Because Blu-Ray will "obviously" be replaced rapidly by streaming only...

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Not until recently have prices dropped this fast, this is not good for the media. Generally, when something is in high demand, the prices stay at constant level close to the MSRP. Disney is very good at keep their prices inflated. I find it alarming that the film Trouble With The Curve has already dropped this fast ans it has not been release for 60 yet.

dude, this happened ALL THE TIME in DVD days. I remember waiting less than 2 months for Underworld evolution to drop in price to $9.99 from the $19.99 retail. it all started with the walmart dump bins years and years ago. Prices started falling fast. same with Batman begins on DVD.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by wormraper

dude, this happened ALL THE TIME in DVD days. I remember waiting less than 2 months for Underworld evolution to drop in price to $9.99 from the $19.99 retail. it all started with the walmart dump bins years and years ago. Prices started falling fast. same with Batman begins on DVD.

Almost seems like he has gone into a subject change mode for whatever reason

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by wormraper

dude, this happened ALL THE TIME in DVD days. I remember waiting less than 2 months for Underworld evolution to drop in price to $9.99 from the $19.99 retail. it all started with the walmart dump bins years and years ago. Prices started falling fast. same with Batman begins on DVD.

I wonder if it is possible that Warner is dumping the last load of current new release movies while the next load of blu rays will not have ultra-violet/dvd inclued. Then the blu ray simply stays at around $15

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

it is pagemaster...

lol, I know, with his incessant postings, I almost think he makes it purposely more difficult for me to find the 4K thread on this forum.

But Anthony, look on the bright side, in going from the technical concepts to the marketing/sales threads, the prior anger management issue seems to have resolved since this time…
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread....on#post7020666

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

I wonder if it is possible that Warner is dumping the last load of current new release movies while the next load of blu rays will not have ultra-violet/dvd inclued. Then the blu ray simply stays at around $15

might be, but what usually is the case with uber popular blockbuster's like Batman etc is that they make 10 BILLION of them and have warehouses just filled with stock. after the initial rush to buy them they're overloaded with excess copies and dump them on the market at cheaper prices to right off on the fiscal year

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Not until recently have prices dropped this fast, this is not good for the media. Generally, when something is in high demand, the prices stay at constant level close to the MSRP. Disney is very good at keep their prices inflated. I find it alarming that the film Trouble With The Curve has already dropped this fast ans it has not been release for 60 yet.

I never DVD drop so fast when they were first on the market, it really wasn't until we aw Blu ray did we see new release blu rays going for $15 in the first two months, it tells me that it is not a good sign for blu ray. Then again, DVD didn't have a good digital alternative at the time.

Umm.. I don't agree at all. I used to buy brand new DVD releases back in the early 2000's at Circuit City, Best Buy, Walmart, etc for $12.99-16.99, many times on release week. Loss leader strategy at its finest.

Anyone who paid MSRP for a DVD even before the format peaked or hit market saturation was pretty much a fool or had money to burn.

Prior to Blu-Ray or HD DVD being released I would regularly find sub $10 DVD's for newer releases on deals. None of this is anything new.

[Tok]

I am tiring of these arguments where basically the same items are used but it is good for the DL model but not good for BD.

Pretty much reminds of the way the goalposts kept moving in the format war where the losing side was trying to spin their agenda in a positive light.

Remember 25GB wasn't enough, 50GB was vaporware and overkill, but 30GB was just right.... whatever goldilocks

I'll believe streaming is taking over when you don't see the major titles sell huge amounts on disc.

[KRW1]

It is the same old arguments, but I never tire of them after five years of hearing them all.

Bluray prices are too high, it'll never take off / Bluray prices are low, its a terrible sign.

You'll never see niche titles released, it's just blockbusters cos that's what sells / It's just for niche titles, the mainstream aren't interested in Criterion, Arrow or Shout Factory.

etc.

[Cevolution]

This is in response to a post from the Blu-ray versus Streaming thread, which has now been deleted. I accessed some of the posts and copied them before it was fully closed. This has been the first opportunity I’ve had to respond to this. I decided to post in this thread as the topic is very similar.

Originally Posted by octagon

They relate directly to the discussion at hand.

