Why did blu ray not take off like DVD's ?

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

But the iPhone got longer?

Yes it got longer to accommodate a larger screen. Just like the new Sharp 70" Elites are longer than the 60" Pioneer Elite Plasma's from a few years ago. Are you trying to say Apple producing phones with bigger screens is going against the smaller footprint idea? Its not.....just like if Apple produce a 17" Macbook Air model, that wouldn't be indication that "Hey you're smaller footprint idea is stupid because lookie, Apple now has a longer lap! hehehe"

It also went from a weight of 135g to 133g, to 135g, to 137g, to 140g

Haha..You're arguing over a few grams. If you're going to come out with silly examples of a couple gram difference after googling all the specs then I think you're missing the point.

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

The iPad is a waste of money in my opinion.

Why because it doesn't suite your needs? The fact that you can use a BI ap(thats Business Intelligence) to access important metrics on the fly remotely isn't wasteful by any stretch. Then again you may not work in any type of corporate environment.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by fathergll

That's sales.

obviously, how welse will you know what people are buying?

That doesn't paint an accurate picture how people are listening to music.

who talked about listening to music, if I buy a CD I can listen to it on my ipod, on my PC, on my CD player in the car, who said anything about how people are listening to it. Your assertion was that people did not care about quality and they are listening to low grade i-tunes music since 2000, if they are listening to CD quality (or higher) on their ipod how does that prove that they care about convenience, form factor..... more than quality?

If ~30% of people that bought Avengers opted for the cheaper DVD and the rest for higher quality BD and ~30% of music sold is bought in low quality DL/streaming then how does it prove that people don't care about quality?

The sheer amount of illegal digital music files floating around is impossible to account for.

agree, but not all of it is low quality? and then I am sure that the main reason for illegal DL is cost and nothing legal can compete with free

Add in tons and tons of small independent bands are selling their content digitally or giving it away.

but if it is sold through normal means, Spontify, i-tunes..... then it is counted in the numbers, but if the band is also selling the CD from the back of their truck then it is not. so I am guessing the "small band" effect would actually work in CDs favour and not DL, on the other hand it will most likely be a rounding error in the final calculations.

How many CD players are being sold compared to MP3 players?

enough

How do you think CD player sales will fare in 5 years? How about 10 years?

don't know, I can still go into BB and buy a record player and have the choice of a few players and CD came out 25 years ago and re3cords are still being produced and sold.

Despite what album sales may say on some link, majority of people are listening to music via MP3 or streaming.

maybe, but they still prefer higher quality which is why they buy the CD and then copy it losslessly to their MP3 player.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by fathergll

Thats making the assumption you'll have a CD drive to do that with. Computers are moving away from optical drives. Apple iMacs, Airs and Retina Macbook Pros all have no optical drives. There's still ways around that but much like the floppy disc, CD drives are going bye bye

and 80% of people don't use mac computers.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by fathergll

Well Im sure there still people who actively watch VHS tapes out there too.

probably, but this is the difference if I look at what people are buying (not what is collecting dust in their home) they don't tell me of what new movie is released on VHS (there are none), or sales info o0n how well it is doing (maybe there are some in some shrift shop somewhere) or even if I go into a store I can't get a VHS only player. On the other hand if I go into a store I can get a record player, I can read about a new record being released and I can see how well record sales are doing they are doing http://www.tinymixtapes.com/news/sal...ssibly-related


Why are records still alive but VHS is not? when the CD came out in 82 and DVD in 96/97?

Mark your calendar for 5 years from now and go back to this thread. Then look at how much CDs will be gone from the market at that time. Im not saying there won't be CDs but im saying there will be a ton of computers without them, many cars won't have them and store will barely even sell CD players(they don’t even sell many of them now im sure). More importantly the kids growing up today won't have some nostalgia reason to buy them like the adults today.

Im not Nostradamus, im just a guy looking at the obvious writing on the wall.

or a nut job with no idea of how stuff works.


Quality does not die it just gets replaced by better quality. If 5 years from today digital music is much higher quality than CD then maybe youre prediction will be right, but if not then CD sales will still be going strong, for the last 10 years I have been hearing idiots predict the extremely short remaining life of CD and it is still roughly 70% of sales. It has nothing to do with nostalgia or being old fasion but the simple reality that maybe not everyone cares about quality but all you need is a few people that care for the difference for something to go on. Some people look at records and say "they are the best quality available" and they have maintained the record industry for the 30 years CD has been around, some people say "CD is the best quality" and they will maintain the CD industry. The way to kill something isn't to get the masses but to convince people that see a benefit in something that there is none there anymore. It was not Ferrari and Lamborghini... that needed help from the government to maintain their companies but GM and the rest that sell crap cars to Joe.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Lawrence of Arabia should be seen on blu ray. The movie was filmed in 70mm and the original negative was scanned at 4K resolution (all done with theatrical distribution in mind)...all other transfers for this movie were done with a 35mm print.

