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

[JasonHensley]

I remember getting my first widescreen tv. A panasonic 50 inch rear projection I believe. It was so much fun trying to explain to people why it still had the black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. I swear I think most average people to this day have their tv zoomed in somewhat. And all that confusion started with DVD lol.

On another note, even though I had a pretty good collection of VHS tapes DVD got me into really collecting movies. Stores having such huge selections and the great prices and bargain bins along with the easy to see upgrade int picture did so much.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by KRW1

You're forgetting he lives over the pond. They took ages to take to widescreen. We had it in the 90s (C4, and VHS etc) but they took a good five years to catch up, like everything else, they spoilt it for everyone

Fair point.

[pagemaster]

You would think that in a movie that promoted products from Mercedes Benz, CNN, Burger King, Nikon, as well as Blockbuster....maybe a widescreen tv company would try to get in on promotions.....seeing that Lost World world was released just as anamorphic widescreen dvds and widescreen tvs were hitting market, somebody might of jumped on the opportunity?

[octagon]

Originally Posted by gabbott

I had one of the Sony WEGA models did a "squeeze" to get all the resolution on an anamorphic DVD. Some of the 4:3 sets even did 480P. So a widescreen TV wasn't a complete necessity at the time to get the full benefit of DVD.

Those were some seriously awesome tvs.

They were also some seriously heavy tvs.

[JasonHensley]

Originally Posted by octagon

Those were some seriously awesome tvs.

They were also some seriously heavy tvs.

My buddy had a 36 inch Wega, and it was beyond heavy lol. The picture on it was awesome though

[Movie Nut]

27" Sony XBR CRT. Purchased new in 1997. Extremely heavy and outclassed numerous times by current HDTVs. But excellent picture for it's day and still going strong. Think we will be able to say that about any current HDTVs 16 years after purchase?

Just askin...

[COLD_COBRA_]

because the general public doesn't know any better. Just like they think leds are better than plasma. They don't know any better and rely and take to heart what their neighbor says who is repeating what he heard at wal-mart.

[gothic_hobbit]

Originally Posted by COLD_COBRA_

because the general public doesn't know any better. Just like they think leds are better than plasma. They don't know any better and rely and take to heart what their neighbor says who is repeating what he heard at wal-mart.

Exactly.

Joe average doesn't know any better.

They are the ones who think that mp3 is good enough when it just isn't !

[Dynamo of Eternia]

The general public can make you want to bang your head against the wall sometimes.

My mom and step-dad, whom I love very much, drive me nuts sometimes with this stuff... both with zooming and (what I can't wrap my mind around) watching things window boxed!

Here's what I mean. They have AT&T Uverse for their TV service. They have their main, big HDTV in their finished basement. The main Uverse box, which is HD, is located there. They also have a PS3 for watching Blu-Rays and DVDs on (and for my much younger sister to play games on).

In several other rooms of the house (including my mom and step-dad's bedroom, my sister's bedroom, and the main floor living room) they have additional Uverse boxes for their other TVs. These additional boxes are only standard def, which isn't the issue in and of itself (the TVs there are smaller and they didn't want to pay the extra fees for more HD... so that I understand).

Originally they had an old standard CRT TV in the living room which they weren't in a hurry to replace until is started having problems. Then to replace it they got a relatively small HDTV since they just wanted to have something to watch and something that would fit in their existing entertainment center (which was designed to fit older CRT TVs).... all of which I can understand since they already have a main viewing area downstairs.

But here's what drives me nuts...

Originally their Uverse box that is hooked up to that main floor smaller HDTV had it's settings adjusted for an older 4:3 TV (similar to how a DVD player has menu settings to adjust the aspect ratio and type of signal for the type of TV being used).

Of note is that even though these standard def boxes only ultimately deliver a standard def picture, they still allow the option to watch the HD versions of that stations since the programming was still more properly formatted for an HDTV (sort of similar to the difference between an anamorphic and non-anamorphic DVD), the end resolution just isn't technically any better. The stations are set up so that the standard def version of NBC for example is Channel 5, and the HD version is channel 1005.

So when watching a standard def channel, everything was stretched out. When watching a hi-def channel, things were stretched out and cut off at the sides.



At one point they all went on vacation and my wife and I stayed at their house to watch their dogs while they were out of town. So while I was there, I fixed the settings so that the box was properly formatted for the HDTV. This resulted, for example, in any shows that are formatted 4:3 for the SD broadcast to have black bars going up and down the sides instead of being stretched out to fill the screen (in some cases these same shows have a 16:9 format for the HD broadcast).

After they got back my step-dad sat down to watch TV, put on the SD broadcast of some news show, and noticed the black bars and asked what happened. He wasn't super angry or anything, but just a little put off by it. I explained that their box wasn't formatted right, and I showed him the HD channel broadcast which was in 16:9 and filled the whole screen without stretching everything out. I explained that this is how it's supposed to be set up, but if he didn't like it I can change it back. He said just to leave it but clearly wasn't 'thrilled' about it and indicated that he was fine with how he was used to it.


Then a couple of weeks ago or so I was over there. The box was still set up correctly from when my wife and I stayed there several months back, but I noticed my mom was watching one of the standard def channels. The particular show that she was watching was formatted in 16:9, but because she was watching the SD channel broadcast of it on a widescreen HDTV, it was like watching a non-anamorphic DVD and the whole picture was window-boxed (black bars on all four sides). I asked her why she doesn't put on the hi-def version of the channel, and she said, "but this box isn't HD", and I replied, "I know, but you would still get a better picture that properly fills the screen." And she said something like, "Oh, this is fine the way it is."

