Patrick on TWIT - I think Patrick was right

[vance]

If you heard TWIT, there was a discussion regarding Bluray's adoption and impact. Some felt the quality increase over DVD was not compelling enough for most to upgrade, especially with the discs themselves being so expensive. Patrick disagreed, saying that the ramp up would continue and eventually gain a major share of the media market (summarizing, of course, and hopefully correctly).

As someone with a small HDTV (32") and no sound system, even I see a marked improvement of Bluray over upscaled DVD's and with Netflix I will rarely buy blurays, so that cost for me is not an issue. I think Bluray can be viable and could even simply replace DVD players if they remain cheap and versatile, with added values like Netflix streaming, home media streaming, etc.

If someone is in the market for a new player, and a bluray player and a regular DVD player are close in price, why NOT get the bluray?

[wiak]

blur-ray player with netflix :P

[ph03n1x]

I have many DVD movies in my collection and using Netflix, I have been going back and watching some again on Blu-Ray. I think I fall somewhere between Roger's and Patrick's opinion. There are just some things that even on a smaller TV with a limited sound system are SO much better in HD, like LOST and the few movies mentioned in Episode 1 here. I don't see any benefit from HD for comedy movies or shows such as The Office. Also, because of greedy ISPs in the USA capping monthly usage and refusing to roll out more than 3-5mbps average speed to the majority of customers, I don't see streaming or downloads replacing discs anytime within the next 3-5 years.

[cryptic]

Bandwidth caps are a major hurdle to the on demand world those panelists keep professing will be a reality. In time, the novelty of immediacy will fade and a hunger for quality will return. I also agree that HD does nothing to improve some content but when it does, it's well worth it. I like Hulu, but not as a replacement to paid cable services. The image quality isn't there. However, if I missed a first-run of a show, it's great to know I have a way to get it legally.

These tech experts really need a reality check. What happens in Silicon Valley isn't the norm for the vast majority of Americans.

[jdryyz]

I agree that Blu-Ray is seeing greater success and won't be pushed aside by the NetFlix/Movie downloads anytime soon. The impression I got from most of the panel on the last TWIT was they're just not seeing Blu-Ray on good/properly calibrated displays. The display part of the equation wasn't discussed enough. I watch Blu-Ray on a Samsung LN55A950 and, believe me, there's a SUBSTANTIAL gain in quality over DVD.

If the $98 WalMart BD player helps push along Blu-Ray sales even more, we'll be seeing more price drops and eventually DVDs will be pushed off the shelves and the space for Blu-Ray will increase. The fact that I can go into my local Best Buy, Fry's, etc. and continue to see more valuable space devoted to Hi-Def, I know it is not just a niche market.

[dargo]

it seems a lot of the "I don't see much improvement with blu-ray" crowd are also people who listen to mp3's as if that is the preferred format, you haven't listened to music till you heard a good SACD if you get the chance listen to the who's Tommy on SACD it will amaze you.
video as well as audio sometimes requires training to appreciate a good HD picture, just like a fine wine or piece of art you have to learn about to 'get it" can't wait for episode 2!

[therage800]

it seems a lot of the "I don't see much improvement with blu-ray" crowd are also people who listen to mp3's as if that is the preferred format, you haven't listened to music till you heard a good SACD if you get the chance listen to the who's Tommy on SACD it will amaze you.
video as well as audio sometimes requires training to appreciate a good HD picture, just like a fine wine or piece of art you have to learn about to 'get it" can't wait for episode 2!

I agree. In my experience the people in the, "I don't see much improvement with blu-ray" have never even owned an HD set up.

[zecane]

Maybe that's the thing, they don't want to spend money on an HDTV (and preferably speakers, recievers etc) and a blu-ray player. And I think people see the difference, maybe they just don't care as much as some do. I agree with ph03n1x, some stuff I'm not too bothered if it's in HD or not, but if I had the choice between an HD-version and a SD-version of a movie and the price difference wasn't huge, I'd obviously go with the HD-version.

[vance]

That calibration issue IS key. As the guys mentioned in the show, if they are just bringing their TV home and plugging it in, I can imagine that a bluray and DVD may not show much a huge difference.

