Samsung questions longevity of Blu-ray format

Samsung questions longevity of Blu-ray format
According to an interview posted on Pocket-lint.co.uk, Samsung believes that the Blu-ray format will only have a 5 year life span from this point out before it is replaced by either HD downloads or a completely different physical media format.

"I think it [Blu-ray] has 5 years left, I certainly wouldn't give it 10", Andy Griffiths, director of consumer electronics for Samsung UK said in the interview. The 10 years mark is what Sony has committed to its Blu-ray playing PlayStation 3 console.

Griffiths does believe however that Blu-ray can be huge over the next year, and that 2008 is just the start.



"It's going to be huge", he added. "We are heavily back-ordered at the moment."

Griffiths cited cheaper prices for players and titles, as well as the format's victory over HD DVD as reasons why the format will be a winner, if only for a short period of time.

"In 2012 we will be in a true HD world. Everything from your television to your camcorder will be offering you pictures in high-definition, and we plan to offer you that HD world from all angles."

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 5 Sep 2008 14:31
Advertisement - News comments available below the ad
  • 90 comments

  • oappi

    I dont know about other physical media but i dont see that many ppl who want to download +10gb:s to see movie. Also i thought more and more isp:s are making download limits like comcast did.

    Other physical media i would say maybe, but it would have to be quite bit better to ppl notice any difference. Having a new media would also mean that ppl would have to buy new tv that supports that new quality and i dont think ppl are so eager to spend on new tv + whatever replaces blu-ray player. Unless samsung got some ultra hd displays at low price blu-ray is safe for 10 years.

    5.9.2008 14:55 #1

  • 13thHouR

    Current optical media's mechanics limit it way too much.

    Lets get on to the next format as quickly as possible and please let Sony have nothing to do with it to thwart their plan of world dominance through propertarian formats & DRM.


    5.9.2008 15:33 #2

  • 1bonehead

    I cannot see his comments boding well for BD.

    5.9.2008 15:40 #3

  • hendrix04

    with the emergence of 32gig and 64 gig thumb drives, I see that as a possible new media for movies. Not only would it be plug and play for everything from a PC to a possible set top box, they are no where near as fragile and much more compact compared to an optical disk. The price is the limiting factor at the moment (though for standard def they would be pretty cheap) but it is catching up (give it another 5 or 7 years).

    5.9.2008 16:35 #4

  • badkrma

    just how many times do they think we will rebuy our collections of movies? (VHS-DVD,etc) And if we wait for a format to settle in then it seems we will be in perpetual wait. I don't have enough money or inclination to see what is the next best thing, and buy it just to have it dated within a 5 year window. And they wonder why people are showing no loyalty and respect to buy the movie that they enjoy and are opting to pirate it instead. Do we really have a choice while they keep coming up with ways to bilk us out of money every which way?.... (yeah, maybe not participate at all)

    5.9.2008 17:13 #5

  • domie

    I remember reading in the papers when DVD first came out , both panasonic and Samsung stated that although DVD was a wonderful technological advance, it would be replaced by the end of 2002 by another totally different and even more fantastic optical disc format.

    When quizzed about this, they responded that it was no reflection on any bad points about DVD - it wa just the way the modern technological world was advancing and was inevitable.

    Well history shows what idiots they have at Samsung and Panasonic doesn't it , in terms of multi-media predictions ?

    I have news for amateur mystic meg predictors like Andy Griffiths ( please note he is only an office worker at Samsung in the UK so he's a nobody in terms of the global company itself ) - it may well be true that the technology will exist very shortly for a much better optical disc format that could blow blu-ray and hd-dvd out of the water in terms of quality but do you seriously believe that all those cronies at MPAA , Hollywoodland, Sony , Paramount, Universal and Warner Brothers are going to even consider backing it after the amount of monet they have either heaped into original blu ray development or reinvestment after they crawled over from the HD-DVD to the Blu-Ray side ?

    Think again !

    5.9.2008 17:15 #6

  • Tecbot

    what a rediculas statement...honestly if blu-ray format comes and goes this quick who in there right mind who even look at anything these companies put out there.

    Blu-ray has barely even started, a new format would be doomed especially a hd one where blu-ray isnt picking up because most people cant afford a hdtv why would a new more expensive format hitting the market make all these people who couldnt afford hdtvs before go run out and buy one now.

    Honestly I should apply for a higher up exec. job at samsung doesnt seem like you need more than a grade 5 education to get on there.

    5.9.2008 17:30 #7

  • juankerr

    He may be referring to the new Sim2 "Better-Than-BluRay" beyond-1080p HD red-laser digital entertainment hardware:

    http://www.twice.com/article/CA6593287.html

    It's an HTPC/hard-disc based entertainment system that comes bundled with their Sim2 C3X 1080p projector.

    The only catch?

    The Sim2 C3X Projector alone costs $32,000.

    http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/30/sim2-...wallets-cringe/

    5.9.2008 17:34 #8

  • snowlock

    if it doesn't last 5 years, it will never become widely adopted.

    that's about how much longer it's going to take blu-ray to become ubiquitous.

    5.9.2008 18:17 #9

  • NexGen76

    Well lets look at this statement.

    (1)HD Downloads?

    No ISP are killing that as well speak tryin to put a cap on Bandwidth.I'm sorry but buyer care for physical media not media locked in a box.


    (2)Other Media

    No there isn't any that's even close to being produce & ready to hit the open market in the next 5 to 10 years that can complete with Blu-Ray.

    5.9.2008 18:49 #10

  • Stu_dent

    Unless there is some sort of miracle with ISPs downloadable movies will be dead before they even begin on a mass market approach.

    5.9.2008 19:47 #11

  • windsong

    Quote:"In 2012 we will be in a true HD world. Everything from your television to your camcorder will be offering you pictures in high-definition, and we plan to offer you that HD world from all angles."So I guess we can look forward to 1gig porn webcam downloads on P2P eh?

    5.9.2008 19:59 #12

  • sKrEwZ

    Longevity?

    I laugh. There will always be a replacement given enough of a time-line.

    5.9.2008 20:23 #13

  • limelight

    "In 2012 we will be in a true HD world. Everything from your television to your camcorder will be offering you pictures in high-definition, and we plan to offer you that HD world from all angles."

    By then there will be 2400p UHDTV.

    5.9.2008 23:41 #14

  • core2kid

    I feel that upscaling DVD players is actually ruining sales for Blu-Ray. Upscaling DVD players give you a pretty good picture, not as good as Blu-Ray of course but its pretty damn good. I have Blu-Ray, HD DVD, and an upscaling DVD Player and I see a slight difference in the DVD and HD DVD/Blu-Ray and no difference in HD DVD/Blu-Ray.

    People that want a good picture with a huge set of movies and don't want to spend $500 on a movie player (basically everyone, I got the PS3 so I didn't spend for a movie player, I spent for a gaming system ;)
    Will probably go for a 1080p DVD player (or if they're insane, an HD DVD Player, which unfortunatly I did for $50 with 6 free movies)

    6.9.2008 09:03 #15

  • lynchGOP

    FINALLY................an industry professional who agrees with what I have been saying all along.

    Blu-ray is just a stop-gap measure and will probably be replaced by flash, downloads or holographic technology. Screw BD............those who buy into that obviously don't mind wasting 300+ on a player and replacing their DVD collection and are those who run out and buy into new tech blindly right away. Sign of technological stupidity in my mind

    6.9.2008 13:01 #16

  • lynchGOP

    Originally posted by core2kid: I feel that upscaling DVD players is actually ruining sales for Blu-Ray. Upscaling DVD players give you a pretty good picture, not as good as Blu-Ray of course but its pretty damn good. I have Blu-Ray, HD DVD, and an upscaling DVD Player and I see a slight difference in the DVD and HD DVD/Blu-Ray and no difference in HD DVD/Blu-Ray.

    People that want a good picture with a huge set of movies and don't want to spend $500 on a movie player (basically everyone, I got the PS3 so I didn't spend for a movie player, I spent for a gaming system ;)
    Will probably go for a 1080p DVD player (or if they're insane, an HD DVD Player, which unfortunatly I did for $50 with 6 free movies)
    And YOU ARE EXACTLY the type of consumer I referred to in my previous post. All 3!!!!!!!!! What a goof!

    Lemme guess............you have a PS2, PS3, Xbox, Xbox 360, Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, Orig. Nintendo, Super Nintendo, NeoGeo, TurboGrafx, Sega Genesis. You probably have a 'yet-to-be-invented- 9.1 speaker system and BETA EVERYTHING. NERD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    6.9.2008 13:05 #17

  • lynchGOP

    Originally posted by sKrEwZ: Longevity?

    I laugh. There will always be a replacement given enough of a time-line.    "5 years" IS NOT 'ENOUGH' TIME. It's a very very small amount of time for a technology to die out.........especially one that had so much controversy and money invested.

    Lame, meritless comment.............keep'em quiet so as not to make yourself look goofy.

    6.9.2008 13:08 #18

  • jutsu

    in maybe by that time we already get new Video codec that compress more extreme than X264, audio codec that compress more extreme than OGG AoTuv.

    high quality HD video with smaller file size, but very heavy to decode........

    6.9.2008 13:08 #19

  • lynchGOP

    Originally posted by NexGen76: Well lets look at this statement.

    (1)HD Downloads?

    No ISP are killing that as well speak tryin to put a cap on Bandwidth.I'm sorry but buyer care for physical media not media locked in a box.


    (2)Other Media

    No there isn't any that's even close to being produce & ready to hit the open market in the next 5 to 10 years that can complete with Blu-Ray.
    Grammar buddy..........grammar. It's like reading from the diary of someone with down's syndrome. You speak-a English?

    6.9.2008 13:11 #20

  • SuckRaven

    This is wonderful...If HD movies go the flash-drive route, now, instead of waiting forever to rip a movie to your HDD with a DVD, Blu-ray or HDDVD ROM or burner, you can just copy it over directly from the flash drive. And what with the advent of USB 3.0 not too far in the forseeable future, once encryptions are cracked, it should be a snap.

    Quote from Extremetech.com article An Update on Standards

    "The USB Implementers forum, which is creating the specification, points out that USB 3.0 will not only offer more performance, but also power efficiency, because it has no device polling and thus lower idle power requirements. Backers say you should be able to copy a 25GB HD movie in 70 seconds, provided of course, the USB device itself supports that kind of speed."

    Nice... =)

    6.9.2008 13:42 #21

  • hade

    when i bought my 46" xbr4 i spent around 3k. for me personally after spending that amount of money on a tube i think its foolish not to "invest" in blu-ray.

    this decision was made easy for me as i already had the PS3. upscaled movies do not look as good as blu-ray, transformers is proof as that is my most recent purchase on BR. to get the most out of my set i think its silly not to buy into BR. transformers retailed for $24.96 at walmart with a 10$ mail-in rebate for prior DVD owners. so the price argument doesn't carry too much weight as i feel that is a reasonable price for the movie.

    now do i think or suggest people should repurchase their current dvd lineup? certainly NOT! i don't but i will purchase those must have movies again which are only a few here n there and the new releases that i feel on worthy.

    im looking forward to having the Dark Knight on BR come december, i believe its december that its expected release.

    Blu-ray is a luxury and not for everyone. why people argue or attack those who buy into the format or its makers is beyond me!? go find something productive to do...

    6.9.2008 15:11 #22

  • lynchGOP

    Originally posted by hade: when i bought my 46" xbr4 i spent around 3k. for me personally after spending that amount of money on a tube i think its foolish not to "invest" in blu-ray.

    this decision was made easy for me as i already had the PS3. upscaled movies do not look as good as blu-ray, transformers is proof as that is my most recent purchase on BR. to get the most out of my set i think its silly not to buy into BR. transformers retailed for $24.96 at walmart with a 10$ mail-in rebate for prior DVD owners. so the price argument doesn't carry too much weight as i feel that is a reasonable price for the movie.

    now do i think or suggest people should repurchase their current dvd lineup? certainly NOT! i don't but i will purchase those must have movies again which are only a few here n there and the new releases that i feel on worthy.

    im looking forward to having the Dark Knight on BR come december, i believe its december that its expected release.

    Blu-ray is a luxury and not for everyone. why people argue or attack those who buy into the format or its makers is beyond me!? go find something productive to do...
    Eh...........a 46" tv isn't big enough to necessitate a BD player. You may think so but what you think doesn't matter because it's just not. I watch a 55" regularly and the difference is not that big an issue between upscaled (or even regular DVDs) vs. HD. Of course, I beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Transformers is only that cheap because IT JUST IS COMING OUT and moreover............it's just coming out after being exclusvely on HD-DVD so it stands separate from other BDs.