Look back to your first 'quality is objective' post.
Now look several pages before that (here's a good place to get your bearings) and you'll see this whole 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder/no, it's not' tangent centered around pagemaster's claims that iTunes is comparable to BD and Apple TV looks superb and Anthony's response that this constituted misinformation and misrepresentation and so forth and so on.

That was the topic at hand.

I understand the differences just fine, thanks. I'm simply applying 'objective' a bit more stingently than you are. My pedantic side bristles at phrases like 'objectively better'.

I don't agree that quality can be quantified. Ultimately quality has to be evaluated. Quailty is a judgment, not an objective trait.

Now, this can get confusing when subjective defintions are almost universally accepted (that freaking eTrade talking baby has to be stopped) or when an objectively measurable trait is almost by definition also a measure of quality (all things equal, faster race cars are better than slower race cars).

But even in cases like that the question of better is not answered by nature or science or what have you. Even in those cases at some point human judgment had to decide that this is better than that, this is how we'll measure the quality of this thing.

Discussions are meant to go forwards not backwards. By “doesn’t relate to the discussion at hand”, I was meaning the discussion between you, Wormraper and I, not the discussion pages before you and I injected ourselves into the thread, because that’s not what was being discussed back and forth between us, and this is what I was referring to as the ‘discussion at hand’. Your question didn't relate at all to what Wormraper said about quantifying quality mathematically, since that example was describing the fact that unbiased indisputable (objective) scientific findings exist for many things, and how it applies to PQ, calibration etc, however instead you tried to apply a subjective angle to it.

Calibre, quality: A degree or grade of excellence or worth.

^The definition of 'Objective' is: “uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices”. 'Objective' is entirely the way something is in the real world, even if there were no people in the universe. When talking about quality, an objective result can be determined using science to measure or quantify and compare which has a higher performance, durability, is longer lasting, faster, more efficient etc, rendering one superior and the other inferior. An example of this which relates to the topic of PQ, is the Value Electronics annual flat panel shootout event, hosted by Robert Zohn (http://www.valueelectronics.com/imag...%20results.pdf). One persons view on quality is subjective, however the unbiased/uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices (objective), scientifically quantified results that indisputably prove which has the higher performance, greater durability, lasts longer, is faster, more efficient etc is not subjective. These evaluations are undeniable, factual, and one’s preference/opinion (view on what's considered "comparable", "superb", or "good enough" etc) does not change this. These things don't have to be subjectively important or relevant to any one person, but they still undeniably exist. This is the original point I was trying to make, despite my use of the term "better" (simply as a figure of speech to describe this), and is the part of Anthony's posts that I was actually agreeing with. Though you and I both know that you were already aware what I meant, and instead of taking it for what it really was, you chose to argue semantics , It is however redundant now, and the original point is still standing untouched, so you accomplished nothing.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by KRW1

It is the same old arguments, but I never tire of them after five years of hearing them all.

Bluray prices are too high, it'll never take off / Bluray prices are low, its a terrible sign.

You'll never see niche titles released, it's just blockbusters cos that's what sells / It's just for niche titles, the mainstream aren't interested in Criterion, Arrow or Shout Factory.

etc.

Too true... for some reason, this is the only topic that and yet provides ample .

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

This is in response to a post from the Blu-ray versus Streaming thread, which has now been deleted. I accessed some of the posts and copied them before it was fully closed. This has been the first opportunity I’ve had to respond to this. I decided to post in this thread as the topic is very similar.


Discussions are meant to go forwards not backwards. By “doesn’t relate to the discussion at hand”, I was meaning the discussion between you, Wormraper and I, not the discussion pages before you and I injected ourselves into the thread, because that’s not what was being discussed back and forth between us, and this is what I was referring to as the ‘discussion at hand’. Your question didn't relate at all to what Wormraper said about quantifying quality mathematically, since that example was describing the fact that unbiased indisputable (objective) scientific findings exist for many things, and how it applies to PQ, calibration etc, however instead you tried to apply a subjective angle to it.

Calibre, quality: A degree or grade of excellence or worth.

