New Study Finds Low Interest In Blu-ray 895
PHPNerd writes "A new consumer survey recently released chronicles the woes of the winner of the hi-definition format war: nobody wants it. While consumers were very happy to embrace the DVD standard when it came about because it brought a huge jump in quality over VHS, the pros of switching to Blu-ray are not as obvious. From the article: 'In contrast, while half of the respondents to our survey rated Blu-ray's quality as 'much better' than standard DVD, another 40% termed it only 'somewhat better,' and most are very satisfied with the performance of their current DVD players." Another reason cited was that a Blu-ray investment also dictates an HDTV purchase, something consumers are reluctant to do.'" Maybe it's also that line-doubling DVD players can be had for less than a hundred dollars.
line doubling? (Score:5, Informative)
Q: What exactly is a line-doubling DVD player?
A: Progressive scan from an interlaced source. [wikipedia.org]
Hardly something that should be mentioned... you know, we've had progressive for quite a long time now, and from experience most DVDs are interlaced.
Re:line doubling? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:line doubling? (Score:4, Informative)
Well I have a HDTV and a PS3, and Blu-Ray is meh (Score:3, Informative)
Got the PS3 for gaming, but thought since I had it anyway, I might as well upgrade to Blu-ray where available in my Netflix queue.
Compared to my upscaling DVD player with Faroudja chip, also connected to the HDTV via HDMI, the difference is really marginal.
Given the downsides that Blu-ray for me currently has working copy protection and region coding, I'm not buying any Blu-ray discs for the time being.
Blu-ray is the next Laserdisc (Score:5, Informative)
Laserdisc has been around almost as long as consumer VHS. But, unlike when Disney and others dropped the cost of VHS movies to $20, Laserdisc stayed expensive, often $50 or more per title. Laserdisc remained a premium format, VHS became the common format, and VHS outsold LD in droves.
Fast-forward to 2000 or so, and DVD is the next hot thing. Laserdisc is still being made, but it's almost done. DVD companies use their brains, and realise that if they want to make DVDs replace VHS and not just replace LD that they need to make them cheap. Thus, the price was common originally around $30, then $20, then $16.99, with some titles as low as $5.00 new, on sale. Great! Those who never saw LD and only saw VHS see a significant quality improvement as they get to use most of their 525 scan lines, instead of about half of them, and with the prices being competitive they see no reason to keep buying those old tapes.
Jump to now. DVD is reasonably well established. DVD has replaced VHS like CD replaced cassettes. People know it, they like it. They see how nice it is, and how much it basically looks like regular broadcast TV, or Cable, or Satellite on their analog TVs, and how it looks pretty good on their digital TVs. Many people have amassed large collections of DVDs and the money spent in those purchases is fresh in the minds. Now, Sony wants everyone to buy an expensive player, expensive titles (twice or more the cost of DVDs), and all that they can really claim is that it's better looking. Trouble is, most of us still need analog converter boxes for HDTV, most of us still use composite cable or coax, and even those of us who are videophiles with huge collections don't necessarily see enough benefit to bother with the added expense. We have our consumer format in DVD and by all reaoning it's a great format with good quality. Why should we buy the elite format in Blu-ray when we've got something that already conveys the eye candy, and already has all of the special features, languages, multiple versions, and the like?
Yes, I actually do collect Laserdiscs. I collect DVDs. I don't see how my older projector will make any use of the new format, and as projectors are expensive, HDMI-capable receivers are expensive, HDMI cables in 50' lengths are expensive, and what I have works wonderfully, I don't see any need to upgrade to anything new until something that I already have breaks, and I mean something more than my DVD player chunking out. Even then, I might buy a Blu-ray player if my DVD player breaks, but that would only be for the ability to possibly play blu-ray discs, and as the standards for Blu-ray aren't finalized, I still don't see any advantage to buying a player that might be obsolete by the time I get around to buying titles in its format.