    Besides........there's PLENTY of HD programming, assuming of course people aren't foolish enough to actually CHOOSE Comcast over DirecTv. In the world of HD, that is just a head-up-you-ass decision as DirecTv has way way way more programming than Comcast (excluding Comcast's bullcrap commercials stating they have "More" because there OnDemand is shit and they offer no network HD like Nat. Geo, TBS, etc.) Unless you're watching ONLY DVDs and a total loser who's out of touch with the real world BECAUSE of watching only DVDs then BD is a relatively unwise investment.

    6.9.2008 15:24 #23

  • core2kid

    Originally posted by SuckRaven: This is wonderful...If HD movies go the flash-drive route, now, instead of waiting forever to rip a movie to your HDD with a DVD, Blu-ray or HDDVD ROM or burner, you can just copy it over directly from the flash drive.
    I think the copy protection will be a bit tighter than just copying and pasting.

    6.9.2008 18:24 #24

  • DXR88

    Disk based medium will go no where, its here to stay. you guys talk about oh HDD this thumb drive that. how would you market something like that as cheap as 18 dollars a movie, game or what not. you complain about pricing now. 56 dollars a Movie sound good to you guys thats about how much a 34GB jumpdrive will cost in 5 years with a movie on it

    6.9.2008 19:07 #25

  • lawndog

    Now I'll admit I'm techno idiot so remember this as you read
    5 years???
    seems a little short to me, maybe 10 years from now we'll see a fade out, why????
    I consistantly see "HD" everywhere. Whether it be on my box top cable, or internet.
    I truly believe the internet, or cable(as in pay per view) is going to be the true future for movie watching.
    Ok I'm done.
    and remember I'm an idiot.
    LD

    7.9.2008 12:20 #26

  • salsa36

    It is Samsung!!!!

    Who cares what they think!, for sure if any new format is stupid enough to compete with the Blu Ray it won't be developed by them, they are koreans, the new technology is produced in USA and Japan.

    Sony will decide what's next on HD not Samsung..........

    7.9.2008 19:51 #27

  • hermes_vb

    Even though I have the money to buy a BD player, I don't feel like expending that kind of money for one. I could even buy a PS3 which is the best player for your money, but still I'd hate to buy one because I'm not a gamer and a great piece of equipment would be underused. Give me a sub $200 player and movies that cost $15-$20, and we have a deal. Otherwise I don't feel like increasing my pile of expensive tech crap.

    7.9.2008 20:37 #28

  • core2kid

    Originally posted by salsa36: It is Samsung!!!!

    Who cares what they think!, for sure if any new format is stupid enough to compete with the Blu Ray it won't be developed by them, they are koreans, the new technology is produced in USA and Japan.

    Sony will decide what's next on HD not Samsung..........
    500 GB Blu-Ray Discs, 100GB for the HD Movie and 400GB for SUPER DRM2 Copy Protection!

    $1000 players with built in "call the cops if DRM FREE media is played!"


    Thats what Sony wants.

    7.9.2008 23:09 #29

  • ematrix

    The comments of Mr. Griffiths reflect what the numbers have been telling them, Blu-ray isn't doing as well as they whished for, since it's only appealing to a few, and they realize that the window of opportunity is narrowing, and the format's lifespan is shortening, since in a few years 2160p HDTV picture will be presented, which will provide closer to identical resolutions in film negatives.

    It's a fact that optical discs are in their way to obsolence, since everyday more consumers are interested in investing on non-optical disc media, which eventually could be used potencially to deliver movies, which could explain why more people everyday are reluctant to spend money on BD, which is generally seen as an optical disc only slighty nicer than DVD.

    8.9.2008 00:50 #30

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: in a few years 2160p HDTV picture will be presented, which will provide closer to identical resolutions in film negatives.Due to the limitations of human ocular physiology, at normal viewing distances (i.e. 8 - 10 feet) you will need screen sizes in excess of 100 inches to take advantage of resolutions above 1920 x 1080.

    http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

    http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/

    In the normal sized living room and with average HDTV sizes of 42 - 50 inches, 1080p is quite enough for the human eye.

    In addition, how much do you think those 2160p HDTV's will cost???

    Best case scenario at launch:

    2160p HDTV - let's say 60 to 70 inches = $10,000 (at the very least)
    2160p movie on a 100 Gig flash drive = $50 per movie (if we're lucky)
    - and you can bet you'll have military strength DRM on that movie as well.
    Forget about downloading a 2160p movie on your bandwidth-capped ISP connection.

    The masses would really go for that I'm sure.

    8.9.2008 08:59 #31

  • oappi

    Everybody in here might already know that codec used in blu-ray is not the best one if you want to save space.

    h264 and 20 layer bd disk (500gb) should be more than fine for 2x1080 (2160),

    If there is 2x pixels in Height and 2x in Lenght it means it´s only 4 times the mb size of todays 1080 hd. Meaning that even with todays codecs its only 160-200gb. That means that blu-ray can have nearly 10 times more pixels. Taking a squere root to that is bit over 3x1080 and this is with that crappy codec they now use. This is why bd was so good in so many ppls eyes it just has so mutch unused potential. Personaly i think HD as it self is good way to fight agains "pirates". They might not notice it but think about it. How many who could pay would want to download 10gb most likely very badly seeded torrent making the download time few weeks insted paying less than $20 for real thing?

    8.9.2008 09:20 #32

  • 13thHouR

    Originally posted by core2kid: 500 GB Blu-Ray Discs, 100GB for the HD Movie and 400GB for SUPER DRM2 Copy Protection!

    $1000 players with built in "call the cops if DRM FREE media is played!"

    Thats what Sony wants.    not to put a dampener on things, but that "feature" is already built into blu-ray and FOX have already publicly stated that it will be included with all their releases, but they did state it will only be used for gathering statistical data on usage! yeah right.. and AT&T didn't break the law either!


    8.9.2008 10:08 #33

  • hermes_vb

    h.264 is an amazing codec, and the best encoders, believe it or not, are free. I've been playing with it encoding some of my movies and they look great at a fraction of the size. On the other hand it takes a lot of PC power to encode. Two cores are not enough anymore...

    If I always hear voices surrounding me, does it mean I'm crazy or that I hear in Dolby 5.1?

    8.9.2008 13:39 #34

  • ematrix

    I only said that 2160p will be presented in a few years, which will reduce Blu-ray's lifespan, because more people everyday anticipates that something better is coming in a few years, that they could rather wait for that instead of investing on BD, specially when optical discs are slowly becaming obsolete.

    As for we actually needing such higher resolutions, to be fair the same 'human eye perception' argument applies for DVD as well, which viewed on large flat panel screens at 8-10 feet distance is quite pleasant for the human eye.

    My point (with no intent or desire to start another tiresome DVD versus BD discussion) is that in all fairness, we must not argue why people should or shouldn't preffer Blu-ray over DVD, and then disregard the same scenario when comparing Blu-ray against a potencially new format in the few years to come, when the bottom line is that either format's resolution can provide a satisfying visual experience.

    For example... if consumers knew in advance that Quad Core processors where to be created, they would have waited for them instead of investing in replacing single core processors for Dual Core processors two years ago. But in all fairness, if your single core processor works fine for you, there's no need to replace it, but if you must, no doubt you would preffer the best processor availible.

    My point that if DVD works fine for the masses, there's no need to replace it, after all isn't like you can't play DVD movies anymore, but when it comes to technological advances, mass consumers preffer to make huge steps for their money, and Blu-ray is more like an intermission of something much better to came in a few years, I of one would rather wait for that, so I can spend my money wisely.

    That's why, if I'm going to play movies from optical discs, I would rather stick with DVD until another media (non-optical of course) is used commercially to deliver movies, that for me will be worth more than investing now on Blu-ray, specially when I know in advance that the promise of something much better is coming.

    8.9.2008 15:44 #35

  • error5

    ematrix:

    There is a big problem with your argument though.

    By the time 2160p comes out, the prices for this new format will be much higher than BluRay.

    Like my best case scenario:

    2160 display - $10,000
    2160 movie on flash or some other medium - $50 per movie
    2160 playback machine - $1000

    Good luck selling that to the general public.

    By the time 2160 comes out BluRay players can be $100 or less and movies will be $10 to $15.

    We'll hear the same thing all over again: "1080p is good enough. No need to go to 2160p since it's too expensive at this time and 1080p looks good enough for me."

    8.9.2008 16:48 #36

  • juankerr

    ...and when 2160p comes out there will be people like ematrix who'll say: "Don't get 2160 now. 4320p is being presented soon and is what you should wait for. A new format using 4320p is the future!"

    When does it ever end?

    8.9.2008 16:58 #37

  • oappi

    @ematrix

    Have you even seen blu-ray movie? even i can tell with my 24" monitor if the movie is dvd or blu-ray. Some dvd movies look terrible if they are long enought. At some point i really thought i would rather watch that movie on vhs that dvd. Thank god we now have disks with plenty of space.

    And i just pointed that most likely blu-ray is not going nowhere because we can have layers added to bd disks. Even vhs didnt have "LP" or "EP" option when they hit the stores and how long the format was alive? Well i say keep on waiting

    It is also kinda stupid to compare something like bd-disks to computer prosessors.. If you buy computers that way you would never be able to buy new one because there is always something behind the corner. Like mores law says every 18months the number of transistors duble which usualy means ~dubling the speed. Also in some tasks it is better to have single or dual core since most programs cant use more than two cores and you get higher mhz with less cores. Mostlikely when most software supports quad cores you will be buying new computer.

    8.9.2008 18:34 #38

  • ematrix

    I did say that I didn't want to turn this into a tiresome DVD vs. BD debate, but...

    @error5

    I'm not saying that a new 2160p format will be cheaper than Blu-ray, and I'm not disregarding that will be expensive, but then again BD is expensive today. The average consumer wants to spend their money wisely, and if they anticipate that something better than BD is coming in a few years, due to the increasing interest and consumption for non-optical disc media, why spend money now when they can wait for the next best thing?

    Also i wonder, the reason why you support Blu-ray is because it offers a higher resolution, yet you quickly disregard 2160p even so it offers an even higher resolution, doesn't that kinda contradict the sole purpose of "getting higher resolution" you stand for? I for one have it very clear what I'm looking for in order to skip my preferrence for DVD... a new video format on a non-optical disc media, that could make a revolutionary step from DVD, simple as that.

    The problem is that everytime anybody says "I'll pass on BD until something better comes along, DVD looks good enough for me", inmediatelly starts the attack from BD supporters, trying to debate any oppinion that differs from theirs; but when the same scenario repeats for BD vs. 2160p format, now you want to use the same "I'll pass on 2160p format, BD looks good enough for me" argument.

    If you support Blu-ray and feel that works for you, good for you, but you should respect and accept that others don't share your same view in the matter, and rather continue to enjoy DVD and wait a few years, so they can invest in something better than BD.

    @juankerr

    When does it ever end? That's a question you should ask to manufactures, which benefit from developing new formats and technology with short lifespans, so people keep spending their money in the newest stuff; as well ask the movie studios, which largely benefit from reselling the same movies you already own, over and over again.

    Despite the appereances, I'm not against HD but indeed reluctant in investing in another optical disc format. Not only do I need a new video format, but also a new media to go along with it to convince me. If someone should offer us today a 1080p format embedded on a non-optical disc media, even so I still believe that DVD is good enough for me, I would be more inclined to try it out, as I would recognized the attemp to make a revolutionary step from DVD, and if the benefits combined of a new format and media convinces me, maybe even support it.

    Blu-ray may be a new format, but it's embedded in a 26 years old media which is slowly becaming obsolete; granted that uses a thinner blue/violet laser which makes it possible to store more information on a slighty refined layer disc, but the bottom line is that we're still talking of optical discs, and for me that's a negative disadvantage.

    The times of optical discs are passing, slowly but they are passing, and more consumers each day are interested in more reliable media, therefore is more likely that an non-optical disc media will be used for 2160p, which will be a revolutionary step from DVD and BD both, not only as video format, but as media for movies as well.

    @oappi

    Yes, I have seen repeatly Blu-ray movies on large flat panel screens, and so far there's nothing about BD that convices me in investing on it, when I can achieve pleasant and satisfying results from upscaling my already own DVD movies. Also consider that better the transfer on DVD, meaning that if the movie was restored and remastered properly, you will achieve better results from upscaling them.

    Yes, optical discs could be used in the future to deliver a 2160p format, but you would need to reinvest on new equipment (players, recorders) that could handle multiple layers BD discs required for a 2160p format, since it needs to store a four times larger resolution and twice the video bitrate than 1080p BD movies, which of course would be much more expensive to manufacture, and with more layers it increases the risk of failure when producing, recording and playing them.

    Therefore if I have to invest in optical discs, I rather do so for DVD, for which everybody has already invested in equipment and large movie collections, and is much cheaper and accesible than BD, until the next revolutionary format and media for movies comes along in a few years.

