Blu-rays are 8 years old and DVDs still cling to them like a cancerous tumor. Why?

[cricepng]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

Well that's kind of a shame. One of my players is connected to two TVs. One via HDMI (main TV) and the second via component to a smaller TV on my computer desk. So when using the computer, I can still watch the movie without having to turn my neck.

If newer models only have HDMI, it would really put a cramp in my style

Even my Sony 5100 (last year's model) only had HDMI for the video out. So people thinking they can just plug a player into their older TV will need to pay more for an older model. I'm still holding onto my 2012 Sony 590 that had more outputs.

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by cricepng

Even my Sony 5100 (last year's model) only had HDMI for the video out. So people thinking they can just plug a player into their older TV will need to pay more for an older model. I'm still holding onto my 2012 Sony 590 that had more outputs.

I bought my mother a new BD player last year for Christmas, and it had all three connections

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

I actually think 4K is hurting Blu-ray. The average consumer considering going to BD from DVD now has 4k hurled in his face. It comes across as a marketing gimmick to sell more product. If they are happy with SD, I don't see them moving to HD especially with new formats being touted as replacements for relatively new BD.

this makes no sense

1) why do you assume that someone that has not yet bought a BD player (a format that came out in 2006) would be beyond bleeding edge when it comes to 4k (siunce there is no 4k format)?

2) why would some that is "happy" with SD not consider HD but be excited with 4K?


Now don't get me wrong there could be the idiot that says "why buy BD now when 4K is around the corner" but it is the same idiot that has and will always make excuses for not getting something better (i.e. I won't get ____ because it is too expensive, I won't get ____ because it is not the right time for me, I won't get _____ because something new will come out soon....

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

this makes no sense

1) why do you assume that someone that has not yet bought a BD player (a format that came out in 2006) would be beyond bleeding edge when it comes to 4k (siunce there is no 4k format)?

2) why would some that is "happy" with SD not consider HD but be excited with 4K?


Now don't get me wrong there could be the idiot that says "why buy BD now when 4K is around the corner" but it is the same idiot that has and will always make excuses for not getting something better (i.e. I won't get ____ because it is too expensive, I won't get ____ because it is not the right time for me, I won't get _____ because something new will come out soon....

After reading about BDXL, and it being finalized in 2010 with a capacity of 100-128GB and the HEVC 265 codec that nearly takes up half the size/space along with BDXL backward compatibility with a firmware update...It seems like the technology is already there for 4k.

Then look at the SonyFMP-X1. 4k movies that can only be downloaded by owners of Sony’s 4K Ultra HD media player, which works exclusively with Sony’s 4K TV’s?? The movies in 4k are also 30.00 a download and the device can only hold 50 movies.

I'll just buy my favorite movies in Blu-Ray (a very limited amount) and wait it/Sony out until they realize the money to be had is 4k movies on a BDXL. Then I'll support Blu Ray/4k/Sony more so, but they need to just give people 4k on BRXL discs imho.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

this makes no sense

1) why do you assume that someone that has not yet bought a BD player (a format that came out in 2006) would be beyond bleeding edge when it comes to 4k (siunce there is no 4k format)?

2) why would some that is "happy" with SD not consider HD but be excited with 4K?


Now don't get me wrong there could be the idiot that says "why buy BD now when 4K is around the corner" but it is the same idiot that has and will always make excuses for not getting something better (i.e. I won't get ____ because it is too expensive, I won't get ____ because it is not the right time for me, I won't get _____ because something new will come out soon....

This pretty much says what I did. 4k comes across to some as a marketing gimmick and there is question on waiting. And I don't know why you consider people who don't share your views, 'idiots'.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2427838,00.asp

If you're still harboring doubts that 4K (Ultra HD) is the new 3D—in other words, if you think it's probably a momentary fad of dubious quality that will soon fade in importance...

After all, despite how much 4K HDTV prices have fallen from last year, they're still 'early-adopter-only' high. Anyone who isn't a videophile with a big budget should stay away at least another year or two.

PC Magazine says its not a fad but also says wait a year or two, hence my point about 4k hurting HD sales now.

[Steedeel]

Your point is is as invalid as it was several months ago. It ain't hurting sales.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Your point is is as invalid as it was several months ago. It ain't hurting sales.

PC Magazine is advising to wait. Those that heed it are hurting sales. As well as articles like this one saying to wait to buy. http://www.tvpredictions.com/tv020714.htm

And there are the ones saying that sales are flat, ie people aren't buying them.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/t...w/35510928.cms

...consumer electronics remains stagnant. Sales haven't budged from about $145 billion in three of the last four years, according to research firm NPD Group.

