Recommended Posts

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.

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 by Xerxes
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.

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).

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).

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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).

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

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.

^

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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....

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Google adds built-in computer control to Gemini 3.5 flash by Karthik Mudaliar Google has added Computer Use as a built-in tool in Gemini 3.5 Flash, giving developers a single model that can reason about a task and operate graphical interfaces across browsers, mobile devices, and desktop environments. The feature is available through the Gemini API and Google’s Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, although it remains a preview feature for now. Computer Use enables an AI agent to examine screenshots and return actions such as mouse clicks, scrolling, and keyboard input. A developer’s application must execute those actions, capture the resulting screen, and send it back to Gemini, creating a continuous loop until the task is completed. Google says the integration can be used for activities including repetitive form filling, application testing, research across multiple websites, and longer enterprise workflows. Gemini 3.5 Flash can work with browser, mobile, and desktop environments, whereas Google’s earlier standalone Computer Use model was primarily positioned around browser interaction. The main change is consolidation. Computer control was previously offered through the separate Gemini 2.5 Computer Use preview model. As Neowin reported when that model was introduced, it was designed to interpret a visual interface and generate actions without requiring a website-specific API. Google later brought Computer Use to preview versions of Gemini 3 Pro and Gemini 3 Flash in January 2026. The latest release now incorporates the tool into the stable Gemini 3.5 Flash model rather than requiring developers to select a specialized model solely for interface automation. Gemini 3.5 Flash itself was announced in May as Google’s latest fast model for coding and multi-step agent workflows. It supports a one-million-token input context window and up to 65,000 output tokens, along with adjustable thinking levels that let developers trade additional reasoning for lower latency and cost. Google also added that Gemini 3.5 Flash received targeted adversarial training for computer-use scenarios. The company is also offering safeguards that can require user confirmation before sensitive or irreversible actions and automatically stop a workflow when suspected prompt injection is detected. Its developer documentation describes configurable protections for areas such as financial transactions and changes to sensitive records. Google isn't the first to bring Computer Use to its platform. Anthropic has made computer control available through Claude, while OpenAI has continued improving computer-use performance in its recent models. Microsoft has also applied the concept to business workflows, including a Computer Use capability for the Researcher agent in Microsoft 365 Copilot.
    • After I installed KB5095093, the volume on my ARM laptop won't go above 20%. It's stuck on the hearing protection level, which is pretty much useless if you want to listen to anything. I rolled back.
    • Amazon Prime Day slashes Samsung's newest Galaxy Watch Ultra by 45 percent by Karthik Mudaliar Samsung’s flagship Android smartwatch has received one of its steepest Prime Day cuts. Amazon has dropped the 2025 Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra in Titanium Blue to $357.24, saving buyers around $292 from its $649.99 list price. That's a 45 percent discount (purchase link below). The 47mm Galaxy Watch Ultra uses a titanium casing and a 1.5-inch Super AMOLED display with a resolution of 480 x 480 and peak brightness of 3,000 nits. It includes LTE connectivity, Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi, NFC, and dual-frequency L1+L5 GPS for more accurate outdoor route tracking. The 2025 model has 64GB of storage, a 590mAh battery, sapphire crystal glass, 10ATM water resistance, IP68 protection, and MIL-STD-810H durability testing. Its health and fitness tools include heart rate monitoring, sleep coaching, Energy Score, Running Coach, body composition analysis, temperature sensing, and ECG support, where available. This model is best suited to Android users who regularly run, hike, cycle, or train outdoors and want cellular access without carrying a phone. The larger battery, rugged construction, bright display, and dedicated Quick Button also make it a stronger option than Samsung’s regular Galaxy Watch models for extended workouts and demanding environments. Grab the Titanium Blue Galaxy Watch Ultra before the Prime Day price resets: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025) [Sold and Shipped by Amazon] Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Google begins rolling out its post-Epic Play Store billing model next week by Karthik Mudaliar Google has confirmed that its redesigned Play Store billing and fee structure will take effect on June 30, 2026, in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Economic Area. The changes will let eligible developers offer their own payment systems or send users to an external website for purchases, while separating Google’s platform service fee from the cost of using Google Play Billing. The rollout puts concrete dates and detailed rate cards behind the broader Android policy overhaul Google announced in March. That announcement followed a proposed settlement with Epic Games intended to resolve their long-running disputes over app distribution and payments, although the U.S. portion of the agreement still requires court approval. Under the new billing choice program, developers selling digital content or services can display an alternative payment option alongside Google Play Billing. They may also direct users to their own websites to complete a purchase. Developers can use Google’s standard payment-choice screen or design one that complies with the company’s user-interface rules. Choosing another payment processor does not eliminate Google’s cut altogether. The company will continue charging a service fee for transactions associated with apps distributed through Google Play, regardless of whether payment is handled by Google, an alternative provider, or a developer’s website. Google argues that this fee covers the value and infrastructure provided by Android and the Play Store. For developers earning up to $1 million annually, the service fee will generally be 10 percent. That rate also applies to auto-renewing subscriptions. When Google Play Billing is used in the U.S., U.K., or EEA, Google will add a separate 5 percent billing fee, and developers processing payments elsewhere will not pay that additional charge. This means Google’s familiar flat 30 percent commission is disappearing, but developers will not necessarily see a dramatic reduction on every transaction. An in-app purchase from an existing user processed through Google Play Billing can still reach a combined 30 percent. The biggest savings are likely to come from subscriptions, smaller developers covered by the $1 million tier, and companies able to move customers to their own payment infrastructure. Google is also offering lower rates through its Apps Experience and revamped Games Level Up programs. Apps and games that satisfy the company’s requirements can qualify for 15 percent service fees on new-install transactions and 20 percent on existing-install transactions. The criteria include performance and reliability standards, support for additional Android device categories, and selected platform features. Those program rates are scheduled to become available in the initial markets and Australia on September 30. For consumers, the immediate effect will depend on whether developers adopt alternative payments and pass any savings on through lower prices. For developers, however, June 30 begins a more flexible but considerably more complicated Play Store economy in which distribution, billing, install dates, revenue thresholds, and program participation can each affect Google’s final cut. Google is also separately developing a Registered App Stores program designed to simplify the installation of qualifying third-party stores. That initiative is expected to arrive with a major Android release later in 2026 and will launch outside the U.S. first. Google says the rest of the world will receive the changes by September 30, 2027, although billing rates for markets outside the US, UK, and EEA have not yet been announced.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!