Seeing the movie on blu-ray allows one to use the blu ray format at the best of its abilities.

My initial statement stands: There is absolutely nothing unique or special about Lawrence... that makes it more important to see on Blu-ray than, say, La Grande Illusion, which was also restored in 4K.

You seem to be under the impression that because it was filmed in 70mm, it is more suitable for Blu-ray. Or something like that.

Pro-B

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by fathergll

Thats hold true as long as the consumers still value that medium. People don't value CDs in 2012.

Who are these people you are speaking of? Because in 2012 CD buyers were up for a second year:

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell...r-second-year/

The music industry is showing signs of renewed health, in part due to the surprising resilience of the CD format, according to a new study by The NPD Group, a consumer information research provider.

“After years of losing buyers, caused by many consumers who simply stopped buying music, the total number of CD buyers increased for the second consecutive year, growing 2% to 78 million [in 2011],” the company said.

Total music-track sales rose 4% last year, the first gain in many years. Paid download buyers increased 14% in 2011, to 45 million customers. Digital buyers also spent more at iTunes Music Store, Amazon AMZN +0.03% MP3, and other digital music stores in 2011.

The average annual expenditure for digital music rose 6% to $49, and although CD sales declined, the decrease was not nearly as steep as it has been over the last five years.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

You seem to be under the impression that because it was filmed in 70mm, it is more suitable for Blu-ray. Or something like that.

Actually, blu ray is the best possible way to see Lawrence of Arabia aside from a full 70mm presentation or a 4K theatrical presentation. Not only because it was filmed in 70mm, but because the original negatives were used to create the 4k master which was used for the blu ray.

All other home formats would not compare.

Now, as for content and storyline, you are 100% correct.

Originally Posted by fathergll

Yes it got longer to accommodate a larger screen. Just like the new Sharp 70" Elites are longer than the 60" Pioneer Elite Plasma's from a few years ago. Are you trying to say Apple producing phones with bigger screens is going against the smaller footprint idea? Its not.....just like if Apple produce a 17" Macbook Air model, that wouldn't be indication that "Hey you're smaller footprint idea is stupid because lookie, Apple now has a longer lap! hehehe"

How come the iPod Nano went from regular size to really small back to regular size again?

The smaller foot print is a really stupid idea. Just because it gets smaller does not mean it will sell better or go back to being larger again.

Pricing is what drives sales.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Why are records still alive but VHS is not? when the CD came out in 82 and DVD in 96/97?

VHS did not die until about 2005-2006. VHS finally died when DVD was at mass consumption and acceptance level. But it was not footprint at all which eventually ended VHS....it was a much better product in that of DVD.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Actually, blu ray is the best possible way to see Lawrence of Arabia aside from a full 70mm presentation or a 4K theatrical presentation. Not only because it was filmed in 70mm, but because the original negatives were used to create the 4k master which was used for the blu ray.

All other home formats would not compare.

Now, as for content and storyline, you are 100% correct.

I don't believe we are on the same page here. I agree with what you have written But this was not my point. Virtually any film is worth seeing on Blu-ray - especially when done right these days. To be specific, I don't find Lawrence... to be any more worthy of a Blu-ray treatment than La Grande Illusion, the recently restored Tess, etc. Film is film. And just because something was filmed in 70mm does not automatically make it "worthier" of a Blu-ray presentation.

Pro-B

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

I don't believe we are on the same page here. I agree with what you have written But this was not my point. Virtually any film is worth seeing on Blu-ray - especially when done right these days. To be specific, I don't find Lawrence... to be any more worthy of a Blu-ray treatment than La Grande Illusion, the recently restored Tess, etc. Film is film. And just because something was filmed in 70mm does not automatically make it "worthier" of a Blu-ray presentation.

Pro-B

Ok, I understand what you are saying.

So what you are saying is that there is no reason for DVD anymore if there is a blu ray available?