^The definition of 'Objective' is: “uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices”. 'Objective' is entirely the way something is in the real world, even if there were no people in the universe". When talking about quality, an objective result can be determined using science to measure or quantify and compare which has a higher performance, durability, is longer lasting, faster, more efficient etc, rendering one superior and the other inferior. An example of this which relates to the topic of PQ, is the Value Electronics annual flat panel shootout event, hosted by Robert Zohn (http://www.valueelectronics.com/imag...%20results.pdf). One persons view on quality is subjective, however the unbiased/uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices (objective), scientifically quantified results that indisputably prove which has the higher performance, greater durability, lasts longer, is faster, more efficient etc is not subjective. These evaluations are undeniable, factual, and one’s preference/opinion (view on what's considered "comparable", "superb", or "good enough" etc) does not change this. These things don't have to be subjectively important or relevant to any one person, but they still undeniably exist. This is the original point I was trying to make, despite my use of the term "better" (simply as a figure of speech to describe this), and is the part of Anthony's posts that I was actually agreeing with. Though you and I both know that you were already aware what I meant, and instead of taking it for what it really was, you chose to argue semantics , It is however redundant now, and the original point is still standing untouched, so you accomplished nothing.

Why was it closed?

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Why was it closed?

I'm 95% certain that I understand the nature of this query.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Why was it closed?

The Mod's were just probably sick of all the back and forwards bickering between members. Though I did think the thread was quite civil at the time.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

The Mod's were just probably sick of all the back and forwards bickering between members. Though I did think the thread was quite civil at the time.

I was actually surprised, most of us weren't being that uncivil at all. I've seen threads stay open that had FAAAAAAAAAAAAAR worse actions then the mild arguments we had.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

I'm 95% certain that I understand the nature of this query.

I'm 100 percent certain I don't know what you are talking about.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

The Mod's were just probably sick of all the back and forwards bickering between members. Though I did think the thread was quite civil at the time.

Same here.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I'm 100 percent certain I don't know what you are talking about.

The 5% was hinging on whether or not you were being genuine in your inquiry.

I was 95% certain that you were making a humourous point in asking why the thread was closed while quoting a rather heavily off-topic debate about the nature of objectivity and subjectivity and a bunch of other psychological terms which very loosely incorporated the words "Blu-ray" and "streaming" once in a while.

Sorry Cevolution, but I think I have a good idea why it was closed.

And the reason why it was deleted was probably because this thread already existed.

BACK ON TOPIC THOUGH... I'm not prepared to dedicate that much bandwidth to my viewing habits. I just watch way too much in such amazing quality with Blu-ray discs to ever let my ISP attack my wallet with "overage fees" via a lesser quality streaming option.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

The 5% was hinging on whether or not you were being genuine in your inquiry.

I was 95% certain that you were making a humourous point in asking why the thread was closed while quoting a rather heavily off-topic debate about the nature of objectivity and subjectivity and a bunch of other psychological terms which very loosely incorporated the words "Blu-ray" and "streaming" once in a while.

Sorry Cevolution, but I think I have a good idea why it was closed.

And the reason why it was deleted was probably because this thread already existed.

BACK ON TOPIC THOUGH... I'm not prepared to dedicate that much bandwidth to my viewing habits. I just watch way too much in such amazing quality with Blu-ray discs to ever let my ISP attack my wallet with "overage fees" via a lesser quality streaming option.

Yes but it was entertaining. After all, streaming is naff but it still entertains some people

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by morriscroy

Wonder how fast this thread will be closed/deleted too.

What I want to know is 'can I see the benefits of 4k sitting at the same distance as I do now to watch bluray'? Please supply charts and graphs to demonstrate.

[ilovenola2]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

Yes, it's similar to the scenario you mentioned about your cable going out although my cable is much more stable than the internet connection which is also provided by my cable provider. However, it's not similar to your physical media collection which can still be viewed even when the cable or internet is out. Unless your power goes out, and you don't have a backup power source, you can still view your movies unlike the scenario mentioned in the OP.

Absolutely correct!! I use streaming (Netflix, Amazon Prime) for tv shows and stuff I'm not really interested in owning. But I buy the blu-ray OR the dvd (if no br) if I really want to own a title.