a PS3. I've had it for quite some time now. Before I even posted my 2009 thread I had one already for a couple of months. In addition, I also own a Sony Bravia Z-Series KDL46Z4100 46-inch LCD TV, with a Sony 5.1 surround sound system.
Would you like to know my height, weight, and schwartz size too? My tax filing status? Where I live? Some more about my spending habits?
My point here is not so much the question of my own personal financial spending habits, but the elitist sense of some like yourself in this thread that seem to vilify those if they don't own a piece of hardware. I find it it nauseating in the sense that I, for one, welcome any person's opinion on the subject--whether they own or don't own Blu-ray--as long as they are willing to back up their assertions with well versed debate. Sure it helps ones assertion if they've witnessed Blu-ray for themselves, as I've done for years now, but ownership is surely not a prerequisite for witnessing Blu-ray or knowing the tech behind the format. Moreover, ownership certainly does not give one certain unaleinable rights as being an expert on the subject either. So, in essence, I find your inquiry simply contentious and lacking in any real substance in trying to discredit my Blu-ray arguments.
Notice I haven't asked you if you own Blu-ray yet? Because, frankly Frank, I don't give a crap. I'll simply keep refuting the bogus pro HD DVD (and now VOD since you lost the aforementioned battle) garbage you've been spewing for a long time now--with ownership or without ownership.
Happy debating everyone. And Frank, I'd love to hear your take on how music on a disc is so last millenium.
ugh. I hope it works better than the Sharp stand-alone player I had for about 3 days last year. It's funny, I don't have an issue with all-in-one computers, but I shudder at all-in-one TVs.
From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.
It isn't that your assertions are that outlandish, but rather that they're stated with certainty and with what appears to be contempt for those who disagree. There's only one thing that is certain here, that video distribution is a turbulent market and that its future isn't entirely clear... hence the attraction of debating the subject here.
Quote:
From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.
I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.
Quote:
Also today, do you recall that rant I posted a couple weeks back about how the talk of Blu-ray's demise was absurd? Our friend Ben Drawbaugh weighed in on the subject over at Engadget as well, and he's clearly of the same mind. Ben and I were e-mailing back and forth recently, and he made a few additional points about Blu-ray and the notion of downloading that I thought were interesting. First, he noted that while Apple was recently thrilled to announce program-to-date high-def TV series sales of $5 million via iTunes download, Blu-ray sold $17 million worth of titles that same week alone. Ben also sent the following, which made me smile...
"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.
10 - Movie commercials say "now available on Blu-ray and DVD" never mentions downloads.
9 - You can't rent TV shows from any download service, but you can buy them on disc.
8 - 24 hour rental window.
7 - 30 day rental limit.
6 - Extras only available on discs
5 - Can't rent HD movies on the PC (only on boxes like the 360, Vudu etc).
4 - Pulls previously available movies from the selection.
3 - About a 30 day window between when a title is released on disc and on download services.
2 - Digital copies are now included with many discs.
1 - Can't buy HD movies from any service."
Those are good points all. To them, I'll add the fact that according to VideoScan, Blu-ray now regularly hits as much as 10% of total sales of new release titles. In addition, there are now over 1,000 Blu-ray Disc titles released or scheduled for release according to the DVD Release Report (1,057 to be exact). That's a significant milestone after just two full years of format availability. Let's go further... as Blu-ray player pricing drops below $200 and even $150 this holiday season and into 2009, buying a Blu-ray player will become a no-brainer. Just a couple days ago, I was at the dentist and the hygienist was talking about how her DVD player had just died and she needed to get a new one. She asked about "this Blu-ray thing," and when I told her that she could get a BD player for under $200 and that it would play all her DVDs too, she was sold on the spot. That story is going to be repeated millions of times next year. ANYONE who walks into a Best Buy or a Wal-Mart looking to replace a broken cheap DVD player is going to learn about cheap Blu-ray/DVD players and think, "Why the hell not?" Have I mentioned the fact that Hollywood is being relentless in getting the word about Blu-ray Disc out? You're not going to see that with downloading. Why, you ask? You want the real clincher? The REAL reason why Blu-ray is going to be around a long time, and downloading isn't going to take over for a very long time? It's not just bandwidth, folks, though that's a problem too and will be for a while. No, the real roadblock is profit. Hollywood studios will NEVER be able to sell you a downloaded movie for $29.99 or $39.99. It'll NEVER happen. That would be like telling hardcore gamers that they can't buy games on physical discs anymore, but they still have to pay $60 for the latest, greatest titles. What this means is that downloading - best case - is going to take over the movie rental market, not sales. Any movie fans who want extras beyond just the movie itself, and want to actually own the content rather than continually rent it again and again, are going to stick with physical media. And that means Blu-ray. Anyone who tells you otherwise A) doesn't understand the home video industry or the movie enthusiast market, is a downloading advocate, or C) preferred HD-DVD and still feels sour grapes. That's not to say everyone who watches DVDs will make the switch to Blu, but this whole idea that Blu-ray isn't here to stay or is going to remain a super-über-high-end niche product is a load of malarkey. I'm just saying. Ben too. (Thanks again, Ben - great talking with you!)