[pro-bassoonist]

No, my point is that every film is unique. Just because something was filmed in a large format, say 70mm, it does not mean anything. You see, I could be just as impressed with a beautiful 4K restoration of Citizen Kane as I would be with Lawrence... (though this really isn't a film a hold in high regard as so many other people do). And one more example, take a look at Mr. Nolan's Following. It is a 16mm film, transfered in 4K, and looks simply astonishing on Blu-ray.

And yes, as far as DVD is concerned, I don't see a reason to opt for the DVD release if a Blu-ray release exists. I think that the overwhelming majority of us, the enthusiasts, embraced Blu-ray because it brings us as close as possible to the original source. So, as long as this is accomplished properly on Blu-ray, there should not be a reason why one could not be as impressed with a 1.37:1 film.

Pro-B

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

obviously, how welse will you know what people are buying?

.

What does knowing what people are buying prove anything when its pirated like crazy for the last 10+?

Take 100 people who listen to music. Say 50 of those people pirate all their music. 30 of them buy CDs and 20 of them buy MP3s. According to a sales revenue you would think CDs are dominate but the reality is 70 of them are using MP3 exclusive.

If ~30% of people that bought Avengers opted for the cheaper DVD and the rest for higher quality BD and ~30% of music sold is bought in low quality DL/streaming then how does it prove that people don't care about quality?

Because the audience that is left that still purchases physical discs are more likely to buy BD. Getting into BD is dirt cheap so its a natural transition for some. It never took off like DVD because of streaming/on demand. The guy who started this thread asked "Why did blu ray not take of like DVD's ?" He didn't pull that out of thin air.....BD never did catch on like DVDs.

Once you can't rent blurays anymore. Thats when things are really going to go south. The entire market is and has been changing.

agree, but not all of it is low quality? and then I am sure that the main reason for illegal DL is cost and nothing legal can compete with free

No its certainly not all low quality. In the Napster days it certainly was. Yep main reason for illegal DL is cost. Its also convenience....people didn't have to spend much time getting music....usually a quick search and you can have an album faster than driving to the store, all for free.

but if it is sold through normal means, Spontify, i-tunes..... then it is counted in the numbers, but if the band is also selling the CD from the back of their truck then it is not. so I am guessing the "small band" effect would actually work in CDs favour and not DL, on the other hand it will most likely be a rounding error in the final calculations.

Heh....the whole "band is also selling the CD from the back of their truck" isn't what it was years ago. People are getting a band music just by going to a link and downloading or streaming some songs.

don't know, I can still go into BB and buy a record player and have the choice of a few players and CD came out 25 years ago and re3cords are still being produced and sold.

You're referring to the vinyl section at Best Buy that has maybe a dozen albums? If thats the future of CD then its a bleak one indeed.

enough

Righttt....

maybe, but they still prefer higher quality which is why they buy the CD and then copy it losslessly to their MP3 player.

Some do that...most don't go into advance settings, change the bitrate and copy music to their HD in a lossless format.

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

and 80% of people don't use mac computers.

And what % of people were using Apple computers when they discontinued floppy drives?


The PC market will eventually follow through(they're already doing it). Mark my words....5 years from now CD drives are going to be out of a LOT of PCs in favor of ultrabooks and slim all in one desktop designs.

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Why are records still alive but VHS is not? when the CD came out in 82 and DVD in 96/97?

Same reason film is still around. Its an extremely pleasing format to many that that can't be fully duplicated digitally. Vinyl is a niche market.

or a nut job with no idea of how stuff works.

Nut job? There's nothing I said that hasn't been said many times in various articles by analysts in various industries or other threads even here.

for the last 10 years I have been hearing idiots predict the extremely short remaining life of CD and it is still roughly 70% of sales.

haha ...what? 70% of what? The entire music industry plummeted and lost billions of dollars. Record stores are closing or already closed up, giant brick and mortar chains are shrinking their CD sections. Stop quoting what % of the market it holds and start comparing how much CDs themselves have lost in the last 15 years. You're saying these guys are idiots but considering in 9 years there been a decrease in 500 million units shipped per year. Those idiots are spot on about CDs. According to the CNN money article music sales dropped 18 billion to 6 billion in 10 years(with inflation). Thats insane

[rdodolak]

Hmm, one reason why the cloud and streaming aren't ready. My Netflix service died on me earlier today and it's still down. Apparently, Netflix is having issues handling the additional load due to the Christmas Eve demand. A quick google search came up with this:

http://www.helpowl.com/q/Roku/Techni...code-10/280358
http://forums.roku.com/viewtopic.php...52959&start=45
http://www.facebook.com/netflix
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellycla...christmas-eve/

Long story short, if you have all of your movies in the cloud and it were to go down, like Netflix, you're SOL.

end rant

[budious]

The music industry is pricing itself out of radio with royalty fees, thus the old avenue of generating sales has dried up, and decreased overall industry revenue. The music execs are the ones screwing themselves over, not the pirates. When was the last time you had access to a quality radio station that didn't play anything than 90s or prior?

