Blockbuster Chooses Blu-ray 351
s31523 writes "The format war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray has posted another battle, this time the victor seems to be the Blu-ray side. Blockbuster has announced it has chosen Blu-ray as the HD format to rent out in the majority of its stores. This decision comes after rental data was looked at for the 250 stores that carry both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray with the majority of rentals being Blu-Ray. Blockbuster now plans to stock Blu-ray only in 1450 of it's stores, but says the 250 stores with the HD-DVD movies will be kept on the shelf."
Freedom to choose (Score:4, Insightful)
someone's getting paid off (Score:1, Insightful)
A little meaning, perhaps (Score:5, Insightful)
If Wal-Mart decides not to stock HD-DVD (or, for that matter, Blu-Ray) titles, then that's more interesting.
Myself, I think the idea of two formats which (unlike VHS/Betamax) are, at first glance, practically identical and come in very similar cases yet require different players is absurd. Unless and until either one wins or dual-format players become commonplace, there's going to be some very pissed off people when they get their shiny new film home only to find that it won't play.
Does this even matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Freedom to choose (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another win for BitTorrent, which allows you to pick your favorite HD format!
:-P
monk.e.boy
Wow, this is huge (Score:3, Insightful)
Strong echoes with VHS/Betamax (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does this even matter? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:BB online still has HDDVD (Score:4, Insightful)
Is netflix starting a chain of B&M rental outlets to compete with BB?
DOH! ... or ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The future ain't DVD, of any format. The future be network distributed content, no matter what the US film industry wants you to think.
Re:Does this even matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
The cost of ownership is significantly lower too... pay your cable/satellite company $5 for the movie you want to see using the equipment you already have or buy a $500+ player and go to the store (or wait for delivery of) a rental + however much that costs.
I see the HD-DVD vs BRD debate along the same lines as the DVD-Audio vs SACD debate... which format one that war? NEITHER the equipment was over priced, crippled by DRM and only a fraction of the market owned the supporting equipment to fully utilize it nevermind become actually interested in it.... who won that war? technically it still rages on but the real victor was the MP3 and other digitally distributed forms of music... far and wide technically inferior to the DVD-A and SACDs but it's pretty apparent that consumers go for convenience over quality... at least in terms of their media.
Re:"We have no Blockbluster, you insensitive clod" (Score:2, Insightful)
News That Doesn't Matter (Score:4, Insightful)
Firstly, there's price. I'm not just talking the price of players here, though that is a factor right now. The big thing is that the vast majority of people do not own televisions that will benefit from a higher-quality format. The cost of having a television that will benefit from this has to be added on to the startup cost, and that price hasn't seemed like it's gone down at all. Sure, you can get high-def 22" sets - but with a set that small, the difference between DVD and HD-format is pretty nullified. Again, only enthusiasts will notice a difference.
Another big reason is customer fatigue. DVDs have only relatively recently obtained high penetration in the home market - in no part thanks to cheap players from Walmart and other discount stores. Now customers are being asked once again to spend money to upgrade their collections... and as I said above, the startup price is not trivial for marginal improvement in quality. No, there are no MPAA-Nazis... oh, there are. My point is, no one is forcing them to upgrade - but on the other hand, the mass amount of customers just don't care.
Another thing I might point out is that the major indicator of trends - the porn industry - hasn't chosen a format yet. In fact, they're pretty much eschewing physical media for the internet. So, were I to be a betting man, I'd say that an online format is going to be the next big thing - and we're already seeing that with sites like YouTube.
So, in the long run, this isn't really news at all, this is just a blip on the radar.
Re:Strong echoes with VHS/Betamax (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Another Layer of DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"We have no Blockbluster, you insensitive clod" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:They should stock both but... (Score:2, Insightful)
To be skeptical of the PS3 because of this issue, you'd also have to be skeptical of any other CD or DVD player on the market since and until the PS3 was released.
Re:Wow, this is huge (Score:5, Insightful)
Blockbuster only stocks "hits". And not for very long, at that.