The research group reported Tuesday that, on average, consumers spent 41 percent of the money budgeted for movies and other video content by purchasing DVDs of films. Movie rentals on DVD were the next biggest category with 29 percent. Consumers spent 11 percent purchasing TV shows on DVD. About 18 percent went to theater tickets, according to the report.
Bandwidth
portability
Flexibility
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Ultimately we'll have to see how the long term trends play out. Their is a market for those who want the highest quality. But their seems to be little excitement for BR amongst the majority of the consumer market for which up-converted DVD is perfectly fine.
Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.
18% of all Dark Knight sales so far have been on Blu-Ray.
You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?
Week by Week you will see your local Blockbuster extend the amount of Blu-Ray titles they have at the expense of DVD's. This is already happening in my local store.
Then all of a sudden we will hit a point where Blu-ray sales actually overtake DVD sales, who is betting on next Christmas? Maybe the year after, but it is not that far away.
Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.
People do not buy what they want, they buy what the manufacturers want them to buy. At the moment the big studios and electronics companies want you to buy Blu-Ray so that is exactly what they will make cheaper and easier for you to buy.
I couldn't find that post. Can you post that information again? Several retail stores that sell DVD's have gone out of business. The major and mom and pop rental stores are still doing pretty well.
Their are ways you can.
This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.
Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.
Widespread HD commerce is already happening.
Quote:
This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.
Sigh!
This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!
Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.
When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.
Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.
Quote:
Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.
Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Condescend much?
Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
How do I support such an assertion?
Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.
Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.
I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.
I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.
"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.
That was a top ten list from a BR fans perspective. The main reason Hollywood is pushing BR is simply because of money. They want to protect their aging business model. The same as the music industry wanted to protect its CD sales.
Quote:
Bandwidth
Portability
Flexibility
As I've said before you are looking at the situation as it is today, todays problems are not tomorrows problems, in technology imagination and innovation always gets around limitation.
Quote:
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Video sales aren't very much more than renting. You tried to make it sound as though people spent a significant more on sales than renting.
You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?
How do I fail to take into consideration a prediction in the future that may or may not happen?
Quote:
Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.
People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.
This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!
Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.
When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.
Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.
That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.
I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.
Quote:
Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.
Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.
People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.
You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.
But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.
You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.
You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.
And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?
That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.
I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.
Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.
TenoBell get a grip. We're talking about how the Video market works regardless of the format. My reference was just an example. The same rules still apply.
Did you read my post from Bill Hunt? He knows alot more about this than either of us. Look I didn't say downloading wasn't in the future it's just going to take a bit longer than you think with all the issues.
Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
How do I support such an assertion?
Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.
Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.
I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.
So you're more of an expert than Bill Hunt?
Did you not read the article??????
Downloading will probably take over TenoBell's mom and pop video store ( which is a shame end of an era and all that ) but as far as sales go physical media is here to stay for about another decade at least. Downloading will be for renting.
Quote:
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
Quote:
people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray.
From my link that I posted for you which you obviously didn't read the article :
Quote:
Here's the kicker for Internet video: only 0.5 percent was spent on renting or purchasing TV shows or movies off the Web.
That's 41 % for sales of physical media, 29% for rentals, and .05 % for downloaded material.