    Finally I'm going to disregard your insulting allusion, I'm smarter and more polite to reply to that, specially I'm not in the mood to start a hatred discussion, when we should all respect and accept each other oppinion and preferrences, which has been laking in these DVD vs. BD discussions... some preffer DVD, others preffer BD, there no need to insult and attack, after all "the sun shines for everybody"

    But when I compared BD vs. 2160p to computer processors, it's an analogy about current and future technological advances, which I want to believe some guys got it with no difficulty. Indeed there's always something new and better in the future, but the difference is that in the case of 2160p, we both know it's coming and we got a clue by when.

    Even so this is offtopic, if people knew in advance that Quad Core processors where on their way, they could have waited for them instead of investing on Dual Core processors two years ago. Is no brainer that you need more juice for some tasks on your computers, therefore the need for Dual Core or Quad Core processors, but then most average users don't require that extra juice, when a single core processor is all they need for what they do daily on their computers.

    If your computer doesn't fulfill your needs, or simply died on you, please by all means buy a new one, and make sure it has the newest stuff availible, but if the computer you have works for you, then hold on to it and wait for the moment you really need to replace it, and then get the newest stuff availible at such time... "if it ain't broken, don't fix it"

    Following this analogy, if you feel that Blu-ray will fulfill your needs, and you require it to view movies, good for you; but if you feel that DVD works for you, and you're content with it to view movies, then hold on to it and wait for the moment you really need to replace it, most likely this will happen when a newer format and media becames availible for movies.

    9.9.2008 03:48 #39

  • error5

    ematrix:

    So if we follow your logic then people should NEVER buy any new technology since there will always be something newer and better on the horizon.

    When 1080p came out:
    "I'll wait for 2160p. It's better."

    When 2160p comes out:
    "I'll wait for 4320p, since it's got better resolution."

    When 4320p comes out:
    "I'll wait for the 8640p, 3-dimensional, virtual reality holodeck technology since it's going to be much better."

    When BluRay discs cam out:
    "I'll wait for movies on flash drives."

    When flash drive movies come out:
    "I'll wait for super high-speed, instantaneous ultra HD downloads."

    When super high-speed, instantaneous ultra HD downloads come out:
    "I'll wait for super high speed solid state drives or holographic storage - whichever comes first."

    When super high speed solid state drives or holographic storage come out:
    "I'll wait for brain implants with input ports at the back of your skull connected to your visual and auditory cortex. Just plug in and enjoy the movie"

    ----

    The thing is some people realize that they may die tomorrow.

    So they choose to enjoy what's available today.

    For them that's money well-spent.

    9.9.2008 08:31 #40

  • oappi

    @ematrix
    Sorry if you felt insulted by me. That was not my intention.. Just saying that you shouldn´t compare prosesors that have successor every half year or so to something that usualy lasts +10 years. I bought quad core (qx9650) but most games or "software" rearly uses all 4 cores and from the looks of it i might be buying 16 core cpu when most games and software can use 4 cores.


    I really dont have a problem if you want dont want to invest something which prize will slash in half at every few years. but i quote you "bottom line is that either format's resolution can provide a satisfying visual experience." Thats just your opinion to me bd totaly was satisfying visual experience and I quess for most with good 1080 flatscreen. Maybe you demand better picture quality or your flatscreen isn´t that good (or bd driver had malfuntion) (just saying some of the flats screens are mutch better than others, and not insulting you =)).

    i have to admid i haven´t seen upscaled dvd but can´t imagine it could bring pixels that were not there in the fist place? Most dvd:s are very watchable, but when movie is 3 hours or more especially fog scenes look like crap. Still dvd might be good enought for most people since it seems people prefer to record their stuff on hdd insted of disk. There bd disks would have had upperhand.

    But like error5 wrote bd´s current defenition is good enought for +50" tv. Some cant even see difference between 720 and 1080 until +30". i Bought my bd-drive to my computer for 109€ which is under $155 and ordered bd movies at the prize of $17.5-$20 from amazon.com. only con is that i live in europe and have to carefully look which movies are region free. Pretty cheap if you ask me =).

    Quoting ematrix again
    "My point that if DVD works fine for the masses, there's no need to replace it, after all isn't like you can't play DVD movies anymore, but when it comes to technological advances, mass consumers preffer to make huge steps for their money"
    You call a dvd huge step? 560x486 (best vhs resolution) to 720x480 (dvd resolution). Blu-ray 1920x1080 seems quite a leap to me, but hey thats just me.

    Why cant blu-ray work for the masses? i dont remember how fast dvd came mainstream but even those players were not cheap at first. Even south park had a joke how expensive dvd was and how only their rich friend token could afford it. Most likely there will be another format in future. Only thing at sight that could beat bd is downloads. I just dont see that happening unless nations around the world decided to put huge amount of money to replace old phone cables and put fiber cables to every home. That would be cool, but dont see it happening.


    It is just confusing me that you are at the sametime saying dvd is enought and blu-ray isn´t. im sorry but i find that really hard to understand since vhs->dvd difference was nearly nothing else than transfering movie to optical disks which was pro for computer users. What did standalone owner got from this? well atleast discs that will break more easily than vhs. With blu-ray we got ~5x the number of pixels and many hours of sd recording space.



    "Yes, optical discs could be used in the future to deliver a 2160p format, but you would need to reinvest on new equipment (players, recorders) that could handle multiple layers BD discs required for a 2160p format"

    eh what did i say about EP and LP on vhs? People with only SP had to buy new vcr to watch/record those and most where happy because they could play their old vhs with out jumping to something totaly new format.


    With sony holding the bd rights it would take company as large as sony to compete even with better format.

    9.9.2008 13:46 #41

  • Daxsmoker

    I dont think this is true ppl want to have hard copy of things like me, i dont think downloading HD videos is the wave of the future, im always afraid of my PC crashing more then my disc play braking.

    9.9.2008 20:19 #42

  • ematrix

    @error5

    Precisely because life is short, everybody has a choice how to live it; if you feel that the best for you is to spend your money on early adopt every new technological advance that's availible, that's your choice, but you should respect that others preffer to use what they already own, so they can spend their money more wisely in the future.

    I'm not saying that you should never buy any new technology, but if anyone reading this believes that BD is only a slighty improvement over DVD, and the bottom line you're content with DVD and the results from upscaling them, then by all means use it and enjoy it, regardless of what anybody has to say... it's your choice and yours alone.

    It all cames down to respect and accept everybody own personal choice and prefference; if you feel that Blu-ray will fulfill your needs, good for you; but if others feel that DVD works for them, and rather wait for something much better than BD so they can spend their money wisely, that's good for them and you should respect that, instead of insisting on the contrary.

    @oappi

    The hole computer processor analogy is just an example of what's happenning today with the technological advances in home entertainment; again if you feel that you must have Quad Core processor or Blu-ray to fulfill your needs, good for you; but if the average user is content with single core processor or DVD, as they fullfil their needs, you should respect that as well.

    Please allow me to tell you a story, to kinda end this analogy about computer processors, please be patient... my first PC had a AMD K62 processor, and I kept using it until it died on me, because it fulfilled my needs, yet during the time I had that PC, my friends bought new ones every year just to keep up with the new stuff.

    Therefore while I spend once to have my PC with AMD K62 replaced by a PC with AMD Duron (which was one of the best processors at the time) they invested several times to have their PC/processors updated anually, and at the end we all ended up at the same point, having top of the line PCs, the difference is that during that period of 4-5 years, they spend much more money than I did, while I choosed to spend my money more wisely and only when I needed to.

    Years after that, when my AMD Duron PC needed to be replaced (while my friends kept investing several times to have their PC/processors updated anually) again I looked for the best stuff availible, in this case i went for an Athlon 64 proccesor (again one of the best at the time)

    But one week after I bought it, the Athlon 64 X2 proccesor was released; bad luck, no doubt about it, but if you think about it, if I had known in advance about this, I would have waited for it, not because I needed the extra juice, but because I was going to spend in a new PC anyway.

    How all this relate to DVD vs. BD vs. 2160p format? It's very simple, as both are manners of technological advances. You can be an early adopter, maybe even price insensitive, that doesn't mind investing a lot of money, in getting every new stuff that's availible, that's your choice and i can respect that.

    But you should also respect that others choose to spend their money more wisely, to make use of what they already invested in DVD, and wait a few more years for something much grander that BD will be worth investing in, but in this case we both know in advance that 2160p is coming.

    I'm not denying the look of BD movies on flat panel screens, but if you ever try upscaling DVD, you would realize that it might not look like BD does, but sure the look of upscaled DVD movies is pretty amazing, which for many users is satisfying enough rather than investing on Blu-ray. The bottom line is that either upscaled DVD or BD can provide a satisfying visual experience, is everybody's choice stick with what fulfills their needs, and you should respect any oppinion that differs from yours.

    I totally agree, a 50" flat panel screen should be enough for a 1080p picture, either from a BD or an upscaled DVD, and have seen several brands and models of screens, some of which are better for BD and upscaled DVD both; I have seen screens that everything looks amazing, that even you can't tell the difference from BD to upscaled DVD, yet I have seen screens so bad, that even BD movies look like wornout VHS or pixelated VCD.

    As I said before: "I'm not against HD but indeed reluctant in investing in another optical disc format. Not only do I need a new video format, but also a new media to go along with it to convince me," which is a possibility for which I find 2160p atractive.

    Also I said: "If someone should offer us today a 1080p format embedded on a non-optical disc media, even so I still believe that DVD is good enough for me, I would be more inclined to try it out, as I would recognized the attemp to make a revolutionary step from DVD, and if the benefits combined of a new format and media convinces me, maybe even support it."

    More and more people are moving away from optical discs, I for one follow such path, and in 5 years non-optical disc media will be much more accesible than it's today. In the mean time, if DVD works fine for the masses, there's no need to replace it for another optical disc, because when it comes to technological advances, early adopters choose to invest in every new stuff released, but average consumers preffer to make huge steps for their money.

    S-VHS and Laser Disc (560x480) never became mainstream, mainly because the masses didn't believe their minor improvement would be enough to invest on them in order to replace VHS... I think that's what is going to happen to Blu-ray as well. I'm sure that some consumers were early adopters and supporters of both S-VHS and Laser Disc, learned the hard way not to invest in every new stuff released, and rather wait for something that from every aspect and angle possible, is worth spending on it.

    DVD was a huge step, a revolutionaty step from VHS, not only was a switch from an analog to digital format, with a higher resolution than other formats availible at the time, such as S-VHS and Laser Disc, with extra content and multiple options of audio and subtitles, and all was delivered in a compact optical disc, which are more reliable than VHS tapes, and easier to handle, store and reproduce than 12" LD discs... the sum of all allowed DVD to became what it is today.

    There's nothing to be confused, I'm against BD as an optical disc, media which is slowly becaming obsolete, and simply doesn't appeal for me. If I'm going to play movies from discs, I rather use DVDs, for which I already invested in, and from which I can achieve amazing results from upscaling them, rather than invest in BD.

    If I have to invest now in a 1080p format, it needs to be delivered on a non-optical disc in order to convince me to try it out, and maybe even support it. If this doesn't happen, then I look forward for a 2160p format that could deliver movies on the media I looking for, because if I'm going to invest a lot of money in replacing equipment and movies, it better be a media that will endure much more than optical discs, and that's the general thought of the average consumer, that chooses to spend their money wisely.

    9.9.2008 22:00 #43

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: and that's the general thought of the average consumer, that chooses to spend their money wisely.What good is your money if you're too old, too demented, or even too dead to enjoy it?

    Besides, I'll bet the average consumer is still learning about 720p/1080i/1080p. They're not even thinking about future formats at this time. You say j6p is waiting for 2160p? Give me a break.

    9.9.2008 23:28 #44

  • ematrix

    Originally posted by error5: What good is your money if you're too old, too demented, or even too dead to enjoy it?That's not for you to judge nor criticize, that's everybody personal choice how to live their lives and how to spend their money. If you choose to spend your money on every new gadget and piece of tech availible, that's your choice and it's respectful, you should do the same by respecting others choose to spend their money wisely, by not investing in every new stuff availible.

    Originally posted by error5: Besides, I'll bet the average consumer is still learning about 720p/1080i/1080p.To be fair maybe you're right, yet I wonder if that's actually the case; after all for the past years, mayor networks have broadcasted HD signals over the air, as well as cable and satellite companies have been providing HD channels; Blu-ray and HD-DVD were introduced, and HD content has been availible throw internet. I think the average consumer knows more about HD that you give them credit for.