Re:You can prefer one on a rational basis (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"We have no Blockbluster, you insensitive clod" (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:You can prefer one on a rational basis (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you paid by Sony and/or BMG? Because otherwise I cannot understand your extremely specious reasoning.
Corporations are entities that we are asked to treat [legally, and only more or less, but bear with me] as people. They are single entities, even when made up of other entities. And in fact all of them are, because they are made up of multiple people.
Now, you don't seem to think that blaming a corporation is wrong, just blaming Sony overall. But what is so different about blaming sony corporate instead of sony music, from blaming sony music instead of the people at sony music that make the bad decisions and implement them? Answer: fucking nothing. There is no difference.
Thus, if it is reasonable to blame sony music for the rootkit, and not the specific individuals responsible, then it is reasonable to blame sony corporate for the misdeeds of its child companies.
The thing that allows corporations to abuse their position is a lack of accountability, and here you are, making the biggest contribution to that lack possible: you're contributing your mindshare to the idea of that lack.
Finally, it is completely rational to boycott all Sony products because of the actions of one subsidiary, because each individual company would have less power in the marketplace if not for being part of a conglomerate.
Calling people fanboys for boycotting companies for their misdeeds is wrongheaded, to say the least. Stop being part of the problem!
Food for thought (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A little meaning, perhaps (Score:3, Insightful)
I would say equally interesting. I think a rental giant will have more sway than a retailer as I believe the average consumer rents more than they buy. If I wanted to buy a HD format (well, I wouldn't because regular DVD is all I need, but IF I did, I would get a duel-player), if I had a choice of renting Blu-rays at any number of Blockbusters (I'm also a Blockbuster Online member) or having a hard time finding HD-DVD rentals, I would choose Blu-Ray.
Given the debatable nature of which one is 'better', I have a feeling duel-players will be the real winner here. The movie industry will be segmenting themselves.
I'm not interested in either. Regular DVD's are fine. But I also do not have the money to buy a nice flat-screen 1080p TV, own a PS3 or Xbox 360, and have a killer 7.1 speaker system. Hooking up a HD format to my current setup will give me the same result as a DVD.
Maybe 5 years from now, I'll have the disposable income and the prices will be much lower to actually have a killer setup. I'm interested in HD setups, as I like my "tech-toys", but I'm also a penny pincher and I can wait a few years and save $200 on a new player, that will probably be smaller and have more features.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Re:Betting on a loser. (Score:3, Insightful)
I must be odd - I don't find the process of driving to the video store, shuffling through the poor selection, finding something that's actually in stock and waiting in line to check out and driving home all that appealing.
I suppose they're still relevant in much the same way Blu-ray vs HD-DVD is relevant.
Other people might see value there - but all I see are the limitations that far outweigh the benefits.
Re:Does this even matter? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're looking at portable media players you will never get the same quality out of those that is delivered by a SACD or DVD-A in a full high end surround sound setup... Not only is the music compressed way beyond what you'd get on SACD or DVD-A the equipment in that form factor just isn't capable of reproducing it in the same high quality you could get from an audiophile grade surround sound system... It doesn't matter how much money you spend on it.
Take a look at phones, hard lines almost always offer better voice quality and reliability, but most people prefer the convenience of a cell phone to the point where there are a lot of people without a hardline anymore.
Similarly with technology today any streamed HD content is going to be compressed more and probably in a lower (720p) resolution when compared to disc based media like HD-DVD or Blu-Ray.
Sometimes you can get convenience and quality like the move from VHS to DVD... but YES sometimes it is a choice of one over the other and looking at the choices consumers have made with new products in the past it seems to me that more often then not people will adopt the more convenient product, quality be damned.
Re:This is so sad ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Most consumers are either rent or purchase their movies. The concept of a DVD player is now ubiquitous in the consumer culture. I consider myself to be VERY computer literate, but I can see major hurdles with trying to toss a 50GB movie file around a home network. Better yet, how would I permit a friend to watch the movie?
I can walk into a Best Buy and pick up 250 GB of movies (I'm generalizing), go home and watch them, sell them, trade them, lend them to friends, etc. etc.
The disk is still a very efficient method of distributing film. (P.S. Most music is still sold on disks as well...)