Big among the issues is bandwidth among other things. Sorry it just ain't there yet. That's why Comcast is putting a cap on their downloads. No one will offer a better solution as Vinea says because without more pipeline there isn't one. I know some people don't want to believe this but that's the way it is. Look it up.
You would think that if there's more bandwidth why would they do this. Hmmm?
It's just that downloading will be good for renting. Period. For many reasons that you still haven't produced a good counter argument addressing these issues.
Posts some links that offer solutions to these issues and I'll believe you. Show me where " huge corporations " plan to sell HD video that you can transfer to another medium for portability. Until then just repeating your wishful thinking isn't going to make it real.
Read the links from people in the know! Sticking your head in the sand won't make it happen either.
You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.
But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.
You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.
You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.
And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?
This post is spot on correct. VOD/downloads are the future. Emphasis on the word future.
I get impatient waiting for a 150mb 1080p trailer to download. I don't see my internet speeds getting any faster anytime soon and I live in Los Angeles. I can't imagine how long it would take to download a 1080p feature film.
Also, I'm a full-on "extras" lover. I gobble up discs for their behind-the-scenes and extras just as much as the feature itself.
Smart buy for a Sony at that timeframe. Essentially an XBR4. Today I guess the XBR6 is pretty well discounted that it's probably the better buy...$2499 vs $2199. I just can't see coughing up $4,699 for an XBR8.
Smart buy for a Sony at that timeframe. Essentially an XBR4. Today I guess the XBR6 is pretty well discounted that it's probably the better buy...$2499 vs $2199. I just can't see coughing up $4,699 for an XBR8.
That's the thing about Sony they always cost too much. However they make a jaw droppingly good LCD tv!
Whatcha going to do? I'm just hoping that by the time my old Hitachi gives out ( 53" rear screen projection and still only 1080i but great picture and I spent $2699.00 in 2002 ) that the top of the line Sonys today will be in a more reasonable range by then.
Comments
Which would seem to make it even more impressive that Blu-ray is outdoing DVD at the same point in their respective lives.
Since it's doing better than DVD did at this point with more competition than DVD had I think I'll be happy.
Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.
Speaking just for me I'll be happy as long as Blu-ray remains viable enough that it's available for all the "must-own" titles that I come across.
Since it's doing better than DVD did at this point with more competition than DVD had I think I'll be happy.
Marz, before I get into why music on discs is so last millennium, have you actually bought a BR player yet?
Frank, for you, and others, let's put your highly offensive and elitist persona in the spotlight for the time being and hopefully have it go away not only for you but for others as well.
First, yes I do own a Blu-ray player, a PS3. I've had it for quite some time now. Before I even posted my 2009 thread I had one already for a couple of months. In addition, I also own a Sony Bravia Z-Series KDL46Z4100 46-inch LCD TV, with a Sony 5.1 surround sound system.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921665411950
Would you like to know my height, weight, and schwartz size too? My tax filing status? Where I live? Some more about my spending habits?
My point here is not so much the question of my own personal financial spending habits, but the elitist sense of some like yourself in this thread that seem to vilify those if they don't own a piece of hardware. I find it it nauseating in the sense that I, for one, welcome any person's opinion on the subject--whether they own or don't own Blu-ray--as long as they are willing to back up their assertions with well versed debate. Sure it helps ones assertion if they've witnessed Blu-ray for themselves, as I've done for years now, but ownership is surely not a prerequisite for witnessing Blu-ray or knowing the tech behind the format. Moreover, ownership certainly does not give one certain unaleinable rights as being an expert on the subject either. So, in essence, I find your inquiry simply contentious and lacking in any real substance in trying to discredit my Blu-ray arguments.
Notice I haven't asked you if you own Blu-ray yet? Because, frankly Frank, I don't give a crap. I'll simply keep refuting the bogus pro HD DVD (and now VOD since you lost the aforementioned battle) garbage you've been spewing for a long time now--with ownership or without ownership.
Happy debating everyone. And Frank, I'd love to hear your take on how music on a disc is so last millenium.
Here is some news on a Cell-based TV that Toshiba is prototyping...
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/s...87&newsLang=en
Very interesting. I'll try and post any more developments.
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167_1-10134480-100.html
From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.
It isn't that your assertions are that outlandish, but rather that they're stated with certainty and with what appears to be contempt for those who disagree. There's only one thing that is certain here, that video distribution is a turbulent market and that its future isn't entirely clear... hence the attraction of debating the subject here.