...experts say things like the ultra-high definition 4K TVs have not been compelling enough for TV owners to upgrade.

"The category was weak. There's no 'Wow' type product to get people in stores or even online," said Brian Sozzi of Belus Capital Advisors.

[slick1ru2]

Makes sense. I have 6 external HDD with movies from my Dish DVRs I like, but not enough to buy on disc. I treat it like VOD of movies I like. Some were not even available on Blu-ray when I recorded them and as I bought them I would delete them to make roon.


http://www.homemediamagazine.com/res...al-media-33385


DVR Hurt U.K. Disc Sales Long Before Digital Media

“Change to the U.K.’s retail landscape is irreversible. The closure of retailers that carried range depth has effectively caused step changes in physical video sales and reduced consumer appreciation of discs both for personal consumption and as a gift,” the BVA said.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Makes sense. I have 6 external HDD with movies from my Dish DVRs I like, but not enough to buy on disc. I treat it like VOD of movies I like. Some were not even available on Blu-ray when I recorded them and as I bought them I would delete them to make roon.


http://www.homemediamagazine.com/res...al-media-33385


DVR Hurt U.K. Disc Sales Long Before Digital Media

Yawn, move on.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yawn, move on.

The email address for the author at Home Media Research is at the bottom of the article. Send him the feedback.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

The email address for the author at Home Media Research is at the bottom of the article. Send him the feedback.

I was sending you my feedback.

[crazyBLUE]

Lets just move on Thanks

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

This pretty much says what I did.

not at all, it says the complete opposite.

And I don't know why you consider people who don't share your views, 'idiots'

I don't, I consider idiots to be idiots.


you said

I actually think [b]4K is hurting Blu-ray. The average consumer considering going to BD from DVD now has 4k hurled in his face. If they are happy with SD, I don't see them moving to HD

I don't agree with the guy that sais "I am sticking with what I have because I am happy with SD." but he is not an idiot we just have different priorities. But if that guy sais "I am sticking with SD because 4K is right around the corner" the that is an idiot. Because if he honestly cared about quality he would have HD now, and if he is not into quality and happy with SD then he won't care when 4K comes out for 4K.


it is 2014, someone might have said in 2006 "I don't have 1K$ for a BD player, but there have been for many years BD players for under 50$, and if they have not been willing to spend 50$ for a BD player they will obviously not care to pay what ever that 4K player will cost so why would they actualy care if there is a 4K player next year? This person is just looking at making up very idiotic excuses for why he does not care.

I see a car as a way to get from point A to point B so I don't care what I drive, someone that constantly drives a newish Ferrari might care about next years model but I don't but I would also not say "why buy a Ferrari now next years models are around the corner.


I see clothes as a way to not be naked (with all the benefits it brings) so I don't care what I wear, someone that is into fashion might care about next years clothes but I don't but I would also not say "why buy that shirt now next seasons models are around the corner.

Now I care about movies so it makes sense for someone like me to say "can't wait fro 4k" but that isn't going to affect BD because there is no other alternative now so it does not hurt BD, but someone that is still watching SD does not care and so 4K being around the corner won't affect him and if he sais it does he is BSing himself and being an idiot because everyone else can see that it is not the reason he is still sticking with SD and therefore an idiot

[slick1ru2]

Yes, there are people right now that have SD, are considering to finally upgrade to HD and see 4k and the prices and read the reviews and heed advice to wait for the numerous reasons said. That doesn't make them an idiot. That makes them one of the 40 million households without an HDTV as noted in the study you yourself posted here, https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=1414/ As of 2010, there are 114 million households in the U.S..

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Now I care about movies so it makes sense for someone like me to say "can't wait fro 4k" but that isn't going to affect BD because there is no other alternative now so it does not hurt BD, but someone that is still watching SD does not care and so 4K being around the corner won't affect him and if he sais it does he is BSing himself and being an idiot because everyone else can see that it is not the reason he is still sticking with SD and therefore an idiot

I know people with families who have to set priorities. While they may be willing to spend a lot of money on a set, they can't do it every two or three years, and they settle for something less than the ultimate paradigm - which can change on any given day, mind you.


The shifting technology that we've all witnessed had rendered a perfectly nice television, player, and audio rig into totally unacceptable "old tech" for many people, Anthony. Waiting for at least a common standard for a 4K television and video playback equipment is not idiocy; it's prudence.


Can this person's kid still watch Disney films in SD? No problem. Is he an idiot for this? That is a stretch.