Blu-ray is the next Laserdisc, and the sooner that Sony realises this and markets it accordingly, the better it'll be for them and for the consumer.
Re:line doubling? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think you're on-target here. That is the classic use of the term "line-doubler," which is why the DVD players in question don't usually call themselves that. They're usually called "upconverting."
In this case, they're not deinterlacing a signal--i.e. combining an every-other-line-per-frame signal into an every-line-per-frame signal. Instead, they're interpolating a higher resolution signal from a lower resolution one. Specifically, they're taking a 640x480 signal up to a 1280x720 or 1920x1080 signal. That may include deinterlacing as well, if the original signal's interlaced and the output's progressive. And it's true that progressive-scan players also deinterlace. Nobody would call them line-doublers though, I don't think.
Thing is, your HD TV does this as well, assuming it takes a 480i/p signal. It has to in order to display that signal at the TV's native resolution of 720p, 1080i, or 1080p.
So the question of whether an upconverting player makes a damned bit of difference comes down to this: Who has the better upconverting algorithm, the TV or the player?
If you have a great TV and a crappy player, it's possible an upconverting player can hurt your picture, not help it. In that case, run the lower-res signal to the TV and let the TV upconvert. This is similar to how, in the early 90s, sometimes it was better to run composite video instead of S-Video from your Laserdisc player to your TV, because your TV did a better job of comb filtering than the player did.
My basic take on upconverters, assuming your TV isn't made by Coby or similar, is that if you get them for free in the DVD player, awesome. If not, don't waste your money.
Regarding DVDs, my experience is that most film-original DVDs aren't interlaced, and most/all video-original DVDs are.
Re:Sony Hater (Score:5, Informative)
LG GGC-H20L + AnyDVD HD + Blockbuster is your friend. ;-)
Re:I personally don't have much interest in it. (Score:3, Informative)
three words: Video LAN Client.
Best FOSS DVD/media player ever. not only does it skip the retarded FBI warning, it skips all the can not skip past sections and directly loads the main menu, if the DVD was mastered to annoy people who directly load the main menu, you can specify the menu number, manually with the open disc dialog.
works on windows and linux, give VLC a shot. VLC is also the only client i've found for internet radio that works if the cast isn't an ogg stream, under linux.
did i mention it slices, dices and makes julian fries too? (you can even 'save stream' internet radio, arr)
Re:Personally... (Score:5, Informative)
Blame Hollyweird's obsession with DRM protection on their movies for that. The Blu-ray players have to do a shitload of self-authentication against internal keys, check for signs of tampering, and load the goddamn stupid JVM before you can view your movie.
*curses whoever thought a JVM was a good idea for an embedded consumer device*
The delay from pressing the 'on' button to getting something on the screen was a big issue when I was working with a certain consumer electronics company on the firmware, but it was very difficult to reduce it further because of all the required DRM/anti-tampering crap. The actual embedded kernel boots very quickly.
Re:Price? (Score:3, Informative)
I have a HTPC HDDVD/BluRay setup and I have to agree. Dealing with DRM is a constant struggle. Sometimes a disc will come out that won't be playable for weeks until the company who makes the player software issues a patch. My system is 100% HDCP. Why should I have to jump through hoops to play a frickin' movie?
Re:Bahh, the beginning of DVD was little different (Score:2, Informative)
The benefits also include audio quality, having everything (extras, etc) all on one disc, and some other stuff. Have you watched anything on Blu-Ray or done any actual research into it or just going with the popular "Only video quality is better, and not that much" crap response? Plus, that 90+ second load time is absolute bullshit.
Re:Prices Don't Help (Score:2, Informative)
I agree, I went into a comp store last weekend just to check, and the drive was 350$ on special, but the discs were 30$ a piece, that is outrageous!
If you calculate the amount of money that costs just to say you can put it all on one disc....
it doesn't make sense...if they were to make it like 3$ a disc, I would be there tomorrow.