From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.
I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.
Also today, do you recall that rant I posted a couple weeks back about how the talk of Blu-ray's demise was absurd? Our friend Ben Drawbaugh weighed in on the subject over at Engadget as well, and he's clearly of the same mind. Ben and I were e-mailing back and forth recently, and he made a few additional points about Blu-ray and the notion of downloading that I thought were interesting. First, he noted that while Apple was recently thrilled to announce program-to-date high-def TV series sales of $5 million via iTunes download, Blu-ray sold $17 million worth of titles that same week alone. Ben also sent the following, which made me smile...
"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.
10 - Movie commercials say "now available on Blu-ray and DVD" never mentions downloads.
9 - You can't rent TV shows from any download service, but you can buy them on disc.
8 - 24 hour rental window.
7 - 30 day rental limit.
6 - Extras only available on discs
5 - Can't rent HD movies on the PC (only on boxes like the 360, Vudu etc).
4 - Pulls previously available movies from the selection.
3 - About a 30 day window between when a title is released on disc and on download services.
2 - Digital copies are now included with many discs.
1 - Can't buy HD movies from any service."
Those are good points all. To them, I'll add the fact that according to VideoScan, Blu-ray now regularly hits as much as 10% of total sales of new release titles. In addition, there are now over 1,000 Blu-ray Disc titles released or scheduled for release according to the DVD Release Report (1,057 to be exact). That's a significant milestone after just two full years of format availability. Let's go further... as Blu-ray player pricing drops below $200 and even $150 this holiday season and into 2009, buying a Blu-ray player will become a no-brainer. Just a couple days ago, I was at the dentist and the hygienist was talking about how her DVD player had just died and she needed to get a new one. She asked about "this Blu-ray thing," and when I told her that she could get a BD player for under $200 and that it would play all her DVDs too, she was sold on the spot. That story is going to be repeated millions of times next year. ANYONE who walks into a Best Buy or a Wal-Mart looking to replace a broken cheap DVD player is going to learn about cheap Blu-ray/DVD players and think, "Why the hell not?" Have I mentioned the fact that Hollywood is being relentless in getting the word about Blu-ray Disc out? You're not going to see that with downloading. Why, you ask? You want the real clincher? The REAL reason why Blu-ray is going to be around a long time, and downloading isn't going to take over for a very long time? It's not just bandwidth, folks, though that's a problem too and will be for a while. No, the real roadblock is profit. Hollywood studios will NEVER be able to sell you a downloaded movie for $29.99 or $39.99. It'll NEVER happen. That would be like telling hardcore gamers that they can't buy games on physical discs anymore, but they still have to pay $60 for the latest, greatest titles. What this means is that downloading - best case - is going to take over the movie rental market, not sales. Any movie fans who want extras beyond just the movie itself, and want to actually own the content rather than continually rent it again and again, are going to stick with physical media. And that means Blu-ray. Anyone who tells you otherwise A) doesn't understand the home video industry or the movie enthusiast market,
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwoc...62.html#bourne
Here's something else you can read.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10042979-93.html
The research group reported Tuesday that, on average, consumers spent 41 percent of the money budgeted for movies and other video content by purchasing DVDs of films. Movie rentals on DVD were the next biggest category with 29 percent. Consumers spent 11 percent purchasing TV shows on DVD. About 18 percent went to theater tickets, according to the report.
Bandwidth
portability
Flexibility
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Ultimately we'll have to see how the long term trends play out. Their is a market for those who want the highest quality. But their seems to be little excitement for BR amongst the majority of the consumer market for which up-converted DVD is perfectly fine.
Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.
18% of all Dark Knight sales so far have been on Blu-Ray.
You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?
Week by Week you will see your local Blockbuster extend the amount of Blu-Ray titles they have at the expense of DVD's. This is already happening in my local store.
Then all of a sudden we will hit a point where Blu-ray sales actually overtake DVD sales, who is betting on next Christmas? Maybe the year after, but it is not that far away.
Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.
People do not buy what they want, they buy what the manufacturers want them to buy. At the moment the big studios and electronics companies want you to buy Blu-Ray so that is exactly what they will make cheaper and easier for you to buy.