Be nice.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I know people with families who have to set priorities. While they may be willing to spend a lot of money on a set, they can't do it every two or three years, and they settle for something less than the ultimate paradigm - which can change on any given day, mind you.


The shifting technology that we've all witnessed had rendered a perfectly nice television, player, and audio rig into totally unacceptable "old tech" for many people, Anthony. Waiting for at least a common standard for a 4K television and video playback equipment is not idiocy; it's prudence.


Can this person's kid still watch Disney films in SD? No problem. Is he an idiot for this? That is a stretch.


Be nice.

Your argument ignores the fact that HD sets have been around for a long time. There is no excuse for not having a HD set now. I agree with the shift in technology but HD is old hat now. Someone buying a 4k set, having gone from a SD set is not showing prudence, they simply find them themselves upgrading by default. (They have no choice because the old tv is broke) they are the type of people who will probably only watch 720p or even SD on their new 4k set. Are they idiots? I am with Anthony on this one but that's just my opinion.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I know people with families who have to set priorities. While they may be willing to spend a lot of money on a set, they can't do it every two or three years, and they settle for something less than the ultimate paradigm - which can change on any given day, mind you.


The shifting technology that we've all witnessed had rendered a perfectly nice television, player, and audio rig into totally unacceptable "old tech" for many people, Anthony. Waiting for at least a common standard for a 4K television and video playback equipment is not idiocy; it's prudence.


Can this person's kid still watch Disney films in SD? No problem. Is he an idiot for this? That is a stretch.

Blu dog, I agree with everything you said. But you need to actually bother reading what others say and pay attention to the conversation before replying since what you posted has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion we were having and what you quoted.


Slick said "I actually think 4K is hurting Blu-ray....[because]... If they are happy with SD, I don't see them moving to HD especially with new formats being touted as replacements for relatively new BD." That is why I said it would only be an idiot that says he won't get BD now because he is happy with SD and 4K is around the corner.



Do I think it makes sense at this point in time to buy 4k equipment? absolutely not unless someone is willing to waste money big time (and nothing wrong with that but I am not one of them). In the old days people would talk about leading (or cutting) edge and with electronics/computers and bugs that came with first generation it became known as the bleeding edge because of the pain involved with the leading edge but in this case I thing hemorrhaging edge would be a better term since the truth is anything bought would most likely be 100% a waste. You buy a 4K TV and there is nothing to see what good is it? you get the Sony 4k TV and server you have some minimal content today but when a real format comes out it will be junk because you would want a real 4K player that will have content from all the studios, you buy a 4K ready receiver and what if the next 4K format adds a an unsupported codec( for example Dolby Atmos...). There is no guarantee that what you buy will be garbage when a format comes out but there is a big chance of it. But in the end that is the point. The guy you are talking about with limited funds is not going to be buying 4k for some time so it won't be affecting his HD buying decisions.

Does it makes sense (for example) for someone who's DVD player (or TV) brakes down to wait for 4K to be affordable or will he look fro what is available now? if someone has a BD player and is thinking of renting a BD does it make sense for him to say "I will rent the DVD and rent the 4K version when I have a 4K TV and player? if someone has a BD player and is thinking of buying the film on BD does it make sense for him to say "I will buy the DVD now and buy the 4K version when I have a 4K TV and player?"

I don't see why 4k being available in the future will mean that someone that is happy with SD now will decide not to get BD now. The guy interested in 4k now (even if they don't have it and are waiting impatiently) will already have been for many years into BD.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Your argument ignores the fact that HD sets have been around for a long time. There is no excuse for not having a HD set now. I agree with the shift in technology but HD is old hat now. Someone buying a 4k set, having gone from a SD set is not showing prudence, they simply find them themselves upgrading by default. (They have no choice because the old tv is broke) they are the type of people who will probably only watch 720p or even SD on their new 4k set. Are they idiots? I am with Anthony on this one but that's just my opinion.

They may not have the money to change, or if they do, they may not have the preference to take chances on technological fashion statements. Two of the nicest sets I've owned were a Motorola Quasar, and a Sony XBR, both tube sets. Brilliant pictures.


I moved from those, to a 70" projection set from Sony, which I thought at the time was a sufficient sea-change to warrant the purchase. I didn't know much about it - it was DVI, and 1080i, and had other limitations. Had I known more, I would have waited for the 70" 1080p version, with HDMI. But I still own the set.


I purchased two Pioneer receivers, both unable to decode HD Audio. Same with a Sony player that could not ever decode DTS HD - it finally was upgradeable to Dolby HD - but I would have waited, if I had known more.


