Blu-ray is dead

[I am Reid]

Too early to tell.

Like others have said, it took a while before DVD finally overthrew VHS.

With the way technology moves NOW as opposed to 10 years ago Blu Ray will be replaced by the time it matures. Everyone knows that downloads will overtake it, if you say otherwise you are just lying to yourself, its only a matter of time.

[Xerxes]

I didn't even bother reading the article, probably written by a HD-DVD supporter still scorn by Blu-Ray's crushing victory :p I was a HD-DVD supporter and still wished it won, but at the same time I'm not gonna go around spreading crap about how Blu-Ray's days are numbered either. Blu-Ray won and it's here to stay and I seriously doubt digital downloads will kill it either. Maybe in the EU and/or NA where high speed broadband has a much higher penetration/cheaper cost. However, in countries like Australia, which already has a low high speed broadband penetration/higher cost and it will be going backwards (thanks to Rudd's new mandatory filters, thanks there bud :rolleyes: ) I think Blu-Ray still going to be the main choice for most people. So Blu-Ray might not be the next DVD but it's not going the way of the Dodo either.

EDIT: Also I don't see digital downloads been that good, they aren't proper HD (only slightly better then DVD - this is mainly to keep the size down, once faster internet connections become more easily available I'm sure that will change, plus by then HDD space for files so big won't be much of an issue either) and I've noticed with some services you don't even get to own it, you gotta pay to view it each time, no thanks. Also, once it's really takes off (which it will, no doubt) DRM is going to play a big part in it, everyone is praising video downloading as the future, but will they once it's DRM infested? (sure Blu-Ray is too, but as a fixed medium the DRM only needs to be so much, on a download they might get even more anal; eg locking it to been viewed only on the PC/device you downloaded it to etc)

Edited November 15, 2008 by Xerxes

[DaDude]

Everyone knows that downloads will overtake it, if you say otherwise you are just lying to yourself, its only a matter of time.

Downloads don't have as good of a picture quality.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

With the way technology moves NOW as opposed to 10 years ago Blu Ray will be replaced by the time it matures. Everyone knows that downloads will overtake it, if you say otherwise you are just lying to yourself, its only a matter of time.

Everything inevitably gets "replaced" in the technology world.

That however doesn't mean it can't flourish, create a market and still exist, even when shifting through replacement/being completely replaced.

Physical products don't vaporise or expire when a new product starts to take over.

[Emn1ty]

This is NOT just what I am saying myself, it's what everyone I know who also has Entered the HD world agrees with me IS saying!!!

Has Blu-Ray fandom become a religion or something? I know this is an old post, but COME ON! I am one of those HD people and honestly I think Blu-Ray is a waste of time, especially in comparison to HD-DVD (although the choices have since been narrowed).

He mentioned Videophile, how did you missed that?

I am a huge Movie buff, also a Videophile, I gotta see it Sharp and clear!

Then stop sitting 5 feet from your 72" television. Upscaled DVD's look almost just as good from proper viewing distances on most anything but a 47" or larger.

But most people today buy 40"+ HDTVs, which is why I started that Huge HDTV thread (which was finally closed, thankfully). So, since everyone is buying big 1080p HDTVs, people would want the true (non-upscaled) 1080p signal. Cable and DVDs need to be upscaled to 1080p, which is not as good as the true 1080p signal. The only way to get that is through Blu-ray.

Actually it's true. My cousin used to have a 27" regular TV. It broke and now he bought a 46" HDTV and his house is too small too. My co-worker used to have just a 20" regular TV and now he upgraded to a 52" HDTV. Let's face it, people today live large. The larger your TV, the more you'll want the true 1080p signal.

IN response to these comments, your are both wrong. While many people do buy larger ones first, the "extra" TV's are bought more often since more and more people are either a) having kids b) getting larger houses or c) getting more than one home. People buy the small ones for anything and everything, whereas you sell the larger ones for on average 1-2 rooms per house, usually only one room (the living room and master bed room are the two most common).

Yup and we're having another one now.

No we are not, we are having something similar to the second stock market crash in the I think mid 70's.

That's the point. During times of economic crisis (such as, when there's 25% unemployment and even greater numbers of underemployment), people turn to entertainment for escapism - movies, games, etc.

When people make less money they spend less money. Right now, DVD costs less, so they will buy DVD and not Blu-Ray. A majority of people care more about whether or not it is widescreen than care about it being HD or not.

Well it's usually $12-15 per ticket.

That is horribly overpriced. On average here it is $8-$12 per ticket, and you get one hell of a viewing experience with it.