[fathergll]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

How come the iPod Nano went from regular size to really small back to regular size again?

It was to make room for a new display. The "regular" size Nano you're referring to was shorter and wider than it's predecessor and just as thin. Also to mention Apple had the iPod Shuffle in its lineup which you obviously forgot to Google.

The smaller foot print is a really stupid idea. Just because it gets smaller does not mean it will sell better or go back to being larger again.

Pricing is what drives sales.

You took basic idea I said about general footprint/convenience as to why products like cassette tapes taking over vinyl and DVDs taking over VHS and then you started a witch hunt with a microscope to prove this wrong by googling the specs of different generations of iPhones and iPods all the while you're missing the big picture.

You have to realize that all MP3 players sales have been down for some time. Would you care to know why? Its because cell phones like the iPhone and Galaxy all have very capable MP3 players built in. Thats exactly why and they completely hold true to my original statement that footprint and convenience will reign supreme. Because guess whats more covenant that having a MP3 player no matter what size? Have it built into your Phone. Here's another 'shocker'.......... digital cameras sales are also suffering. Why is this? Its because you can take decent quality photos with your cell phone. Its not DSLR quality but its good enough for point and shoot. Again this points back to the basic idea that humans gravitate towards ease because we are lazy by nature.

Im sure the following has had sales down because of smartphones
Digital cameras
Land line telephones
Portable gaming consoles
MP3 Players
GPS systems
Calculators
Alarm clocks
Video Cameras
Compasses
Maps

[Spicoli]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

Hmm, one reason why the cloud and streaming aren't ready. My Netflix service died on me earlier today and it's still down. Apparently, Netflix is having issues handling the additional load due to the Christmas Eve demand. A quick google search came up with this:

http://www.helpowl.com/q/Roku/Techni...code-10/280358
http://forums.roku.com/viewtopic.php...52959&start=45
http://www.facebook.com/netflix
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellycla...christmas-eve/

Long story short, if you have all of your movies in the cloud and it were to go down, like Netflix, you're SOL.

end rant

This is the reason I will not ever go to the cloud. Trusting a source to protect my product I cannot do. I need to possess physically my media.

In the future I do not care if it is on cd's, thumbs, passbooks...whatever.

I watch when I want to watch not when you say I can.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Spicoli

This is the reason I will not ever go to the cloud. Trusting a source to protect my product I cannot do. I need to possess physically my media.

In the future I do not care if it is on cd's, thumbs, passbooks...whatever.

I watch when I want to watch not when you say I can.

Its not like you can't go out and rent a movie from the RedBox machine if the Netflix account is down.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

VHS did not die until about 2005-2006. VHS finally died when DVD was at mass consumption and acceptance level. But it was not footprint at all which eventually ended VHS....it was a much better product in that of DVD.

yup. And that is both points

The one I brought up much earlier thread: why are so many people freaking out, it took roughly 10 years for DVD to replace VHS and BD has only been around 6. Maybe it might have doine it in 6 but how can anyone know how long it will take BD to replace DVD completely? If it happens next year or the year after then BD would have taken off faster then DVD, if it is in 3-4 then it would be roughly the same, if it is 5 or 6 then again it would have been a bit slower but nothing where it would make sense to freak out and ask the question (after all DVD was the fastest adopted tech in history), but at this point no one knows how long it will be. It always takes time, when tech is new only the enthusiasts know about it, only the relatively well off can afford it because the companies need to recuperate their R&D... But word of mouth, lower prices, availability... all take time until you get to the point where the only reason anyone buys the old tech is that it is cheap and at that point it makes no sense to continue it and subsidise the old tech.


And the point that was made in my last post that when tech is clearly better (i.e. everyone agrees) then it eventually replaces the old (no more CRT TVs, no more VHS, no more 78 rpm records no more audio tapes) when it is just new but not accepted by everyone as better then it never does (33 rpm records are still around because some people think they sound better and still chose to buy and listen to them even though CDs came out 30 years ago, CDs are still the lions share of music sales.....