I purchased a 52" Sony XBR flat screen, with black levels that didn't match the broadcast or Blu-Ray black levels that were available only a year later. To satisfy my desire for good video, I purchased a 60" Kuro. I really should have waited.


If I had waited, I could have gone from the SD tube sets, straight to the Kuro. It wouldn't have hurt me, and although I still own all of the equipment mentioned above - except the tube equipment - I would not have been an idiot not to buy it. These are whims - just preferences, not requirements - and I had the luxury to buy these things, not some kind of need. I completely bypassed the 3D hysteria, without harming myself in the slightest, though I've been excoriated for being mentally challenged for doing so. I'm not impressed by such comments.


I can see excellent reasons for not jumping on the bandwagon at each point of this technological excursion. It's a sign of patience, not idiocy.


But that's just my opinion. And I paid a lot of money for that opinion.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Blu dog, I agree with everything you said. But you need to actually bother reading what others say and pay attention to the conversation before replying since what you posted has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion we were having and what you quoted.


Slick said "I actually think 4K is hurting Blu-ray....[because]... If they are happy with SD, I don't see them moving to HD especially with new formats being touted as replacements for relatively new BD." That is why I said it would only be an idiot that says he won't get BD now because he is happy with SD and 4K is around the corner.

I paid attention, pretty closely. I was matching these comments with my experiences and memory of what happened, and found merit in Slick's comments. Think about it:

1. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were launched amidst an all-out corporate war over the two formats. Neither standard was matched by broadcast television, which still languished largely in the SD space. Consumers sat on the sidelines, replacing the actual televisions only when an old one malfunctioned.
2. Blu-Ray won the war, but recorded content was very expensive - at $30 or more per film. Adoption lagged. DVD, in SD format, was still more popular (and still is). SD viewing again only was relinquished by attrition, for the most part.
3. Mitsubishi launched an abortive 3D effort, further confusing the scene. This was followed quickly by Blu-Ray 3D, which had no backwards compatibility, and rendering Mitsubishi's format as obsolete and unsupported. Again, the audience was skeptical of the format, and it is still not widely adopted - either by users, or broadcasters. SD viewers are still sitting on the sidelines, able to view everything available as recorded and broadcast content.
4. Even within the 3D world, competition between active and passive formats further clouded the picture. The advantage of passive was cost, as far as the consumer was concerned, and an SD user was vindicated in not spending money on active 3D that they weren't interested in anyway. Again, SD content was available for every film and broadcast.
5. 4K is introduced. There is no recorded standard defined and sold. There is no indication that backwards compatibility as assured - not only for 3D, but for the more esoteric details of color space, audio, or compatibility with support equipment such as receivers. An SD user, watching this new lurch in technology, is not encouraged to go bleeding edge, and is vindicated for not making a large Blu-Ray investment and then facing change again.

This is not idiocy; it's skepticism, and waiting is not a bad idea. The LG 84" is a classic case in point - they originally released an 84" set with HDMI 1.2, unable to support HDMI 2.0 that is needed for 4K - and are now announcing that they will sell a new circuit board, for $400 US, to be installed in those sets to make it 4K compatible. How is someone an idiot for not buying into this nonsense? Why has Sony discontinued the sale of their 84" flagship 4K set? Why is someone an "idiot" for not jumping in this vat of boiling oil?

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Do I think it makes sense at this point in time to buy 4k equipment? absolutely not unless someone is willing to waste money big time (and nothing wrong with that but I am not one of them). In the old days people would talk about leading (or cutting) edge and with electronics/computers and bugs that came with first generation it became known as the bleeding edge because of the pain involved with the leading edge but in this case I thing hemorrhaging edge would be a better term since the truth is anything bought would most likely be 100% a waste. You buy a 4K TV and there is nothing to see what good is it? you get the Sony 4k TV and server you have some minimal content today but when a real format comes out it will be junk because you would want a real 4K player that will have content from all the studios, you buy a 4K ready receiver and what if the next 4K format adds a an unsupported codec( for example Dolby Atmos...). There is no guarantee that what you buy will be garbage when a format comes out but there is a big chance of it. But in the end that is the point. The guy you are talking about with limited funds is not going to be buying 4k for some time so it won't be affecting his HD buying decisions.

Limited funds is not the same as judiciously spent funds. Someone who spends their money at the theater to see a film, and watches the news on TV in SD, doesn't need to be insulted. The point that staying with SD is a sign of derangement or limited mental capacity doesn't quite wash, with the history of staggeringly absurd technological rollouts from the industry.