In china, blue ray production doesn't cost more then a buck a disc, but because we live in a world of let's squeeze money out of the consumer until he bleeds, then go to the next gen technology, we end up with people trying to charge us these prices, then when it doesn't respond they post on slashdot crying as we we were the reason for not wanting to buy the technology.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Price? (Score:2, Informative)
Before now the largest problem has been the complete disparity between computer monitors and televisions. That line is quickly blurring and in many cases being destroyed all together.
Now we finally have HDMI switching receivers yet whenever you connect through them, Vista throws COPP errors and refuses to let you play despite the fact that you have gone out of your way to make sure that all your devices are HDCP compliant. This is my fundamental argument against blu-ray and DRM in general. I am willing to bet that I could take a sony VAIO, sony projector and sony receiver and still have problems with DRM. At least in that case they can't blame some other company. I am also getting a little tired of being told that my configuration is not supported. What the hell is the point if these devices aren't playing nice and what recourse does the consumer have.
The only reason blu-ray outsold hd-dvd is because of the PS3. If microsoft included HD-DVD things would be very different right now. The format war would still be waging. Personally I think Toshiba gave up too soon. I don't think blu-ray adoption is going to pick up that much. Everyone who wants it already has it and everyone else has their trusty dvd player and digital set top converter. I'd rather buy up the HD-DVDs at 12 bucks a pop, Rent the blu-rays from netflix and wait for the DRM to either get cracked wide open so I don't have to use gray market software to enjoy my legally purchased movies or DRM becomes outmoded and despised by the consumer.
Frankly I think there aren't enough people pissed off about it and until there are, we won't see it change.
The problem is price. (Score:4, Informative)
The problem is price. Not of the Blu-Ray players (which are relatively reasonable), and not of HD televisions (which more people are buying anyway), but of the media.
Simply put, a Blu-Ray title typically costs 50% to 100% more than it's DVD predecessor. With high gas prices and reduced wages and many families struggling to make ends meet, does it make sense to spend $30 a pop for a movie?
High-definition disks, you see, were the industries the secret strategy behind rationalizing higher DVD prices. Consumers have historically resisted every attempt by the industry to raise prices, and competition has in fact lowered them. As such, we pay much less for a DVD today that we did a decade ago, despite that fact that inflation should have boosted the price of a disc along with most everything else.
A new format kills two birds with one stone: It provides a rationale for higher prices for a higher quality product and --not insignificantly-- lets us pay for our favorite movies yet again in yet another format.
Unfortunately for the industry, however, we're not taking the bait. Plus we now have other options, like HD cable VOD, or AppleTV/iTunes HD downloads. They're not quite as good as Blu-Ray, true... but they're also only five or six bucks apiece.
If the Blu-Ray folk want to sell players and discs, they need to drop media prices so that the HD version is only a slight premium over the SD DVD. Say two bucks, max.
As is, they're wanting to screw the consumer and, as always, make him pay for the privilege.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:2, Informative)
Hear this Every 6months until BR passes DVD. (Score:2, Informative)
People must have the same tired replies in a file and don't bother updating them.
## $30-$35 disk prices?
http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/ [eproductwars.com]
Check the top 20 Blu rays: They are $14 - $25 Most are under $20. These are not garbage titles. Batman begins is #1 BR for $17.95.
Right now there is typically only a small premium for the Blu Ray. Soon it will be negligible. Why they heck wouldn't you get blu ray when the price is more or less equivalent?
## Not enough quality difference.
Seriously is everyone blind? I can see the difference on my 20" computer monitor. On really big screens DVDs show serious issues. Actually compare the back to back is astounding. People used to watch VHS and think it was fine too.
I don't have a BR yet, but I think buy a DVD at this point is silly when the price is so close for a much better source. A year from now the prices will probably be equal and we will still see posts railing about $35 blu rays.
jvm probably not the problem (Score:3, Informative)
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
According to the viewing distance calculator [homestead.com] you really should sit closer to such a "small" screen.