    Originally posted by error5: They're not even thinking about future formats at this time. You say j6p is waiting for 2160p? Give me a break.I never said J6P is waiting for 2160p, nor thinking about future formats at this time. I said that the average consumer wants to spend their money wisely, and if they anticipate that something better than BD is coming in a few years, due to the increasing interest and consumption for non-optical disc media, while optical discs are slowly becaming obsolete, why spend money now when they can wait for the next best thing?

    10.9.2008 05:05 #45

  • error5

    ematrix: Again, give me a break.

    The average consumer is just starting to learn about BluRay and high def. He still sees movies on discs everywhere.

    It's only in these types of forums that flash media, HD downloads, 2K/4K, and future formats are being discussed.

    When the average consumer sees the 1080p sign on a flat screen in a store chances are he still needs someone to explain to him what it means.

    Ask 10 random people on the street and ask them if they are aware of your 2160p, or of movies on flash media. I'll be surprised if more than 1 or 2 out of 10 are even thinking about future formats at this time.

    Quote:To be fair maybe you're right, yet I wonder if that's actually the case; after all for the past years, mayor networks have broadcasted HD signals over the air, as well as cable and satellite companies have been providing HD channels; Blu-ray and HD-DVD were introduced, and HD content has been availible throw internet. I think the average consumer knows more about HD that you give them credit for.Why then do most HDTV owners still don't subscribe to HDTV programming? They connect SD sources to their new HDTV and that's it. Most people don't even know what an HDMI cable is.

    http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6495849.html

    Quote: Industry research has generally indicated that anywhere from 40%-60% of HD sets are still being fed exclusively with standard-definition content, either because consumers don’t know any better or they haven’t bothered to sign up for HD cable or satellite service or to hook their TVs up to over-the-air antennas to receive local broadcast HD signals.

    The CEA’s own research, in fact, indicated that in 2007, only 44% of HDTV owners are actually receiving HD programming. A CEA spokesperson explained that this was because many consumers buy the wide-screen sets simply to watch DVD movies.

    10.9.2008 07:54 #46

  • ematrix

    @error5

    I once believed the same, but once you realize that there's HD content in any form availible, you conclude that either people are content with DVD and SD programming and/or do make use of HD content, but don't care to consume Blu-ray, precisely because the average consumer doesn't see the benefit in investing in another optical disc format/media.

    I'll bet that there's more people downloading HD content, than people buying BD movies at stores, since the concept of downloading music and movies isn't unknown to J6P. If you asked 10 random people on the street if they are aware of this, it's likely that most of them would respond that not only they know about it, also preffer to download music and movies than buy the discs at stores.

    Certanly the people that frequent these forum, know more about Blu-ray, flash media, HD downloads, 2K/4K, and future formats than the average consumer, yet not all of them are consuming BD. The problem is that you assume that once the average consumer knows about HD, he'll inmediatelly start to consume Blu-ray, when in fact not everybody that owns a HDTV is interested in consuming it.

    Let me say this as simple as possible, nobody is denying that Blu-ray offers higher resolution than DVD, but the average consumer sees no benefit in investing in movies on another optical disc media, since he's been investing on DVD movies for the past decade, so J6P is eager to invest in another form to deliver movies (which most likely will happen when 2160p is introduced) and anticipates that will happen in a few years, due to the increase interest and consumption of non-optical disc media.

    I never said J6P is waiting for 2160p, nor thinking about future formats at this time, so give it a rest. J6P has moved away from audio CD, and more people each day are buying portable MP3 players, USB/flash cards, etc. so the concept of something completely different than optical discs, that could be used for movies as well isn't unknown to them, even looks forward to be able to show off that he has something cool in his hands... therefore why spend money now when they can wait for the next best thing?

    10.9.2008 18:29 #47

  • error5

    Now I know you're making thing up as you go along.

    Originally posted by ematrix: I'll bet that there's more people downloading HD content, than people buying BD movies at stores, since the concept of downloading music and movies isn't unknown to J6P.We're not talking about music here.

    We're talking about movies - high-definition movies.

    Downloading a single song will take you maybe a minute or two.

    Do you know how long it takes to download an 8 to 10 Gigabyte high-definition movie encode? Not to mention a BD rip which could take as much as 30 to 45 Gigabytes???

    Now show me actual statistics that show that the movie studios are actually making more money from HIGH-DEFINITION movie downloads than from BluRay disc sales. I want actual dollar values and actual numbers OK - and from reputable sources.

    and NO - illegal downloads don't count.

    PLUS - we haven't even considered the factor of newly-imposed bandwidth caps now enforced by the major ISP's.

    Originally posted by ematrix: If you asked 10 random people on the street if they are aware of this, it's likely that most of them would respond that not only they know about it, also preffer to download music and movies than buy the discs at stores.Like I said, downloading music is one thing, downloading HIGH-DEF movies is another. Try downloading an HD movie when your ISP is throttling your connection at 3.5Mbps.

    Originally posted by ematrix: (which most likely will happen when 2160p is introduced) and anticipates that will happen in a few yearsA few years??? It's already here!!

    Now try selling Westinghouse's 52-inch 2160p HDTV to the masses. It should be easy - it costs only $50,000. A lot of people should be lining up to buy at that price.

    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ces2007-we...eview-2018.html

    10.9.2008 20:05 #48

  • juankerr

    Originally posted by error5: Now show me actual statistics that show that the movie studios are actually making more money from HIGH-DEFINITION movie downloads than from BluRay disc sales. Let me help you with the numbers. These are from Adams Media Research (1/2008).

    Hi-def Discs Already Double Size of Download Market

    Total revenue from HD discs in 2007 = $260 million

    Total revenue from internet downloads (both SD and HD) = $123 million

    Also from the article: far more homes in the US have disc players (>90 million) than have high-speed internet access.

    10.9.2008 20:48 #49

  • DVDBack23

    Quote:Originally posted by error5: Now show me actual statistics that show that the movie studios are actually making more money from HIGH-DEFINITION movie downloads than from BluRay disc sales. Let me help you with the numbers. These are from Adams Media Research (1/2008).

    Hi-def Discs Already Double Size of Download Market

    Total revenue from HD discs in 2007 = $260 million

    Total revenue from internet downloads (both SD and HD) = $123 million

    Also from the article: far more homes in the US have disc players (>90 million) than have high-speed internet access.    Since January I'm sure that gap has grown even larger, probably substantially larger.

    10.9.2008 23:06 #50

  • juankerr

    Originally posted by DVDBack23: Since January I'm sure that gap has grown even larger, probably substantially larger.Exactly right.

    Blu-ray Is Booming; Wall Street Analysts Are Blooming Idiots

    1st 6 months of 2008 BluRay revenue = $194 million
    This a 350% increase compared to 1st 6 months of 2007

    PLUS according to the article: Blu-ray sales revenue alone should triple the amount of digital downloading (SD plus HD) revenue in 2008.

    2007 BluRay plus SD DVD = $24 BILLION
    2007 Downloads = $118 million or $123 million (depending on the source)

    It doesn't look like anyone is waiting for the next best thing. People are still buying discs.

    10.9.2008 23:31 #51

  • ematrix

    The thing I dislike about you guys, is that you take comments from others and place them out of context at your convenience, just to make good claims about your beloved Blu-ray. I have so far being fair and respectful of your choice and oppinions, but you don't show the same respect for others, and that's fanatism.

    First of all give it a rest, people is still buying DVDs because they're cheaper, more accesible and consumers already invested on it for the past decade, but if they don't care for Blu-ray, because they don't see much of an improvement, nor want to invest in another optical disc media, deal with it.

    Also I don't have to make things up, where are talking that optical discs is a dying media, that's a fact that nobody can deny, and even so you're having a hard time convincing yourselves, Blu-ray may be a new format, but it's embedded on a media doomed to obsolence.

    The average consumer when from buying audio CDs to downloading music, and no matter what the record industry tries to reverse that, doesn't change the fact that CD is dead. That has everything to do with movies, because unless they came up with a new physical media to deliver movies (which doesn't involve a disc) that's the same path that movies will suffer.

    Second, did I ever said that people where downloading HD movies only? Did I? I said "I'll bet that there's more people downloading HD content, than people buying BD movies at stores" HD content is not only movies, there's other stuff as well like TV episodes, yet you conveniently take my comment to make your argument about HD movies only.

    I also said "If you asked 10 random people on the street if they are aware of this, it's likely that most of them would respond that not only they know about it, also preffer to download music and movies than buy the discs at stores." Legal or not, this has been happenning for years, and like or not, it will continue to happen as a lot of people will rather pay a few dollars or get it for free, than buy overpriced discs at stores.

    By the end of 2007, iTunes Store alone sold 7 million movies since September 2006 (which are legal downloads) while Blu-ray sold 6 million movies since June 2006, and HD DVD sold 2.5 million movies since April 2006, meaning that iTunes Store sold more movies in less time than Blu-ray or HD-DVD did. Today iTunes it's still the preffered option for downloading movies legally, yet it's not the only one availible.

    For the moment there's no 2160p format/media released commercially, it's going to be released in a few years, and you know that well to make such argument. Even so I repeatelly indicated that J6P anticipates that non-optical disc media will eventually be used to deliver movies, since optical discs are slowly less preffered by all (and not because it's looking forward for future formats such as 2160p) you have continuously and deliverately disregard that to make your allegations.

    Also should we really care how much does the movie industry profit from each movie they sell? NO. We should care about how many movies they actually sell, those are the numbers that are factual and never lie. If you insist in numbers, here some from DEG...

    - Less than 8 million Blu-ray and HD-DVD movies were sold within USA during 2007.
    - DVD sold 1.6 billion movies within USA during 2007.
    - In the U.S. during 2008, about 95% of discs sold were DVDs, while globally DVD accounts for about 99% of discs sold.
    - In the U.S. during 2008, only about of 5% of discs sold were BDs, while globally the presence of BD is minimal, acounting for 1% of discs sold.

    Those are the numbers that never lie, and the ones that really should matter to us; total spending numbers, profit figures, etc., those numbers are manipulative to make you believe that BD is doing much better than it actually is, because DVDs and legal downloads (like iTunes) are cheaper than BD, therefore they don't generate the same profit that BD does; no wonder why rarely such numbers are presented, specially on sponsored articles.

    Honestly I'm tired on debating against stubborness and fanatism, I have better things to do with my time, than waste it with people that show no respect for other's oppinion and prefference, who manipulate numbers and distord comments, to make arguments at their own convenience, in order to inforce their choice in others.

    If you aren't able to conduct a respectful and fair conversation, without attacking others just because they differ from yours, then you can continue to say whatever you want, I'll simply don't care anymore on your continuous blah, blah, blah. If anyone whishes to continue debating with them, be my guess. I'm smarter than that.

    11.9.2008 03:02 #52

  • juankerr

    Wow.

    That's the first time I heard someone call a $24 Billion industry a "dying media."

    Just wow.

    11.9.2008 07:41 #53

  • snowlock

    i don't think anyone is specifically fighting for bluray here.
    not even really fighting for optical disc media versus downloads.
    it just the fact that disc media is still the standard,
    and there isn't much that going that can truly change that.



    just like i said earlier,
    it will take bluray multiple more years to saturate the market;
    unless one chooses to believe that won't happen at all.
    when bluray started getting coverage on this and other sites
    dvd's market saturation had really just begun, whether you believe it or not.
    players and media alike have to drop below a reasonable cost
    (versus previous forms like vhs or now dvd)
    before average consumers will honestly invest in the new media form.

    i can see bluray right where i saw dvd when i was first truly aware of that form.
    they have the discs for rent at stores like blockbuster (now netflix too,)
    but there are a limited amount of titles available.
    eventually blockbuster (and other rental stores) phased out all vhs in favor of dvd.
    although i don't see bluray removing dvd from the shelf like that,
    i'm waiting until at least 50% of shelf space is taken up by bluray
    before i declare the hd disc media market completely ubiquitous.



    then you can look at downloads,
    where neither the mpaa or riaa really want their members to ever go.
    there is nothing in the way of a true, publisher-created service for movies.
    the same goes for music, of course, but that's another thread.
    the truth is that broadband internet service is far from ubiquitous;
    therefore since no one puts things like download kiosks in retailers,
    consumers tend to shy away from this form of media even more.

    just like bluray, i think it all comes down to cost.
    i pay $50/month for broadband, because that's the only worthwhile option.
    some have to pay upwards of $90/month because they don't even have my option.
    that plus the cost per download, and even sometimes subscription fees,
    and it's obvious why consumers continue buying $10 dvd movies.

    11.9.2008 07:52 #54

  • error5

    Originally posted by juankerr: Wow.

    That's the first time I heard someone call a $24 Billion industry a "dying media."

    Just wow.    If you make $24 Billion and you're still considered a dying industry then I guess I want to be dying too.