I actually have spent the money, but it wasn't through intelligence; it was from just liking the technology, and having the ability to get it without undue pain. There's a difference.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Does it makes sense (for example) for someone who's DVD player (or TV) brakes down to wait for 4K to be affordable or will he look fro what is available now? if someone has a BD player and is thinking of renting a BD does it make sense for him to say "I will rent the DVD and rent the 4K version when I have a 4K TV and player? if someone has a BD player and is thinking of buying the film on BD does it make sense for him to say "I will buy the DVD now and buy the 4K version when I have a 4K TV and player?"

It's interesting that you mention that. I just picked up "I, Frankenstein" in 3D, 2D, and DVD, all in the same package. Rental doesn't allow you to do that - another sign of confusion in this industry, that has competing interests and desperate merchants doing anything to increase revenue - and that hurting the industry worse than skeptical buyers are.


We get trapped in double-dips all the time. Some people, very tired of that nonsense, just stay away from the whole thing and are waiting for the industry to grow up and allow backwards compatibility to finally win out. It may be happening, I don't know, but I hope so. Vizio finally walked away from the 3D mess, and the studios are slowly walking away from it as well. These triple disc packages are expensive, and the public is staying away in droves.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't see why 4k being available in the future will mean that someone that is happy with SD now will decide not to get BD now. The guy interested in 4k now (even if they don't have it and are waiting impatiently) will already have been for many years into BD.

The buyer walking into the TV store is faced with a decreasing number of quality sets in 1080p, which is Blu-Ray's world. Right next to it, on display, is a 4K set. That tells him or her that Blu will be supplanted - but that to buy into Blu, costing thousands, is the only current option for Blu content. I wouldn't do that, and I did buy into Blu when there was nothing else. I wouldn't do it today, and neither would you or anyone who is a savvy buyer.


The next change is too close. Everyone should wait, SD, Blu, or not. And that is not good for Blu. They introduced 4K too soon - it's not ready, without playback - and it's hurting things.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't see why 4k being available in the future will mean that someone that is happy with SD now will decide not to get BD now. The guy interested in 4k now (even if they don't have it and are waiting impatiently) will already have been for many years into BD.

I think you and others are over-thinking this. It's almost impossible to analyze this because like any decision tree, there are many paths and different people will take different paths based upon their own needs, desires and financial situation and their decisions aren't necessarily logical. You and others are assuming a rationality that isn't necessarily there.

No one is "stupid" (umm..okay...watching SD on an HD set is stupid, but even there, the people who do that may not be aware that there's a difference. I live in an apartment building and I've helped neighbors with their setups and almost every single one was watching SD channels on an HD set). But aside from that, TV and movies are more or less important to different people and obviously we're seeing more and more people who don't need the big screen experience and are instead watching on portable devices where resolution makes little difference.

There are indeed people who skip generations of technology, either passively or consciously. So it is indeed possible that there are people who aren't into BD, are aware that 4K is coming and will wait and skip to that technology. There are even some naysayers who already think that 4K is not good enough and want to wait for 8K.

We all know that there are early adopters, who must have every new piece of technology, as well as late adopters. I'm an ex-recording engineer and I've worked with technology my entire life, but I had this great Sony CRT and even I didn't replace that with a flat screen until about three years ago, largely because I watched very little television and when I wanted to see a movie, I went to a movie theatre. I moved into my current co-op around 1991 and didn't even bother with cable here until after 9/11 when I could no longer get OTA reception.

And you can't have an expectation that consumers' purchasing decisions are logical. So even if the most logical approach is to not wait for 4K, that doesn't mean that consumers won't do that anyway. You can't expect that consumers won't go for streaming over a disc format, even if discs have higher quality and actually cost less in the long run. Consumers aren't necessarily rational. If they were, advertising wouldn't work. My bet is that a very large percentage of consumers still don't really know the difference between DVD and BD. (What do you expect in a country where over 40% can't name the Vice-President).

So you can't really generalize about anyone's logic or motives. Having said that, I think the history of media technology clearly demonstrates that in the wide consumer marketplace, convenience takes priority over quality and in the cases where quality has won, that was a coincidence. And I also think that most consumers don't understand technology and only hear "numbers". So "if it goes to '11', that must be better than amps that only go to '10'". (Look at digital photography, where consumers have purchased based on higher resolution counts, instead of also considering the sensor size where high resolution on a small sensor causes lower performance because the dense photosites on the sensor cause noise at high ISOs).