That's ok, my living room setup fares worse.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:1, Informative)
component inputs look damn good with HD video, just because you dont have an HDMI port doesnt mean it isnt worth upgrading to the bluray
Re:Personally... (Score:1, Informative)
FWIW, the delay isn't nearly as bad when playing BluRay discs with a PS3 and even in the other players that I've seen, the delay is mostly in booting up the player (since it's essentially a computer with an OS). Perhaps the delay you saw had to do with a player that didn't have the firmware to play a disc with a later version of the BluRay profile.
My roommate is in what I believe is the same or similar business as you...he installs mid-high end home theater setups ($15k - $75k). At one point, he got a free BluRay player from a vendor for directing a bunch of business at the guy. We hooked it up to our projector and the startup time was terrible...so bad that we got in the habit of planning to watch something on TV between when we'd turn the player on and when we'd watch the movie. Since then, the BluRay player went to another one of his clients and I've bought a PS3. And the PS3 goes from off to usable much faster than the old player. Even the old player would load BluRay discs pretty quickly once it had finished booting up, but the PS3 will load a BluRay just as fast as any old DVD player loads DVDs if it has already booted up.
FWIW, as another data point, my roommate tells me that to really appreciate the difference between DVD and BluRay, you need a > 100" TV. Below that, it's very difficult for the average person to tell the difference between an upscaled DVD and a BluRay.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
I think you missed part of his point. Component is not encrypted and, even though it may not be enabled on most current movies, Blu-ray is designed to reduce image quality unless the entire media path is "secure". It starts to get really depressing when you realize how hard it is to figure out whether every component in your setups actually supports whatever HDMI version is required.
Here's what I don't get. They don't refuse it to play, they "only" reduce quality to about DVD. Yet they are up in arms about people using camcorders in theaters. If they actually believe people are content watching CAMs, why would they for a second believe anybody would be bothered by DVD quality?
Re:Prices Don't Help (Score:1, Informative)
I completely agree. I would DEFINITELY buy more Blu-Ray discs, but I think that the price should be the same as the DVD version. Once they align the prices more with each other, I think you would see more blu-ray uptake. Until then, I'll settle for my upconverting DVD playback (even though I have a Blu-Ray player for some things).
Re:TVs don't die (Score:4, Informative)
Serious question: Has anyone here ever seen a TV die? I mean, not from being dropped during a move, but actually just stopping to work. I might be mistaken, but I have the impression these things just don't break.
They actually die a variety of slow deaths. They get blurry, they lose color fidelity (tint), they get dark, or lose contrast (look washed out), they can suffer 'burn in', make high pitched buzzing noises...
A lot of this stuff is repairable... but its not usually worth repairing.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
I can't use HDMI anyway. At least with my hardware, closed captioning does not work through HDMI. And we need closed captioning in our household. When I first bought my HDMI-capable 46" LCD TV, I bought HDMI cables. I took them back the next day when I realized closed captioning didn't work.
So I use normal DVD, normal cable box, and standard analog cables to the 46" LCD TV. Looks fine to us.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:5, Informative)
HDMI doesn't support closed captions (in the Line-21 sense), because on HDMI, there is no "Line 21" or overscan signalling for closed captioning at all. HDMI is just a lightly modified version of DVI (slightly more robust signalling, but otherwise identical save the connector and digital audio).
The only captioning available via HDMI is that produced by the source - e.g. high-def TiVos generate captioning over the video source before outputting it over HDMI, and DVDs/Blu-Ray (and HD-DVD) offer standard subtitling support. The annoyance comes from the fact that MPEG-2 has an actual transport for line-21 captions, but the studio masters don't make DVD subtitle overlays with the same content. (New DVDs tend to have it as overlays - you'll see it as "English SDH" under subtitles, rather than as part of line-21 MPEG captions, but old DVDs don't, and it's annoying). Alas, most players don't have caption generators to overlay the caption text prior to output via HDMI.