[kurolust]

I do think calibration is obviously a good thing to do. But as far as Blu ray goes I can't justify paying $19 for say Knocked Up when its $9 on DVD. Movies like Iron Man, Transformers, etc I can understand, but until Blu ray comes down for all titles, I will stick to the action/sci-fi where I feel I'm getting the most for my money.

[vance]

kurolust, I agree that there are still only a handful of movies I would actually buy on Bluray, but that was the same for DVD's. I just don't feel the need to collect the the physical media. With Netflix, I have any movie I want (and a LOT in bluray) just a day away (which is the philosophy behind my signature!).

[viremia]

The difference going from VHS to DVD was, IMO, more substantial than the difference between DVD to Bluray. It's not just in the picture or audio quality. It's the non-cinematic features that the "average Joe" thinks of as much as the cinematic features (picture and audio quality). The non-cinematic features are things like instant jumping between time points in the movie, extra features like audio commentary, deleted scenes, out-takes, behind the scene featurettes, etc.

THAT is why the "average Joe" doesn't see Bluray as being that compelling. And like it or not, there are a hell of a lot more "average Joes" in the consumer market than videophiles and audiophiles. And they are the ones who drive market changes.

While I may be able to see a difference and that difference may be important to me, most people either don't see the difference or simply don't care enough to justify the increased expense of Bluray. Therefore, there will be a slowed adoption.

One thing that is helping to increase the adoption of hi-def DVDs is the overall relative cheaper price of a good home theater system (TVs, optical disc players, audio equipment, etc.) these days as compared to what it was in the days of the VHS->DVD transition.

That's just my take on it.

[mic]

Right you are viremia. Spending more for just image quality has to be weighed against extra features and so far from what I've seen, you pay more for a Blu-ray disc and get fewer extras. And, if you already have a large DVD collection, replacing it with Blu-ray discs, if you can find adequate replacements, is very pricey.

I have quite a few DVDs and they don't look all that bad on my setup, so I see no need to rush out and replace everything. Besides, I think I will wait for the next "big thing" so I don't have to purchase everything all over again in a couple of years.

[ghelyar]

I can see the difference. It is particularly obvious when looking at things like Morpheus' crater face in The Matrix (or facial hair on other closeups, etc).

However, I couldn't really see the difference from any of the marketing out there before I bought the drive. Most of the marketing is just a big lie and if we get lied to that much we probably won't believe anything that turns out to be true until we see it for ourselves.

They used to say that the colours were better on Blu-ray but I haven't noticed that at all and I'm sure they just turned up the saturation for the marketing as the only difference.

It will obviously replace DVD eventually. The only time this was ever in doubt was when people didn't know if HDDVD or Blu-ray would replace DVD but even then they knew one would. Even if there was no noticeable improvement, moore's law means that eventually they will drop to about the same price and people will buy Blu-ray rather than DVD given 2 pieces of hardware at the same price. In a few years, they probably won't even make DVD players any more and a few years after that someone will probably make some obscenely priced piece of hardware for converting old DVDs (as they currently do for things like cassette tapes, which used to be dirt cheap).


The only problem at the moment is that there is so little Blu-ray content that takes advantage of it. Most of what is out there are classics that they know will probably sell well but that were filmed on analogue film. You can get Zulu on Blu-ray but it will probably look exactly the same as it does on DVD because its filming pre-dates both of them. If it was originally released in 1964, upscaling to 1080p is just going to look like a higher definition of crud.

[vance]

The message that needs to be promoted is that bluray players will still play DVD's. In fact, the player will upscale them to look better than a DVD player! So, once a person's DVD player dies, it simply makes sense for them to get a BR player instead of another DVD player. And, for rental purposes, via Netflix or brick and mortar, the cost of getting the bluray is only marginally higher.

[zecane]

The TV will upscale either way, right? So if you have a decent upscaler built into the TV already, you may just want to let that one do the work (sending native resolution of the dvd-disc). And I know early on there were some concern about blu-ray players not been great at upscaling dvd's, that might have changed though.

[headshot1485]

blur-ray player with netflix :P

Same here with a blue-ray subscription. High-def or no-def for me.

[jdryyz]

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090717/tc_pcworld/bluraydiscsalesup_1