I couldn't find that post. Can you post that information again? Several retail stores that sell DVD's have gone out of business. The major and mom and pop rental stores are still doing pretty well.
Their are ways you can.
This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.
Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.
Widespread HD commerce is already happening.
This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.
Sigh!
This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!
Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.
When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.
Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.
Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.
Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Condescend much?
Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
How do I support such an assertion?
Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.
Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.
I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.
I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.
"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.
That was a top ten list from a BR fans perspective. The main reason Hollywood is pushing BR is simply because of money. They want to protect their aging business model. The same as the music industry wanted to protect its CD sales.
Bandwidth
Portability
Flexibility
As I've said before you are looking at the situation as it is today, todays problems are not tomorrows problems, in technology imagination and innovation always gets around limitation.
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Video sales aren't very much more than renting. You tried to make it sound as though people spent a significant more on sales than renting.
You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?
How do I fail to take into consideration a prediction in the future that may or may not happen?
Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.
People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.
Sigh!
This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!
Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.
When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.
Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.
That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.
I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.
Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.
Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.
People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.
You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.
But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.
You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.
You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.
And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?
That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.
I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.
Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.
TenoBell get a grip. We're talking about how the Video market works regardless of the format. My reference was just an example. The same rules still apply.
Did you read my post from Bill Hunt? He knows alot more about this than either of us. Look I didn't say downloading wasn't in the future it's just going to take a bit longer than you think with all the issues.
Still haven't heard a good counter argument.
Condescend much?
Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
How do I support such an assertion?
Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.
Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.
I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.
So you're more of an expert than Bill Hunt?
Did you not read the article??????
Downloading will probably take over TenoBell's mom and pop video store ( which is a shame end of an era and all that ) but as far as sales go physical media is here to stay for about another decade at least. Downloading will be for renting.
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.
people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray.
From my link that I posted for you which you obviously didn't read the article :
Here's the kicker for Internet video: only 0.5 percent was spent on renting or purchasing TV shows or movies off the Web.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10042979-93.html
That's 41 % for sales of physical media, 29% for rentals, and .05 % for downloaded material.
Big among the issues is bandwidth among other things. Sorry it just ain't there yet. That's why Comcast is putting a cap on their downloads. No one will offer a better solution as Vinea says because without more pipeline there isn't one. I know some people don't want to believe this but that's the way it is. Look it up.
You would think that if there's more bandwidth why would they do this. Hmmm?
It's just that downloading will be good for renting. Period. For many reasons that you still haven't produced a good counter argument addressing these issues.
Posts some links that offer solutions to these issues and I'll believe you. Show me where " huge corporations " plan to sell HD video that you can transfer to another medium for portability. Until then just repeating your wishful thinking isn't going to make it real.
Read the links from people in the know! Sticking your head in the sand won't make it happen either.
Here's some more food for thought.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives...ar_much_lo.php
http://gizmodo.com/5048025/giz-expla...-very-high-def
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...th-crunch.html
You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.
But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.
You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.
You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.
And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?
This post is spot on correct. VOD/downloads are the future. Emphasis on the word future.
I get impatient waiting for a 150mb 1080p trailer to download. I don't see my internet speeds getting any faster anytime soon and I live in Los Angeles. I can't imagine how long it would take to download a 1080p feature film.
Also, I'm a full-on "extras" lover. I gobble up discs for their behind-the-scenes and extras just as much as the feature itself.
Sony Bravia Z-Series KDL46Z4100 46-inch LCD TV
Smart buy for a Sony at that timeframe. Essentially an XBR4. Today I guess the XBR6 is pretty well discounted that it's probably the better buy...$2499 vs $2199. I just can't see coughing up $4,699 for an XBR8.
Smart buy for a Sony at that timeframe. Essentially an XBR4. Today I guess the XBR6 is pretty well discounted that it's probably the better buy...$2499 vs $2199. I just can't see coughing up $4,699 for an XBR8.
That's the thing about Sony they always cost too much. However they make a jaw droppingly good LCD tv!
Whatcha going to do? I'm just hoping that by the time my old Hitachi gives out ( 53" rear screen projection and still only 1080i but great picture and I spent $2699.00 in 2002 ) that the top of the line Sonys today will be in a more reasonable range by then.