    11.9.2008 08:04 #55

  • eatsushi

    @ematrix: I agree with snowlock. It's NOT a BluRay vs DVD argument. Here's my summary of your argument:

    ematrix: "Discs are a dying media. People are not buying discs anymore and are waiting for the next best thing."

    juankerr: "No. People spent $24 billion on discs (both SD and HD) in 2007 - much, much more than downloads. Discs are still the preferred media for movies."

    Simple as that.

    If people spend $24 billion on a media format I think you'll find it difficult to convince anyone that it's dying and that people are waiting for something else.

    It's true that DVD sales have a slightly downward trend but BluRay is expected to take up the slack. So much so that the industry still predicts growth for 2008 - 2010 to the tune of 17%.

    http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6571170.html?nid=3511

    11.9.2008 10:30 #56

  • oappi

    ematrix seems to be litle paranoid.. Most people are only writing responses to your clames that blu-ray and optical disks will die. I for one have already bought more blu-ray disks than i have bought dvd´s. Sure i never bought that mutch dvd´s because i didnt think the quality was there yet. Bd on the otherhand is enought for me to say this is like watching a movie in movie theater if i had right equipment.

    With +40" tv imo dvd´s quality is not enought. Some how i think these bd trashers are same people who already bought hd-dvd and refuse to buy nearly same product and are waiting next 8-9 years for the better format. Maybe even more who knows.

    11.9.2008 12:37 #57

  • ematrix

    oappi, I'm not being paranoid, but it pisses me off that they repeatly butcher other's comments and place them out of context, so they can disregard anybody else oppinion that differs from theirs. You preffer Blu-ray, I'm glad for you and I respect that, and I appreciate the least you can do is show the same respect for those that don't feel the same. That's why I'm replying to you, and you alone.

    I can respect that you believe that a more than 40" screen isn't enough for DVD, even so you admited haven't tried upscaled DVD, which I invite you to do so, it probally change your perception about it; I'm only asking for you to show me the same respect, when I believe that a more than 40" screen for DVD is good enough for me... the problem is that not all are willing to show the same respect.

    I mean, did I ever said in a full sentence "Discs are a dying media. People are not buying discs anymore and are waiting for the next best thing."? Did I ever said that people are not buying discs anymore? Did I? NO. But some choose to repeately substract pieces from several sentences and thoughts, add stuff I never said, just to make such a claim out of context. That pisses me off because it's disrespecful to other's oppinions.

    This has became a debate about BD against any present and future format and media, after all this all started with the article itself questioning the longevity of BD format. The problem is that those how support Blu-ray are so eager to see it succeed, that inmediately rally around others to disregard their prefferences, and distord comments and thoughts at their own convenience, even to the point to act like high school bullies... do you think that's really necessary?

    As for discs being a dying media, allow me to explain what I meant... just as Mr. Andy Griffiths from Samsung indicated, eventually DVD (and possibly BD as well) will suffer the same faith that CD, which already is a dead duck in the water. It may take 5 years, if they're lucky may take a decade, but eventually will happen, because other non-optical disc storage media have surfaced, which people are already consuming, and have the potencial for delivering movies in the following years.

    Yet what's been helping DVD survive this, is that people are still consuming DVDs because as mentioned, it has been a standart media and movie format for several years now, it's inexpensive, accesible, and consumers already invested on it, I'm not denying that.

    That's why today it's much easier to sell DVD movies, when it has been around for a decade, when people already invested in the equipment and even own large movie collections, after all DVD is the one consumers have spent for 24 billion dollars annually (consumers only spent 260 million dollars for HD-DVD and BD movies in 2007)

    But as far as selling BD movies, some people simply don't see the benefit from reinvesting in another optical disc format, while other potencial options are surfacing, which could deliver movies in the following years. If you preffer BD all I'm asking is for you to respect that others are preffering other options.

    And people will continue to consume DVD until other media becames as inexpensive and accesible, just like happen with CD. I'm not denying neither that if prices for BD hardware and media went down substancially, could help the average consumer accept and consume BD easier than it's happening now.

    But by the time BD has a chance to catch up with DVD, non-optical media will be much cheaper and more accesible than they're today, which will make it harder for BD to sell their products to the public. Even today as for investing in new optical disc media, even if it's only for storage purposes, people are preffering to invest on USB flash cards and HDD, rather than invest in BD discs, which ain't a standart media/format yet.

    If anybody expresses their support for BD, that's fine by me and I'll respect that, all I'm asking them to show the same respect for other's oppinions and prefferences; if they're going to question and disregard every single thing that doesn't stand for their beloved BD, then it's only fair that others do the same; but it's really neccesary for them to attack and insult others, to distord and manipulate their comments at their convenience? NO.

    11.9.2008 16:43 #58

  • juankerr

    Originally posted by eatsushi: @ematrix: I agree with snowlock. It's NOT a BluRay vs DVD argument. Here's my summary of your argument:

    ematrix: "Discs are a dying media. People are not buying discs anymore and are waiting for the next best thing."

    juankerr: "No. People spent $24 billion on discs (both SD and HD) in 2007 - much, much more than downloads. Discs are still the preferred media for movies."

    Simple as that.

    If people spend $24 billion on a media format I think you'll find it difficult to convince anyone that it's dying and that people are waiting for something else.

    It's true that DVD sales have a slightly downward trend but BluRay is expected to take up the slack. So much so that the industry still predicts growth for 2008 - 2010 to the tune of 17%.

    " target="_blank">http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6...id=3511

    QFT and agreed 100%.

    ematrix's comments sound like an obituary for anything that's on a shiny silver disc. There's no other way to interpret his comments despite his protestations.

    Oh, BTW - here's another report about the "dying media."

    Report: DVD, Blu-ray Reign in Western Europe

    Quote:Packaged media sales of DVD and Blu-ray movies in Western Europe are expected to generate $14.8 billion in revenue this year, compared to $500 million for electronic sellthrough, according to a new report.

    London-based Futuresource Consulting said repromotion of DVD movies three-to-four months after their initial release and continued consumer demand for TV DVD fare are driving packaged media sales. Blockbuster titles released on Blu-ray are contributing as well.     $14.8 BILLION just for Western Europe this year.

    I guess the optical disc is in big, big trouble.

    12.9.2008 03:41 #59

  • ematrix

    DVD itself is the one making billions of dollars annually, it doesn't need BD to achieve such figures, as its contribution are minimal, and as I said before the numbers that count are how many DVD and BD movies are sold, not how much the movie studios profit from selling them.

    BD is the one in trouble now, not DVD, and in a few years all optical discs will have a hard time existing, as I have explained preciselly what I meant by "dying media" if you choose to disregard that so you can continue to make your claims, I frankly don't care anymore, I know there's people that share my oppinion.

    You want to buy and support BD, be my guess. Others rather skip BD alltogether and go for the next format/media, that's our choice and we're free to do so at our convenience. If you have a hard time accepting this, that's your problem, not mine.

    12.9.2008 20:19 #60

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: in a few years all optical discs will have a hard time existing,There you go folks.

    An official prediction from ematrix.

    2007 - a $24 billion industry
    2011 - 2012 - "existence will be difficult"

    We need to mark our calendars for the official death watch of the 12cm video disc.

    I hope they let us know where to send the flowers because that's one funeral that I'd like to attend.

    12.9.2008 20:48 #61

  • DXR88

    Jesus, what the hell. longest argument ever on a non-related issue Award Goes to....(Name Goes Here)

    Who gives a flipping Monkey's Wazoo about what Samsung thinks.

    There wrong there will always be a need for Optical Disc based Medium, 4 Generations of Optical Media just doesn't fall off the map cause samsung says so.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    LaserDisc
    Compact-Disc
    DVD
    Blue-Ray

    Are your 4 Generations.

    12.9.2008 23:31 #62

  • ematrix

    Whatever error5, your comments only confirms what I have been saying, not only you're disrespectful to others, you'll do whatever you can to disregard anything else that threathens your worshipped Blu-ray.

    I have no need to make predictions, when I'm only indicating the obvious, which the big BD supporters are beginning to admit, that BD is a hard cookie to sell, and it won't be around as much as you wish for; not like those hilarious Sony "predictions" that BD will outcome DVD by 2009-2012, when we're now by the end of 2008, and BD presence in US in minimal, and insignificant globally... 3 years to reach global mass market? It's not possible.

    Yet at least i don't have to resort to cinism or inmature comments to defend myself, neither i'm not stubborn like to you to not recognize the big picture of global market consumption, present and future possibilities, and the trend they follow. I have done more than enough to explain myself and my view in the matter, and I know others feel and think the same as I do, if you can't accept nor respect it, too bad for you.

    13.9.2008 05:20 #63

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: Whatever error5, your comments only confirms what I have been saying, not only you're disrespectful to others, you'll do whatever you can to disregard anything else that threathens your worshipped Blu-ray.Show me exactly where we were disrespectful to you as a person.

    All we did was disagree with your comments. This is a place for public discussion. If you cannot stand the fact that someone else has viewpoints that differ from yours then I suggest that you don't post at all.

    We have put forward a dissenting opinion supported by links, marketing data and actual dollar sales figures. All you have done is make blanket statements that have no basis in fact. At least post some links that support your contention that "in a few years all optical discs will have a hard time existing" and that "discs are a dying media."

    Quote:I have no need to make predictions, when I'm only indicating the obvious, which the big BD supporters are beginning to admit, that BD is a hard cookie to sell, and it won't be around as much as you wish for; not like those hilarious Sony "predictions" that BD will outcome DVD by 2009-2012, when we're now by the end of 2008, and BD presence in US in minimal, and insignificant globally... 3 years to reach global mass market? It's not possible.You obviously don't have any experience in the corporate/marketing world. Large corporations always rely on marketing trends and predictions to help guide their strategy. They pay big bucks to marketing analysts to come up with studies that show trends for the future.

    No one disagrees with the fact that BluRay is a hard sell but as you paint a gloomy picture, others prefer to look to the future with optimism. You are already writing off the format but others prefer to think otherwise.

    Oh BTW here's another link:

    http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/...hp?startid=2#/4

    Week ending 9/7/08 - Top 20 titles:
    DVD = 88% - Total Sales down 10.56%
    BluRay = 12% - Total Sales UP 16.28% thanks to Transformers.
    The 4th quarter should show more of the same as the summer blockbusters get released and special pricing deals crop up.

    Quote:Yet at least i don't have to resort to cinism or inmature comments to defend myself, neither i'm not stubborn like to you to not recognize the big picture of global market consumption, present and future possibilities, and the trend they follow. I have done more than enough to explain myself and my view in the matter, and I know others feel and think the same as I do, if you can't accept nor respect it, too bad for you.Well welcome to the world of internet discussion groups - where feelings can and do get hurt. LOL! If you're too sensitive to see anyone disagree with you in a condescending way then don't post at all. Remember, we don't know you personally so nothing is personal. We don't dislike or disrespect you as a person. We just disagree with your point of view and we can express our disagreement within the rules of the forum.

    It's a fact of life that there's always someone out there who will have a differing opinion from you. The important thing to remember is that in a free country he has the right to express his opinion no matter how much it irritates you. If you're too stubborn to accept that then too bad for you.

    13.9.2008 08:47 #64

  • ematrix

    Of course you have every right to disagree with my viewpoint, but if you can't stand that others don't share your oppinion, that you must be disrespectful when you take other comments and mannipulate them at your convenience, which you have done repeatelly, and when you aren't able to repute something, you resort to cinism and inmature comments in order to disregard it, then by all means don't post at all.

    Indeed you have put forward a dissenting opinion supported by links, marketing data and actual dollar sales figures. But the source and intent of such figures is 100% inquestionable? Should we rely on them blindly? As I said before, the numbers that matter is how many DVD and BD discs are sold, not how much consumers spent on them, because consumers spent slighty, even largely more, on BD movies than they do on DVD movies, therefore those numbers are misleading... but let's play it your way.

    You're the one that obviously don't want to believe that big corporations like Sony, is paying bic bucks to tech and marketing analysts to come up with studies and predictions that show misleading trends for a bright and positive BD future, in order to mislead consumers that they should support BD and should buy it now.

    As for "in a few years all optical discs will have a hard time existing" and that "discs are a dying media." even you can't deny that non-optical disc media are rising and more consumers everyday are buying them, even more than BD, and that they have the potencial of being use to deliver movies in the future, but if you have a hard time accepting this, read this...

    Quote:SanDisk took the top spot among global vendors in the $11.5 billion memory card and USB flash drive (UFD) market last year, according to DRAMeXchange.

    SanDisk posted $2.93 billion in sales, followed by Sony with $1.73 billion. Coming in third at $1.13 billion is Kingston. U.S. channel brand PNY took the fourth place with $715 million sales. Moreover, Taiwan's Transcend secured the top-five position with sales of $619 million.