Also, there's only one Blu-Ray player on the market that's worth getting (the Playstation 3), partly due to HD-DVD having forced Blu-Ray's hand in releasing players before technology had matured enough to make HD-DVD features affordable in Blu-Ray players. And unfortunately, the PS3 doesn't integrate nicely into a home theatre (lack of consumer IR being the big issue, so you can't use your fancy universal remote).
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
Aspect ratio is not at all relative if you want to preserve a 1:1 *pixel aspect* ratio. 1.85:1 to 16:9 or 4:3 conversions are done by cropping or pan & scan, not by changing the aspect ratio of the pixels.
Buying/renting a DVD that has been pan & scanned from 1.85:1 to 4:3 is the silly thing, not trying to watch video in the pixel aspect ratio that was intended.
Re:Prices Don't Help (Score:3, Informative)
I suspect that BLu-Ray price is going away:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=blu-ray&x=0&y=0 [amazon.com]
In fact, the Transformers 2 disc set is more expensive on DVD...by 4 cents:)
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
Whatever.
Yes, in fact, it [Blueray] does.
No, Blueray can do 60 FPS at 1080p. It can also do 24 FPS, but that's not a limitation of the format or the players or the displays by any means. That's just a limitation of old film technology. And "in fact", the reason that Blueray can do motion better is because it can present a full, non-interlaced frame in 1/60th of a second so that (a) there's no interline distortion, and (b) the full frame rate is twice as fast and (c) things like panning are less susceptible to blurring the background because the frame rate can be up to twice as fast (see the Red one digital movie camera [red.com] for an instance of this capability.)
Old films are not the only source material available today. Wake up and smell the digital data.
I'm well aware of how it works; My company's software has supported 3:2 pulldown since the early 1990's. I'm an engineer with many video-related hardware and software design credits. Slashdot is full of people like me. :-)
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:3, Informative)
Are you referring to the Image Constraint Token (ICT)? I don't think there's been a single release, on HD DVD or Blu-ray, that actually had that flag set on. I just saw a thread recently (perhaps on AVS forum) of a guy that had a setup routing the data from his HD DVDs and Blu-ray discs through a home theatre PC. So it can definitely be done, although I don't know how.
I watch hi-def content on my old projection HDTV, and I've done A/B comparisons through different inputs between DVD content and hi-def content. There's quite an improvement.
Where I can't tell an improvement is sound. But then I'm neither an audiophile nor do I have a surround sound set up that is good enough to differentiate between the compressed audio on DVDs and the lossless sound on (many/most) HD DVDs/BDs.
And to the grandparent: it's Blu-ray. Not Blue-Ray.
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:2, Informative)
Re:DVD is poor by comparison, but is "good enough" (Score:1, Informative)
How about the 3rd option:
Download all your HD movies with bittorrent, and watch them on your HDTV with your PC, over a DVI to HDMI cable, component cable, traveling pigeons or what else you prefer. Nothing beats a clean, unrestricted stream of HD video, I can tell you that.
I only see BluRay as a niche segment that servers the purpose of seeding the P2P networks with HDTV rips.
I wasn't allays a cynic troll, mind you - they did this to me. My life is much to short to be bothered with things like CSS, AACS, Image Constraint Tokens, region codes and the like. And you start to appreciate the price after a while.
I wonder what will they do when nobody, except for a few old people, will buy their stupid frisbees ?
But wait! you say, what about the people that make movies? Is it moral to profit from their work, without giving anything back ?
You know what? I realized I don't really give a fuck. Hollywood can go bankrupt for all I care. Go to hell with your pretentious movie stars, pompous directors, sneaky lobbyists, overworked crews, billionaire moguls, payroll politicians and morally bankrupt culture. I don't think society will suffer in the least.