Downloads don't have as good of a picture quality.

How so? Fast, cheap and easy ones maybe but if you try to get decent downloads there are ones that are released in full HD. I have several full series of anime that are 720p already through digital downloads (not illegal series, pre-license series).

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

How so? Fast, cheap and easy ones maybe but if you try to get decent downloads there are ones that are released in full HD. I have several full series of anime that are 720p already through digital downloads (not illegal series, pre-license series).

No downloads of HD content are the same quality as physical.

That's factual.

I'm discussing raw statistics as well (bitrate/audio quality/codecs/etc).

If you can't notice a difference, kudos to you I guess, but there is 110% a difference.

I rip my own BR/HD-DVD movies, and I leave the video files untouched (raw VC-1/AVC), you're looking at 16GB+ per movie. Eastern Promises, a BR title I recently ripped is 18GB, with an average bitrate of around 22mbps. Find me a web based HD movie (rent or buy) in that quality.

I think Blu-Ray is a waste of time, especially in comparison to HD-DVD (although the choices have since been narrowed).

Can you also please explain this remark for me?

If you're talking about pricing, fair enough when HD-DVD was relevant on the market it was cheaper than BR (current HD-DVD prices are void, as they are only the way they are right now due to the format being dead).

[DaDude]

I have several full series of anime that are 720p already through digital downloads (not illegal series, pre-license series).

Wow! Either you're exaggerating or you're waiting days for a download to finish. I seriously doubt that ANY download out there is as good as a Blu-ray disc.

[I am Reid]

Who said they are as good now? Nobody. They will eventually increase in quality to be on par with other mediums. Is it really that hard to think out a year or two? You people are acting like they will be the way they are forever. Its not some wacko crazy idea that digital downloads will increase in quality.

[DaDude]

Who said they are as good now? Nobody. They will eventually increase in quality to be on par with other mediums. Is it really that hard to think out a year or two? You people are acting like they will be the way they are forever. Its not some wacko crazy idea that digital downloads will increase in quality.

Increased quality = more data. More data = longer downloads. Longer downloads = a boring life.

[I am Reid]

Increased quality = more data. More data = longer downloads. Longer downloads = a boring life.

wow, you guys REALLY cant think ahead. Are you saying a few years from now, that people will have the same speed connections? Even with the advancment of fiber, which is pushing cable companies to up the speed, they will just stay the same?

[Emn1ty]

No downloads of HD content are the same quality as physical.

True, but who's complaining when you are on an PC? If people want the higher quality, then they obviously can wait for it just like they can wait for it to A) come out or B) come in the mail (netflix). If a service similar to digital cable is provided for movie purposes then downloads shouldn't be a problem since they will have dedicated servers for such things. Not to mention the world is moving closer and closer to a fiber-optic based web connection and as that improves we will see much MUCH faster download speeds.

Can you also please explain this remark for me?

If you're talking about pricing, fair enough when HD-DVD was relevant on the market it was cheaper than BR (current HD-DVD prices are void, as they are only the way they are right now due to the format being dead).

HD-DVD has a faster read speed, is cheaper, and overall better. While it may not have the storage capacity it also doesn't over-compensate. It was the perfect HD medium and the only reason it lost was because of the PS3's push for Blu-Ray forcing it to be bought for the next gen console (although that strategy didn't work for UMD's for the PSP since no one bought the PSP).

Wow! Either you're exaggerating or you're waiting days for a download to finish. I seriously doubt that ANY download out there is as good as a Blu-ray disc.

No, it takes me roughly 20-30 minutes to download via torrent and or 10-15 minutes to download a single episode via direct downloads. Sound quality is generally good but it ain't 5.1 or 7.1 (usually stereo only). So it is reasonable to assume that digital downloads for current 1 hour programming would be a mere half hour to 45 minutes of download time depending on how many people are downloading it, and a full length movie would take no more than 1 hour to 3 hours depending on length as well as speed. Not too bad if you ask me. And this is at 720p, not 1080p. 1080p could be 1/3 slower, and increase times more for things such as 7.1 surround sound and such (although uncompressed sound is overrated).

Increased quality = more data. More data = longer downloads. Longer downloads = a boring life.

This is assuming people want to watch the movie the instant they download it (many people don't even watch newly bought DVD's until at least a few hours after purchase) as well as assuming that download speeds don't improve along with compression methods.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

True, but who's complaining when you are on an PC? If people want the higher quality, then they obviously can wait for it just like they can wait for it to A) come out or B) come in the mail (netflix). If a service similar to digital cable is provided for movie purposes then downloads shouldn't be a problem since they will have dedicated servers for such things. Not to mention the world is moving closer and closer to a fiber-optic based web connection and as that improves we will see much MUCH faster download speeds.