    Top players
    DRAMeXchange analysts indicate that SanDisk, with the capacity backup from the Toshiba JV, recorded shipments of its microSD card soared by 128 percent y-on-y in fiscal year 2007, generating an equivalent sales of $1.4 billion. The firm also achieved a good sales record of $1 billion in SD and CF card markets—the two market segments mainly dominated by digital camera. In the UFD market, SanDisk hit a 54 percent y-on-y shipment growth, generating sales of $500 million. SanDisk successfully took the lead in both memory card and UFD markets in terms of sales in FY07.

    Sony is known to create its proprietary memory card standard, Memory Stick, for its own-brand Cyber-shot cameras and Sony Ericsson handsets. Owing to its foothold in respective segments (Cyber-shot ranks second and SonyEricsson ranks as top five), it generated a sales amount of over $1.7 billion from both Memory Stick and UFD on a relative high ASP than other memory card/UFD.

    According to the report, number one DRAM module maker Kingston uses its established global connections to foster its NAND flash memory sales over recent years. Its sales scale of over $500 million in UFD market in 2007 has allowed it to reach a level similar to SanDisk.

    DRAMeXchange analysts also indicates that being one of the top five memory card and UFD makers in 2007, Transcend was the only player from Taiwan. Its year-long strategic deployment and channeling in branded sales allowed the synergy of brandname to start emerging since 2006. This emergence is evident in its growing market share in Europe, India and China. By including its success sales record from Japan, it achieved a sales amount of $619 million from memory card and UFD in 2007.

    According to the memory card and UFD sales from the above vendors, SanDisk, Kingston and PNY are the three top players. Sony also takes a heavy role in the market, not only because of its proprietary memory card standard, but also its influence in both digital camera and handset markets.

    As for Taiwan vendors, DRAMeXchange analysts believe that their influence is set to grow further amid the aggressive deployments in emerging markets and channels over the next few years.    http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800522918_499486_NT_7b64b5b2.HTM

    From figures provided by the Hollywood-based trade group DEG with input from all major motion picture studios...

    - Consumers spent $375 million worldwide on BD and HD-DVD movies during 2007, from which U.S. consumers alone spent $260 million on high definition discs, while consumers in the rest of the world spent $115 million on HD discs.

    - Consumers spent close to $50 billion worldwide on DVD movies during 2007, from which U.S. consumers alone spent $23.4 billion on DVD discs, while consumers in the rest of the world spent $26 billion on DVD discs.

    My point is that who shows today grander potencial and preferrence among consumers, not only as media for storing information, but as possible means to deliver movies in the following years... BD, who's strugeling to reach $1 billion spending worldwide annually, or memory cards and USB flash drives (UFD) how are already a $10 billion worldwide industry annually, and whose consumption is rising among consumers everyday.

    You can argue about memory cards and USB flash drives (UFD) current capacities and prices against BD discs, and I'm not going to dispute that, but regardless of that, people are consuming them more than BD discs, and that capacities will be larger and prices will be lower, to suit the needs and accesability that any J6P requires, even you can't deny that memory cards and USB flash drives (UFD) are showing a more promising future than BD discs.

    Oh BTW if you're going to put some link, at least be fair enough to present the hole picture and not choose what's convenient to you, in order to mislead others to believe that BD is doing well, when it's not... because when you're choosing to put just one week for DVD/BD sales, but neglect to mention which has the case in all previous weeks, that's misleading; just for example:

    For the week ending 31st August 2008, here are the stats:

    Percentage of Top 20 titles by volume:
    Blu-ray vs DVD: 6% vs 94%

    All sales by volume (Percentage of Total Sales):
    Blu-ray sales up 28.94% compared to last week, total spending in the week: $9.11 million (6.83%)
    DVD sales up 3.18% compared to last week, total spending in the week: $124.23 million (93.17%)

    http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/ques....php?startid=1

    It's I how is LOL! If you can't stand that others differ to your viewpoint, and stubborn enough to recognize other prefferences and possibilities, in order to act like you have been doing, then by all means don't post at all.

    Everybody has the right to invest their time and money in what they feel suits best their needs; if you feel that BD works for you, good for you and I respect that, if I feel that DVD works for me and choose to wait for something else in the future, good for me and accept that, rather than insist I must buy BD just because you and big cows like Sony say we should.

    Becuase it's lame that you must resort to cinism and misleading information, in order to make a claim that's not 100% irrefutable. I'm not saying you shouldn't be true to your believes, for sure I am, but at least try to be respectful and fair to other's oppinions, even recognize when there's truth and validity in their claims, I for one have tried my best to do so, but when you conveniently distort and manipulate information and oppinions, that's a cheap way to state your claims.

    13.9.2008 19:14 #65

  • DXR88

    Yawn...Still arguing god, ya could give it a rest.

    13.9.2008 20:11 #66

  • varnull

    Always happens when the paid trolls meet their match I'm afraid.

    Some nice figures there from ematrix.. supporting what we have been saying all along.. the spinning disk, like the elcasette and the umd are end date technology which will be replaced as prices of other non optical media falls.

    ..funny comment. the first pc I had with a cd-rom drive only had a 120MB hdd which cost £690 to get another to double the hdd space. I was employed in a hi-fi shop when the first cd players were released.. at £1200 we sold none, (that was about half what I earned in a year) and they didn't sound any better than the existing technology at half the price... the dvd didn't kill off the vcr until the dvd recorder became a viable alternative. You may not be able to buy new films on tape, but you can still buy blank tapes.. and as for vinyl records..those big extinct black plastic things.. have a look in HMV sometime ;)

    Blu is like dvd-audio.. niche market for the gadget heads with money to burn who just have to have everything. Same went for cd for at least the first 5 years if not more. It was some time in the 90's that things stopped being released on both formats. More then 10 years to get the market penetration required to make it not economic suicide to release on one format only.



    Free open source software = made by end users who want an application to work. sig nazis beware.. Im coming to get you

    13.9.2008 20:41 #67

  • error5

    For each article you quote there's another that I can quote too:

    http://www.homemediamagazine.com/columns/going-blu-suburbia-13354

    Quote:A study from ABI Research found 75% of respondents planned on buying a Blu-ray player by 2009.

    Also, an In-Stat survey reiterated the pull of packaged media, with more than half of respondents saying they preferred hard goods when buying movies or TV shows. Even younger viewers in the study preferred packaged media, with its cover art and extras.

    “That bodes well for Blu-ray,” In-Stat analyst Gerry Kaufhold said.

    Blu-ray disc unit sales in the first half of 2008 were up 340% from the first six months of 2007, according to Nielsen VideoScan data. And, looking at our weekly numbers since then, Blu-ray seems to be gaining momentum on a week-by-week basis as well.

    Driving to work this week, I heard a commercial for Dish Network's “TurboHD,” which touted 1080p resolution “as good as Blu-ray.” That's not a bad thing. When big competitors start comparing themselves to Blu-ray, you know it's on its way to success.    When BluRay can sell $9 - 10 million each week during the 1st 3 quarters they should easily pass their goal of $750 million to $1 billion this year. This is true since 50% or more of disc sales usually happen during the 4th quarter as this is the time when the summer blockbusters are released and special holiday pricing deals kick in.

    It's illogical to compare the flash memory market to BD since they're two totally different things. One is a movie distribution medium and the other is used for computer data storage, digital cameras, etc. Get back to me when movies are distributed on flash.

    Non optical media could be viable in the future but people will not just abandon their disc players that easily. For example, set-top boxes that play flash media (especially if you want 2160p) will come at premium. If you're looking at PC based playback then don't expect J6P to instantly jump on the bandwagon since now everyone has the tech savvy to connect their PC to their television. J6P will want something as simple as (1) insert in the media then (2) press play.

    The infrastructure for disc replication is already there. OTOH they will have to find a way to manufacture 30 - 50 Gig flash memory cheaply and find a way to transfer that much data to each and every unit in a timely manner. A disc replicator can manufacture 1 SD DVD in 2 seconds and 1 BD disc in 6 seconds. Do you know how long it takes to transfer 30 to 50 Gigs of data to a memory card?

    Finally, I think the main obstacle for non optical media is the content provider. Good luck trying to convince the movie studios to abandon a $24 billion a year industry and invest in new technology.

    13.9.2008 21:38 #68

  • juankerr

    This is the reason why Samsung is is looking forward to non-optical media:

    They're trying to buy Sandisk.

    Quote:The world's largest maker of flash memory cards for digital cameras jumped 31 percent, or 4.18 points, Friday on rumors that Samsung would buy the company.

    This follows a recent spate of rumors including one that said Seagate was interested in SanDisk. While Samsung already makes flash memory and is a leader in the emerging solid state drive market, Seagate does not sell SSDs and is looking to get into the market.

    Samsung doesn't need SanDisk to grow; the South Korean company is already the world's largest supplier of flash memory chips, with Toshiba a distant second.    -------------

    Originally posted by error5: Do you know how long it takes to transfer 30 to 50 Gigs of data to a memory card?Come on error5. Don't you realize that 2160p would probably require twice that amount of storage?

    Originally posted by error5: This is true since 50% or more of disc sales usually happen during the 4th quarter as this is the time when the summer blockbusters are released and special holiday pricing deals kick in. I thought the number from Kosty was 60% of total sales in Q4. Anyway, I think Ironman and TDK should push the numbers close to and even above 12% BD share.

    13.9.2008 22:01 #69

  • dblbogey7

    Originally posted by juankerr: I think Ironman and TDK should push the numbers close to and even above 12% BD share.error5 & juankerr: I think the picture is more complicated than just the weekly percentages given by Nielsen.

    Consider this: The profit margin for DVD is about $7 - $10 per unit while the profit margin for BD is roughly $14 - $20 per unit. So in terms of revenue, BD could overtake DVD when it reaches 34 to 35 percent of sales - not 51%.

    BD could actually be more profitable even if it's being outsold by DVD 2:1.

    Guess what number the studios are actually looking at: numbers sold or actual dollar revenue.

    Granted, there are other factors to consider such as the declining costs of BD authoring and replication but you do get my point, right? It's just more complicated than just weekly head to head numbers.

    14.9.2008 00:21 #70

  • DXR88

    Originally posted by varnull: Always happens when the paid trolls meet their match I'm afraid.

    Some nice figures there from ematrix.. supporting what we have been saying all along.. the spinning disk, like the elcasette and the umd are end date technology which will be replaced as prices of other non optical media falls.

    ..funny comment. the first pc I had with a cd-rom drive only had a 120MB hdd which cost £690 to get another to double the hdd space. I was employed in a hi-fi shop when the first cd players were released.. at £1200 we sold none, (that was about half what I earned in a year) and they didn't sound any better than the existing technology at half the price... the dvd didn't kill off the vcr until the dvd recorder became a viable alternative. You may not be able to buy new films on tape, but you can still buy blank tapes.. and as for vinyl records..those big extinct black plastic things.. have a look in HMV sometime ;)

    Blu is like dvd-audio.. niche market for the gadget heads with money to burn who just have to have everything. Same went for cd for at least the first 5 years if not more. It was some time in the 90's that things stopped being released on both formats. More then 10 years to get the market penetration required to make it not economic suicide to release on one format only.
    b-b-but i like my spinney disk thing, with a class 2 type laser that may blind you if you stare directly into it...

    granted Disc technology will eventually die just like tape based medium did, but not now not even 10 years from now. its a niche that will keep spinning and cause radiation hazards for many years to come

    14.9.2008 01:41 #71

  • ematrix

    First of all, thanks varnull. I know they're others than share my viewpoint, yet I appreciate your comments and I completely agree with you, and certanly helps to show that I'm not the only that feels and thinks this way, thanks.

    error5, you're the one that asked me to support my viewpoint, but when i do so, you inmediatelly rush to disregard it, and worst of all with a doubtful study... doesn't that confirms what I have been saying? I want to believe that people are smarter to believe blindly on a study of doubtful origin and results, at least I'm; unless you can provide solid proof of the validity of such study, then is misleading and manipulative... or do you still believe that BD will outcome DVD by 2009, like alleged "studies" claimed a while ago?

    How can you compare BD, even if it reaches $1 billion spending in US, or $1.5 billion worldwide this year, when DVD reaches $20 billion spending in USA, or $50 billion worldwide. Yet when the memory cards and USB flash drives market is already a $10 billion worldwide industry annually, and still rising, it's not that farfedge that they could be potencially used to deliver movies.

    If the past years have showed us, is the movie studios is beginning to learn, the hard way in most cases, that they better explore other possibilities; that's why they're supporting online movie stores like iTunes, adding Digital Copies to DVD and BD releases, etc. I don't think will be long before they notice a growing $10 billion a year worldwide memory cards and USB flash drives industry.