:FACEPALM!!!!: One minute they don't like black bars being there, then they are watching something with unnecessary black bars that shouldn't and don't need to be there.

There's also been several occasions where I've had to fix the settings on the PS3 in their basement because they must have held the power button down too long when trying to turn it on or off and they accidentally reset the resolution settings and it's putting out an SD 4:3 signal that is stretched out (and when it defaults to the HD signal and asks if they would like to keep these settings, they choose "no" because they are scared that they are agreeing to change settings that they shouldn't change despite me repeatedly explaining that they should click "yes" when that happens).

The irony of this is that they initially got the HDTV and PS3 for Blu-Ray in the basement because my mom was impressed with how Blu-Ray looked when she saw it set up in a store (to which my step dad agreed) and more often than not if they buy movies they pick the DVD version because it's "cheaper" (which in some cases is true, but I've tried to explain to my step dad how to check for sales, which he doesn't, then get's put off when he walks into a store and sees a Blu-Ray for $30).

But if I get them movies as gifts, I'll almost always get them the Blu-Ray versions if there is a Blu-Ray version so that they have some HD content. Amongst other gifts, this past Christmas I got my mom the Santa Clause trilogy on Blu-Ray because she's a fan of the series (mainly the first one, but the trilogy set was only about $30) and she had never upgraded her VHS tape of the first movie. I got my step-dad the Amazing Spider-Man on Blu-Ray (and I think another movie that I can't recall offhand) for Christmas both on Blu-Ray. And actually even though his b-day is in February, I actually bought his gift for his last b-day back around the black Friday sales when the box set of all of the Rocky movies was on sale for something like $20.

[JavaJulien]

A combination of the prices of HD television, the digital market, and quite frankly the DVD to Blu leap not being as massive as the VHS to DVD (yes yes, Laserdisc was there as well, but most people didn't own one.)

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by JavaJulien

A combination of the prices of HD television, the digital market, and quite frankly the DVD to Blu leap not being as massive as the VHS to DVD (yes yes, Laserdisc was there as well, but most people didn't own one.)

Sums it up well, and the audio wasn't much of a difference for most people compared to DVD.

[Kino-Chan fan]

I understand your pain Dynamo, worse when parents or older people are too patriarchal to even try to listen, and believe what they do is the only way right.

Various times I've tried to tell dad about cables from coax to HDMI but still doesn't understand, and doesn't want to listen. And I tell people that if all of the sudden a channel is missing; try scanning for them but have no idea and don't want for me to touch their tvs. And when I do, they get desperate in the middle of the scan.

Yeah, I also see it sad that BD is falling due to things like these. I am not much of a fan of streams and downloads.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Kino-Chan fan

I understand your pain Dynamo, worse when parents or older people are too patriarchal to even try to listen, and believe what they do is the only way right.

Various times I've tried to tell dad about cables from coax to HDMI but still doesn't understand, and doesn't want to listen. And I tell people that if all of the sudden a channel is missing; try scanning for them but have no idea and don't want for me to touch their tvs. And when I do, they get desperate in the middle of the scan.

Yeah, I also see it sad that BD is falling due to things like these. I am not much of a fan of streams and downloads.

How is bluray falling exactly? Please tell me. You have seen sales numbers for q1 this year, right?

[Lyris]

Surprised to see this thread. BD is doing outstandingly well.

Of course the change won't be comparable to DVD, but you have to understand that DVD is what finally killed VHS, which was long outstaying its welcome. It was an anomaly. And, it's true, there are more ways to watch movies now: pirate downloads (obviously not endorsing that), Netflix, endless TV channels... BD is doing really well.

[MikeCL]

Originally Posted by Movie Nut

27" Sony XBR CRT. Purchased new in 1997. Extremely heavy and outclassed numerous times by current HDTVs. But excellent picture for it's day and still going strong. Think we will be able to say that about any current HDTVs 16 years after purchase?

Just askin...

I just gave this same tv to a family member to replace her sharp CRT.. still worked but I was pleeding with my mom to replace it with a LCD.. it was like 83-86 lbs to move that thing.. It was not until I got my 40" LCD did she say she saw how HD is clearer..

However she is back to saying she can't tell the difference between a DVD on a 23" and a blu-ray on a 40"

lets see her say that with a 124" projector screen

[Solo man]

I think one of the reasons why was in order to take advantage of the full hd experience was that people not only had to buy bluray players but also had to purchase HD TV's to get the full resolution. At the time when bluray came out, HD televisions were fairly expensive.

With DVD, people went out and purchased a dvd player.

By the time, bluray started to pick up steam, then they had to contend with streaming which kind of knocked off Blockbusters.

These are my opinions and doesn't mean they are necessarily true.

[Konrad]

I think that Blu-ray did take off well enough but that, regrettably, DVD is not dying fast enough. This is unfortunate as some movies, at least in Europe, are still released on DVD only. It is the arthouse and niche movies that suffer that fate.

As long as DVD is still around there is always the risk that movies that do not attract mass audiences are relegated to the inferior format with no chance of being released anytime soon on Blu.

I do not go to brick and mortar stores too often but it always surprises me how people are still walking out with tons of DVDs. It is beyond me. All the arguments that were brought forward here are valid and in the beginning it was really quite expensive to adopt the new format. Players were expensive and the required HD TVs were not common and even more expensive. But today? Players cost almost nothing and flat screens are in most households.

I think it is an "old habits die hard" sort of thing plus the fact that not all people really care about better image and sound as long as the perceived quality of what they already have is acceptable to them. For some DVD is good enough even though they watch TV in HD. Strange but that's how it is. And then there is the competition by HD video streaming that also adversely affects Blu-ray sales. Still Blu-ray is on a good way!