Not everyone is on a PC.

And as long as broadband infrastructure is imbalanced worldwide we cannot go download only.

You seriously think the movie studios would be idiotic enough to ignore the market for people who can't get 24mb broadband with unlimited bandwidth caps?

Physical will always have a demand, at least for the foreseeable future.

HD-DVD has a faster read speed, is cheaper, and overall better. While it may not have the storage capacity it also doesn't over-compensate. It was the perfect HD medium and the only reason it lost was because of the PS3's push for Blu-Ray forcing it to be bought for the next gen console (although that strategy didn't work for UMD's for the PSP since no one bought the PSP).

Blu Ray can actually support the higher bitrates, and better quality audio codecs (helped by disc size).

So I genuinely have no idea outside of the pricing how people think HD-DVD is better.

Overall though there's not much difference between what's on the discs, so I don't understand people bitter about HD-DVD bombing. Aside from having to wait a bit longer for standalone BR prices to drop.

[Ambroos]

wow, you guys REALLY cant think ahead. Are you saying a few years from now, that people will have the same speed connections? Even with the advancment of fiber, which is pushing cable companies to up the speed, they will just stay the same?

In 5 years time, my (Belgian) ISP changed it's speeds.

In the very beginning, we had 4Mbits.

Upgrade to 5Mbits in the same year.

Upgrade to 6Mbits the year after.

Upgrade to 12mbits later on

Upgrade to 15mbits last year

Upgrade to 20mbits 3 months ago.

Data volume went from 5GB to 30GB.

So yes, it will be possible. Our ISP has this kind of service already. Movie streaming on demand (and the bandwith doesn't count in your monthly allowance).

[ViZioN]

30 gig a month on a 20mbit connection....eek! :(

[Sandor]

for me, i don't see the point of buying blu ray.

if i walked into my local currys store here in the UK i'd be able to buy a dvd player, even one of those upscaling ones if i was so inclined, for ?70. if i want a blu-ray players it's more than double that price.

then when i go to play.com and look at the latest releases. on blu-ray they cost around 1/3 more usually.

i don't think the perceived advantage is worth the cost at the moment. ok sure it looks kick ass but i'm hardly struggling to see or hear whats happening with a normal DVD

[Emn1ty]

Not everyone is on a PC.

And as long as broadband infrastructure is imbalanced worldwide we cannot go download only.

Never said it would completely phase out physical media. In fact, I doubt it ever will, since I even prefer physical media. I just hate all the negativity around digital downloads when the only bad thing that can happen to them is the charges accompanied with the people who distribute them (things like DRM and such).

Blu Ray can actually support the higher bitrates, and better quality audio codecs (helped by disc size).

So I genuinely have no idea outside of the pricing how people think HD-DVD is better.

Overall though there's not much difference between what's on the discs, so I don't understand people bitter about HD-DVD bombing. Aside from having to wait a bit longer for standalone BR prices to drop.

HD-DVD could also support those bitrates. The support for such things really comes from the amount of storage space, since more storage means more quality media can be put on. Even normal DVD's could give you HD video, problem was 9GB of space wasn't enough for HD movies and sound, so Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were made which had a higher storage capacity. Blu-Ray was the new technology and HD-DVD was the evolution of DVD technology (which is also why it was cheaper).

And a bit longer? ALOT longer. The HD-DVD prices were dropping way before the format war ended. You could get an HD-DVD player for $99 (360 one) while the Blu-Ray players at the time were still upwards of $500 (PS3 itself). HD-DVD was a faster, cheaper, and better media.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

^

The HD-DVD prices were dropping as HD-DVD was always trailing.

It's called trying to gain marketshare in a market you're losing in where there can only be one winner.

If HD-DVD could've survived alongside Blu Ray you can bet such drastic price cuts wouldn't have been happening as quickly, but that wasn't possible, it was all or nothing to conclude the HD war.

The drastic price cuts went a long way in putting Toshiba in as much debt as they seen from losing the war.

[soniqstylz]

Never said it would completely phase out physical media. In fact, I doubt it ever will, since I even prefer physical media. I just hate all the negativity around digital downloads when the only bad thing that can happen to them is the charges accompanied with the people who distribute them (things like DRM and such).