    As others and I have pointed out, optical discs will eventually die, not now of course, but it's possible that in 5-10 years will happen, the reasons and circunstances why this will happen have been explained before. DVD has nothing to worry about, it has been with us for 11 years and will continue to be around while it's possible; on the contrary BD is the one that has a lot to worry about.

    Regardless of our differences in the past, I'm respectful and fair enough to recognize some validity and truth in part of your past comments... I won't deny that at this moment there aren't movies distributed on USB flash cards, but at least there's the possibility that could change in a few years, specially with present global market trends.

    I'm not denying that a set-top box that plays USB flash media will be expensive at first, but such scenario will be no different from the one early adopters endured while purchasing BD players. Also be sure that they will make playing movies from USB flash media as easily as plug and play, so that any J6P can handle.

    Also let me ratify that my expectancies for 2160p is that most likely USB flash media or other non-optical disc media will be used to deliver movies at such resolution, not because I personally preffer 2160p over 1080p... I just don't share your same interest in spending my money on another optical disc.

    Also in the following years, not only the costs to manufacture large USB flash media will be much cheaper and faster than they're now, but their GB capacities will be grander, and their transfer data rate will be faster as well, which will widen the possibility that they could be used to deliver movies commercially... just consider that in 2 years, they went for 4-8 GB to 32-64 GB capacities.

    I agree that the picture is more complicated than just the weekly percentages given by Nielsen or HMR, after all they only reflect how much people spent each week on discs, where BD percentages have been fluctuating from 5% to 8% weekly, but they don't reflect how many DVD and BD discs were sold, which is the number that should matter to us.

    If you analyse closer the latest numbers provided by Nielsen and HMR, you'll notice that as for consumers spending on discs last week, indeed Blu-ray reached 12% of the Top 20 titles, but as for total disc sales (including of course the Top 20 titles) it actually reached 8.71% of total consumers spending in the same week (only 1.88% increase from the previous week)

    If you consider that DVD movies, despite rebates and discounts, are in most cases slighty to largely cheaper than BD movies, specially when it comes to catalog titles, then the weekly percentages provided by Nielsen and HMR are inacurate, as they only provide how much consumers spent of BD and DVD discs, not how many BD and DVD discs consumers actually bought nor how much they spent on each disc.

    It's like saying that 10 guys go in a store, 9 of them buys a $10 DVD movie each, while 1 buys one $20 BD movie; at the end of the day BD will account for 10% of total discs sold, but will claim that accounts for 18.18% of total consumer spending. Both figures are correct, but this is a simple example of how percentages could easily mislead you.

    Therefore it may be possible that the actual percentage of BD discs sold weekly, could be actually lower than the percentage provided by Nielsen and HMR on consumer spending for BD discs... and I enphasize it may possible, because they aren't providing all the information; in the contrary if they did, then we could know exactly how BD is doing against DVD, even an average spending of each BD and DVD disc.

    Remember: "Numbers don't lie. The people that manipulates them does"

    14.9.2008 10:18 #72

  • juankerr

    Originally posted by ematrix: error5, first of all you're the one that asked me to support my viewpoint with solid proof, but when i do so, you inmediatelly rush to disregard it, and worst of all with a sponsored study... doesn't that confirms what I have been saying?You obviously didn't get the point. For one study that says one thing - there's another can say the exact opposite. Plus - all studies are sponsored one way or another. Peeople pay to get the studies done or they pay to get copies of the study results. No one does studies for free.

    Quote:I want to believe that people are smarter to believe blindly on a study of doubtful origin and results, at least I'm; unless you can provide solid proof of the validity of such study, then is misleading and manipulative... or do you still believe that BD will outcome DVD by 2009, like they claimed a while ago?The studies are out there. You can choose to believe them or don't. BTW, stop misquoting: No one said that Bluray will outsell (not outcome) DVD by 2009. Every study that i've seen so far has predicted good things for Bluray and will achieve parity by 2011 to 2012 in terms of revenue - like this one from futuresource.com:

    http://www.arcadiasbest.com/files/u1/2008-08_DVD-v-Blu-ray.jpg

    Quote:Yet when the memory cards and USB flash drives market is already a $10 billion worldwide industry annually, and still rising, it's not that farfedge that they potencially could be used to deliver movies.Show me a business or technological model that makes it profitable to distribute a 30 to 50 GB movie on a 30 - 50 gig flash drive/card. Until then all this is vaporware. (Sorry to correct your spelling but it's "farfetched" not "farfedge.")

    Quote:As others and I have pointed out, optical discs will eventually die, not now of course, but it's possible that in 5-10 years will happen, the reasons and circunstances why this will happen have been explained before, even with proof to support it.I didn't see the proof that discs are going to die out in 5 to 10 years. Please post the proof agaain.

    Quote:DVD has nothing to worry about, it has been with us for 11 years and will continue to be around while it's possible; on the contrary BD is the one that has a lot to worry about.Sorry but if you're talking about the demise of the disc then you'll have to include DVD as well. If you're looking at non-optical media then you have to include both in the equation. remember that optical media a $24 billion a year industry and is deeply entrenched in the consumer psyche.

    Quote:just consider that in 2 years, they went for 4-8 GB to 32-64 GB capacities.Look at the prices though. The cheapest 16GB SDHC card I could find was about $50. if you're talking about 2160p video you'll probably need anywhere from 75 to 100 GB per movie.

    Like I said - show me a technological model that makes it profitable to distribute a 2160p movie on a 75GB flash drive. Otherwise it's all vaporware at this time.

    Quote:I agree that the picture is more complicated than just the weekly percentages given by Nielsen or HMR, after all they only reflect how much people spent each week on discs, where BD percentages have been fluctuating from 5% to 8% weekly, but they don't reflect how many DVD and BD discs were sold, which is the number that should matter to us.If you want actual number of movies sold then go to the-numbers.com. You can make calculations from them baased on the Nielsens.

    However, the actual numbers sold isn't what matters to the studios distributing the movies. It's how much they make. Like dblbogey7 pointed out - even if Bluray sold only 35 percent of the volume of DVD's they could still be more profitable due to the higher margin per disc. That's what matters to those who release the movies.

    Quote:If you analyse closer the latest numbers provided by Nielsen and HMR, you'll notice that as for consumers spending on discs last week, indeed Blu-ray reached 12% of the Top 20 titles, but as for total disc sales (including of course the Top 20 titles) it actually reached 8.71% of total consumers spending in the same week (only 1.88% increase from the previous week)Still this is a 340 percent increase from last year's 1st 6 months. That type of growth never goes unnoticed by those in the industry.

    Quote:If you consider that DVD movies, despite rebates and discounts, are in most cases slighty to largely cheaper than BD movies, specially when it comes to catalog titles, then the weekly percentages provided by Nielsen and HMR are inacurate, as they only provide how much consumers spent of BD and DVD discs, not how many BD and DVD discs consumers actually bought.Like I said - what matters to the industry and to the longevity of a format is the dollar amount made. If a format doesn't make money then it's doomed. If it continues to make money like BD then you can expect it to survive.

    The DVD market is at the point of saturation. Why do you think we see $5 bargain bins at Walmart?

    Quote:It's like saying that 10 guys go in a store, 9 of them buys a $10 DVD movie each, while 1 buys one $20 BD movie; at the end of the day BD will account for 10% of total discs sold, but will claim that accounts for 18.18% of total consumer spending. Both figures are correct, but this is a simple example of how percentages could easily mislead you.It's not misleading. Like I said it's the dollar amount that matters to the industry - not the number of units sold. DVD is a lower profit margin product so the industry looks to BD.

    14.9.2008 10:55 #73

  • ematrix

    I provided a real marketing study that shows actual numbers for memory cards and USB flash drives, yet you want to repute that with a survey with alleged consumer prefferences of doubtful origin and results? Damn right I choose not to believe.

    So now I'm misquoting? Didn't Mr. Frank Simonis, chairman of the Blu-ray Disc Association, made the absurd claim early 2007, that by the end of 2009, the BDA planned to have BD replacing DVD entirely, and I quote "Within three years it will just be Blu-ray"? Hell, it was widely discussed here at the forum.

    Come on, a lot of people read and LOL about it, I mean sure looks you could use some laughs. Yet I don't like people insinuating that I'm lying. By the way, you don't like misquoting? Then why the hell you do it? You guys have been misquoting me all along at your convenience.

    So now you know that BD can't outsell DVD by the number of discs each sells, you want to rely on sales revenue in order to do so... how do think that's good for consumers? Because either to achieve high revenues from BD, they must keep prices high, or they lower them to rival those for DVD, which will result in lower revenues and slower growth; also how do they expect to profit higher from BD, which costs more to manufacture than DVD?

    But so far BD isn't making a lot of money, maybe this will change in a few years, but also if you believe that growing markets never goes unnoticed by those in the industry, I'm sure that they'll eventually notice the growing $10 billion memory card and USB flash media industry; for BD's sake, he better grow fast before they do.

    Funny that you reffer to DVD as lower profit margin product when is the $24 billion a year industry by itself, BD hasn't earned yet the right to call itself a billion dollar industry, nor it's deeply entrenched in the consumer psyche; and yes, both discs have been included in the demise of optical discs, the difference is that when this happens, DVD would have lived long enough and achieved all its goals, BD will fall short on both.

    However, as for how much they make from discs sold what matters to the studios distributing the movies... why should we care? When did we became the devil's advocates to look out what's best for the movie studios? Do they always have the consumer in their best interest? Tell that to those HD-DVD's early adopters. Tell that to those how pay a highly anticipated film that turns out to be a crappy movie.

    As for the rest, by all means read what I said instead of rushing to reply, I specifically said future possibilities, and yes in a few years it's going to be possible and profitable for movie studios to deliver movies on non-optical disc media.

    14.9.2008 13:05 #74

  • juankerr

    Originally posted by ematrix: I provided a real marketing study that shows actual numbers for memory cards and USB flash drives, yet you want to repute that with a survey with alleged consumer prefferences of doubtful origin and results? Damn right I choose not to believe.Like I said it's illogical to show a marketing study on flash drives since they aren't used for movie distribution. I repeat, show me the technological and business model that says 2160p HD movies at 75 GB or more are feasible to distribute thru flash media. You have failed to do so since it's what we call vaporware.

    Quote:So now I'm misquoting? Didn't they made the absurd prediction months ago, allegedly based in a study, that BD will outsell DVD by 2009? Come on, a lot of people read and LOL about it, I mean sure looks you could use some laughs.On the contrary, the expectations we have been reading lately are quite within reach. By the end of 2008 they expect a 7 - 8% market share with $750M to $1B revenue. Just right on target don't you think?

    Quote:So now you know that BD can't outsell DVD by the number of discs each sells, you want to rely on sales revenue in order to do so... how do think that's good for consumers? I have bad news for you ematrix. It doesn't matter if it's good for the consumer or not. What matters in the business world is profit and right now DVD is a low profit margin product compared to BD.

    Quote:I'm sure that they'll eventually notice the growing $10 billion memory card and USB flash media industry; for BD's sake, he better grow fast before they do.So who do you think will be the one's developing the playback machines for these flash media?

    It's the same usual suspects: Sony, Panasonic/Matsushita, Pioneer, Philips, Toshiba, Samsung etc. These are companies that already have a stake in optical discs.

    Plus, who do you think will be providing the content for these flash movies?

    It's the same usual gang of movie studios that right now are making money off discs.

    They will need initial R&D and later new manufacturing infrastructure just to implement a new format meaning billions in initial outlay which needs to be recouped. Then comes marketing the new format to the public - a consumer market that has discs already deeply entrenched as a movie medium.

    Bottom line, they will have to convince the general public to abandon discs in favor of some other non-optical media. The first players will probably have the high-end pricing that we see today - $1000 or more. This movies will need capacities of 75 GB or more and will likely cost at least $40 to $50 a title. Plus the 2160p/2K/4K displays needed to take advantage of these movies will also have high-end pricing - >$10,000 or more depending on size.

    By the time these prices come down to J6P levels you will already see full-featured BD players for $50 or less, bargain bin BD movies for $5 and larger 1080p HDTV's at $500 or less.

    Any new non-optical format will have an enormous task ahead of it.

    Quote:Funny that you reffer to DVD as lower profit margin product when is the $24 billion a year industry by itself, BD hasn't earned yet the right to call itself a billion dollar industry, nor it's deeply entrenched in the consumer psyche Yes, it's a $24 billion industry that will not just vanish just because some of you think that discs are on their way out.

    If BD can make it's projected revenue of $750 to $1B this year then I think it could be rightfully called a billion dollar industry by the end of 2009. Right now, BD is still on it's way to achieving it's goals for this year.

    Quote:However, as for how much they make from discs sold what matters to the studios distributing the movies... why should we care? See the above bad news comment. The consumer has no voice in all of this. The sooner you realize that profitability is the ultimate goal of the industry, the clearer you'll see the picture.

    Quote:I specifically said future possibilities, and yes in a few years it's going to be possible and profitable for movie studios to deliver movies on non-optical disc media.The fact remains that it's still vaporware at this point.

    14.9.2008 13:44 #75

  • aldan

    And YOU ARE EXACTLY the type of consumer I referred to in my previous post. All 3!!!!!!!!! What a goof!

    Lemme guess............you have a PS2, PS3, Xbox, Xbox 360, Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, Orig. Nintendo, Super Nintendo, NeoGeo, TurboGrafx, Sega Genesis. You probably have a 'yet-to-be-invented- 9.1 speaker system and BETA EVERYTHING. NERD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!do you even know what goof means?if you ever said that to my face you had better be ready to scrap.do you have anything concrete to say or is this verbal diahrea all we can expect? on topic now,i think maybe old andy is right to a point.the way it looks to me,we will probably be saying goodby to blueray and hello to another format in 5+ years.this has been the trend in the past and i dont see it changing now.i am not likely to buy a blueray player just yet.just my opinion.

    14.9.2008 15:11 #76

  • ematrix

    It's logical because not only the USB flash drives market is there and it's growing, but also Toshiba is the first one that has shown interest in developing a movie format for them; months ago they said that they're into that, as part of a lot of tech advances they're working at, which was discussed here at the forum.

    Again... So I'm misquoting?, didn't Mr. Frank Simonis, chairman of the Blu-ray Disc Association, made the absurd claim early 2007, that by the end of 2009, the BDA planned to have BD replacing DVD entirely, and I quote "Within three years it will just be Blu-ray"? Hell, it was also widely discussed here at the forum. I don't like you insinuating that I'm lying, which I never did.

    It may be reach 7-8% market share by the end of 2008 in USA, but globally it's a completely different story, where BD market share is minimal to nonexistent, to the point that some stores have returned their BD movie stock, simply because nobody is buying them.

    I'm sure you must live in USA, and therefore your perspective would be different if you saw the big picture. I have bad news for you. If Blu-ray is rather successful in USA, but a failure in the rest of the world, then it won't matter what they do, it won't be more than a niche market.

    Even if BD can make it's projected revenue of $750 to $1B this year, still can't rightfully be called a $20 billion dollar industry. You're wrong about something, the consumer does have a voice in all of this, it simply can refuse to buy BD, just like it's happenning with a lot of people globally. The sooner you realize that, the clearer you'll see the picture.

    You can keep insisting about the expense involved in a USB Flash driver movie format, but it won't be any differente than when BD started as well, because all new tech is expensive. Yet you're making claims based on the tendency of current prices for this media, and refuse to recognize that because they have made huge steps in just 2 years, it's fair to say that in a few years there's a strong possibility that it will became cheaper, larger and faster.

    It's going to take more than 5 years before BD prices come down to J6P levels, but you're ask too much from people in believing blindly that we'll see by then, full-featured BD players for $50 or less, when more likely will be $100, bargain bin BD movies for $5, again more likely for $10, and larger 1080p HDTV's at $500 or less, when in fact will be closer to $700-$1000 for large HDTVs, specially when they have stated that you shouldn't expect dramatic price cuts on flat panel screens in the following years.

    You can argue that I don't know the future of USB flash drives for sure, you may be right. Then again you don't know for sure what's BD future, to claim such inexpensive prices for BD players, movies, even HDTVs... even you can't provide unrefutable proof that this will actually happen.

    If you want to look up about the stuff i talked earlier, be my guess, you should find it in the forum, I have no need to lie, exagerate or make up things along the way. I'm really tired and actually have other things to do, to keep this on-going discussion. And I see no point to present links or quotes from articles, in order to support my viewpoint, if you're going to dismissed them.

    Obviously my viewpoint, prefference and expectations differs from yours, if you can respect and accept mine, and let it be, then of course i'll extend to you the same courtesy and do the same, at least just for the sake of putting this discussion to an end.

    14.9.2008 15:40 #77

  • DXR88

    Originally posted by aldan: And YOU ARE EXACTLY the type of consumer I referred to in my previous post. All 3!!!!!!!!! What a goof!

    Lemme guess............you have a PS2, PS3, Xbox, Xbox 360, Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, Orig. Nintendo, Super Nintendo, NeoGeo, TurboGrafx, Sega Genesis. You probably have a 'yet-to-be-invented- 9.1 speaker system and BETA EVERYTHING. NERD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!    How dare you you forgot the Atari 2600, Atari 5200, Atari 7800 and Atari Jaguar, and you forgot the 3DO shame on you.

    14.9.2008 15:42 #78

  • error5

    I wanted to reply to your other points but I think juankerr did a good job. However, there is one comment that I want to address:

    Originally posted by ematrix: So now you know that BD can't outsell DVD by the number of discs each sells, you want to rely on sales revenue in order to do so... how do think that's good for consumers? Let me put it this way - a hypothetical scenario:

    Let's say that DVD sold 200,000 units but all of them came from the $5 bargain bin at Walmart - that's $1 million right there.

    However, to make the same amount BluRay will need to sell only 50,000 units at $20 each.

    So in our hypothetical case, BluRay sold only 25% of the volume but made the same amount in actual dollars.

    Now do you understand why volumes are less meaningful?

    Read dblbogey7's post on this. It contains very good points:

    Quote:error5 & juankerr: I think the picture is more complicated than just the weekly percentages given by Nielsen.

    Consider this: The profit margin for DVD is about $7 - $10 per unit while the profit margin for BD is roughly $14 - $20 per unit. So in terms of revenue, BD could overtake DVD when it reaches 34 to 35 percent of sales - not 51%.

    BD could actually be more profitable even if it's being outsold by DVD 2:1.

    Guess what number the studios are actually looking at: numbers sold or actual dollar revenue.

    Granted, there are other factors to consider such as the declining costs of BD authoring and replication but you do get my point, right? It's just more complicated than just weekly head to head numbers.

    14.9.2008 15:55 #79

  • ematrix

    Yes, I agree with you on that, but how does that help BD consumers? It doesn't change the fact that our goal as consumers is to pay the least possible for entertaiment, therefore while 50,000 consumers got one BD movie for their money, another 50,000 consumers got 4 DVD movies for the same amount... so 4 movies for the price of 1, that's an excelent deal that most people can't refuse, maybe even goes for more movies at such prices... and the more people buying DVD movies, the less will be buying BD movies... at least that's my viewpoint.

    14.9.2008 16:17 #80

  • DXR88

    you know you guys might make Afterdawn addict status just by arguing a pointless battle.

    14.9.2008 16:28 #81

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: Yes, I agree with you on that, but how does that help BD consumers? It doesn't change the fact that our goal as consumers is to pay the least possible for entertaiment, Well you have to balance your "goal" to pay as little as possible with the economic reality that any product needs profitability to survive.

    They can sell you the product for much less but if it means the format is losing money on each sale then that's not ideal either. What does it benefit anyone if they discontinue the format because it's losing money. You just lost your initial investment right there.
    You may have achieved your goal of paying as little as possible but if your chosen format does not survive then you've lost out as well.

    When your 2160p non-optical movies and 2160p displays come out do you think you'll be paying less than current BluRay and 1080p prices?

    I expect to pay extra for BD because it has better PQ and AQ and is a better product than DVD across the board. Fact remains that player prices are coming down and movie prices should follow. (Read about Warner's plan to cut catalog prices.)

    14.9.2008 18:03 #82

  • ematrix

    First of all, when 2160p non-optical movies come out and more 2160p displays are availible, they'll be at comparable prices than the initial ones for Blu-ray and 1080p displays; if those BD/1080p initial prices have decreased, and you insist that current prices will continue to lower, then you can't disregard the same will happen for 2160p.

    As for the rest it simply doesn't make sense. It has been a common discussion among consumers, that DVD movies have been overpriced for years, specially when the production disc costs have decreased in the past years, and there's nothing that suggest that will not happen with BD movies as well.

    We can't deny that the movie industry has been seeking to profit largely from each unit sold, which has resulted in people buying less movies legally that they can or should, rather than profiting from volume sales, which would result in more people buying movies legally.

    Overpricing is a cancer that has been eating the movie industry (and the record industry as well) yet you get excited when reductions in optical disc production costs occur, as if inmediatelly would imply lower prices for the movies; if any the last decade has showed us, is that really means they can seek more profits by keeping movies overpriced.

    To make things short, if they profit accordinly and fairly to what costs to produce it, then it should be reflected in the final price. If it costs a few dollars to produce, and consumers pay $5-15 for a movie, then that's a fair and accesible price, which will appeal to more people than when a movie is priced for $20-30.

    15.9.2008 01:58 #83

  • Toshibot

    Originally posted by ematrix:
    To make things short, if they profit accordinly and fairly to what costs to produce it, then it should be reflected in the final price. If it costs a few dollars to produce, and consumers pay $5-15 for a movie, then that's a fair and accesible price, which will appeal to more people than when a movie is priced for $20-30.    Movies prices are based on what the market can bear. Why should they sell at $5 when people are still buying at $20.

    At this point in time HD movies are still a rich man's hobby. If you can't afford movies at $20 to $30 then I guess you should look for a different hobby.

    Mass acceptance will come in its own sweet time.

    15.9.2008 07:41 #84

  • error5

    Originally posted by ematrix: If it costs a few dollars to produce, and consumers pay $5-15 for a movie, then that's a fair and accesible price, which will appeal to more people than when a movie is priced for $20-30.Well unfortunately, prices do not depend on what the consumer wants to pay for it.

    Prices depend on a complex interplay of supply and demand plus on other market forces that require a degree in business and economics to fully understand.

    Why do you think the companies pay analysts to do all those marketing studies?

    15.9.2008 07:52 #85

  • eatsushi

    Originally posted by error5: Well unfortunately, prices do not depend on what the consumer wants to pay for it.Well sometimes you can. I was at a flea market yesterday and I was able to haggle for a nice set of Libbey wine glasses - 3 bucks for a set of 6. LOL!

    I'm reminded of this classic scene from "Life of Brian."

    Unfortunately the rest of the world doesn't work like a flea market and we are at the mercy of supply/demand and other mysterious market forces.

    15.9.2008 10:46 #86

  • ematrix

    First of all, movies prices are based on what the movie industry and everyone involved in the process wants to gain from each unit sold. The problem is that a huge percentage of DVD users aren't buying movies legally, they never had, period. ¿Can we assure that everybody that owns a DVD player, buys movies legally? Absolutely not.

    That's why they make a big deal about "piracy", because they know that there's a lot of people that aren't buying movies legally, when they preffer to get a copy for a few bucks, or downloading it for free, than to pay for overpriced movies... this is common knowledge.

    Indeed, movie prices do not depend on what the consumer wants to pay for them. But the bottom line is that consumers can choose, like they have been doing for the past decade, to decline from buying them legally.

    DVD's mass acceptance came to be, not thanks to past and current movie prices, but when players, recorders, and blank discs, became so cheap and accesible, that allowed pirates to appeal to more consumers with lower prices for the movies, and profit more from volume sales, or allow users to rent or borrow a movie, and make their own copy.

    I don't aprove pirates actions, yet I recognize that they have been smarter in profiting from large volume sales, and given the masses exactly what they're asking for, good entertaiment at a low price, rather than profiting largely from overpricing each unit sold, which translates in low volume sales.

    BD is far from reaching that point, sure you'll have a hard time finding someone offering you BD copies, and it's not in the movie industry's best interest for it to happen, yet it's ironic that until BD recorders and blank discs became cheaper and accesible, if that ever happens, BD will not reach mass acceptance.

    Greed has blind them from reversing this, and it doesn't require a degree in business and economics, to realize that the best way to attrack more consumers into buying movies legally, is lowering their prices dramaticly.

    21.9.2008 07:47 #87

  • Brennan22

    Originally posted by DXR88: Jesus, what the hell. longest argument ever on a non-related issue Award Goes to....(Name Goes Here)

    Who gives a flipping Monkey's Wazoo about what Samsung thinks.

    There wrong there will always be a need for Optical Disc based Medium, 4 Generations of Optical Media just doesn't fall off the map cause samsung says so.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    LaserDisc
    Compact-Disc
    DVD
    Blue-Ray

    Are your 4 Generations.

    29.9.2008 21:38 #88

  • 1bonehead

    Originally posted by DXR88: you know you guys might make Afterdawn addict status just by arguing a pointless battle.
    DXR88, I agree !

    The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
    The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
    The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!
    The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX.

    29.9.2008 21:48 #89

  • tvs4U

    spam removed

    9.3.2009 12:26 #90

© 2024 AfterDawn Oy

Hosted by
Powered by UpCloud