HD-DVD could also support those bitrates. The support for such things really comes from the amount of storage space, since more storage means more quality media can be put on. Even normal DVD's could give you HD video, problem was 9GB of space wasn't enough for HD movies and sound, so Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were made which had a higher storage capacity. Blu-Ray was the new technology and HD-DVD was the evolution of DVD technology (which is also why it was cheaper).

And a bit longer? ALOT longer. The HD-DVD prices were dropping way before the format war ended. You could get an HD-DVD player for $99 (360 one) while the Blu-Ray players at the time were still upwards of $500 (PS3 itself). HD-DVD was a faster, cheaper, and better media.

Wrong. Blu-ray can support much higher bitrates than HD-DVD. That has to do with the laser, not the storage capacity. A 25GB single-layer Blu-ray can handle a higher bitrate than a 30GB dual-layer HD-DVD for playback. While you can get 1080p video from a DVD9, the laser won't read at the high bitrates of HD-DVD or Blu-ray. All HD is not created equal.

Audio equivalent - same 3:40 song, one in real audio, one in 192k mp3, one in .wav. Which has a higher bitrate and takes up more space?

The reason you could get HD-DVD players so cheap is because Toshiba were essentially the only manufacturers, and it was a toss-up of lose money now and hopefully reap the benefits down the line from royalties, or sell at cost/small profit, and lose much of the pricing edge over Blu-ray. Unfortunatly, they priced themselves out of any other manufacturer coming in later -- they went scorched earth, hoping to win, but would have lost in the end anyway as a format.

[DaDude]

wow, you guys REALLY cant think ahead. Are you saying a few years from now, that people will have the same speed connections? Even with the advancment of fiber, which is pushing cable companies to up the speed, they will just stay the same?

Ok, suppose speed does increase dramatically. Who wants to watch movies on their computer all day?? With me, I'd rather sit and relax on my couch and watch movies on the bigger TV in my living room.

[Sir Topham Hatt]

Problem is, most people can't see the advantages of HD over SD until someone shows them. With VHS->DVD the difference was a little more clear.

But it's easy - HD TV has not quite yet arrived.

VHS > DVD was simple, you didn't need to get a new TV or anything extra. In fact, I would suggest the DVD really was the start of SCART cables instead of analog wires. However if you want to enjoy the richness of Blue Ray or HD at all, you need a new TV, simple as.

Although the majority of TVs are now with HD automatically, I should think many consumers simply aren't willing to part with their pre-HD set so there is no need to get a blue ray player just yet.

Although I haven't yet seen a full whack HD setup as yet, I know the difference isn't as obvious as it was with VHS and DVD. However, when this financial boo boo is in the past, perhaps in a couple of years Blue Ray will be all the rage. It seems just a slow starter.

Although one other thing that is worth noting. . . all these special editions on DVD over the past few years, extra features, cut scenes blah blah, perhaps consumers think that they have wasted all this money on DVD special editions, and now they are somewhat obsolete already? Maybe this is putting many others off from getting into the whole Blue Ray market?

Ok, suppose speed does increase dramatically. Who wants to watch movies on their computer all day?? With me, I'd rather sit and relax on my couch and watch movies on the bigger TV in my living room.

This is where you miss the point. In a few years, PCs will be connected to TVs, wait a minute, a little bit like Windows Media Centre edition! Then you'll download a DVD from the net to keep and watch it through the TV from the comfort of your sofa :p

[kak]

Why are there still threads on this?

[Arpit]

i guess i'm part of the minority that doesn't see the point in upgrading to blu-ray yet.

the only thing i enjoyed watching on a large screen in blu-ray was the planet earth thing at my friend's house. while everything else looked really awesome, i didn't feel that the quality of my entertainment was diminished much when watching it on dvd or even regular tv.

i watch some sitcoms and movies every now and then but i cannot yet justify the cost of a big screen/blu-ray yet.

[Ci7]

This is where you miss the point. In a few years, PCs will be connected to TVs, wait a minute, a little bit like Windows Media Centre edition! Then you'll download a DVD from the net to keep and watch it through the TV from the comfort of your sofa

it can be done already

[Sam]

In fact, I would suggest the DVD really was the start of SCART cables instead of analog wires.

SCART is analogue too.

[TruckWEB]

Ok, suppose speed does increase dramatically. Who wants to watch movies on their computer all day?? With me, I'd rather sit and relax on my couch and watch movies on the bigger TV in my living room.

It's called a Sony PS3, Xbox 360, a Media Center PC, new Blu-Ray players from Samsung can stream movies from Netflix, ...

No need to watch a movie in front of your PC.... It's 2008 you now... soon 2009....