3 Reasons to Avoid Blu-ray (For Now)

[Seiko1]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Jeff Winston proved himself to be nothing more than an ignorant tool with regards to film and home theater with that comment. It's at the height of dumb-ass doofus-ness. Completely brain-dead stupid.

Couldn't agree more.
Old Roy Orbison shows Didn't have HD in mind either but as it turns out the old 8 track recordings are perfect for surround.
Roy Orbison "Black and white Nights" + "Austin City Limits" Great sound!

[Anthony P]

llike others have said, it is an old article (if it is not new of the day then it is old and already discussed)

in the end the guy has absolutely no idea what he is talking about and everyone of his facts are 100% wrong.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

llike others have said, it is an old article (if it is not new of the day then it is old and already discussed)

in the end the guy has absolutely no idea what he is talking about and everyone of his facts are 100% wrong.

And yet it gets posted here anyways.



This worthless thread spent an entire day in the news area, if you can believe that, before it finally got moved here.

[MJM]

I'm putting together a modest HT right now, and I look forward to getting either a PS3, or a standalone Blu-ray player in the next month or so.

When I posted the article, I was curious to hear some of the comments, since I figured there would be some funny responses. I guess it didn't exactly turn out as I had planned. When I came across the article the other day, I searched titles here to see if it had been posted, and I didn't see it, so I figured it somehow got overlooked. OOPS! Lots of passion here - that's a good thing.

BTW - I found the article sneaky & manipulative, and that's why I wanted to hear what members here thought.

[Anthony P]

well then here is what I said before

I think the only three reasons pretty much are
1)you hate Sony (and you think BD=Sony)
2)you are still POed HD DVD lost and it is BD’s fault
3)you work for a company that does not want BD to succeed (for example like Toshiba where you want to continue with DVD royalties or MS where you want to make sure BD does not take off so that in a few years you can pressure studios into DL is the only solution)

let’s face it
1)film has much higher resolution then HD does today (roughly 6k- 1080p is just under 2k) and that is for normal 35mm if you go with stuff like IMAX or super panavision…. It is even higher. Also films are scanned at higher resolution for digital archiving, during the DVD days most where at 2k and some 4k)
2)the costs are all wrong. There are BD players <300$, http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...ct_id=10088473 so 298$ -100$ gift certificate so that brings it to 198$, so how do units cost at least 400$? And then there is the other side, yes there are players at over 1000$ but there are also DVD players >1000$ in both cases they are the minority
3)so there are DVD players with different feature sets, everything has them. You can buy a DVD player that does not upscale, an other that does a crappy job, one that does a good one, does it play SACD? DVD-A? MP3?……since when is choice a bad thing?

[Anthony P]

PS then that article was followed with http://www.electronichouse.com/artic...or_bluray/C175

I guess they wanted to stress why BD is not for everyone, I also guess they forgot to add that BD is more enjoyable in a 10M$ house with a 30 seat HT and a cook, butler and maid preparing and bringing you snacks.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I think the only three reasons pretty much are
1)you hate Sony (and you think BD=Sony)
2)you are still POed HD DVD lost and it is BD’s fault
3)you work for a company that does not want BD to succeed (for example like Toshiba where you want to continue with DVD royalties or MS where you want to make sure BD does not take off so that in a few years you can pressure studios into DL is the only solution)

let’s face it
1)film has much higher resolution then HD does today (roughly 6k- 1080p is just under 2k) and that is for normal 35mm if you go with stuff like IMAX or super panavision…. It is even higher. Also films are scanned at higher resolution for digital archiving, during the DVD days most where at 2k and some 4k)
2)the costs are all wrong. There are BD players <300$, http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...ct_id=10088473 so 298$ -100$ gift certificate so that brings it to 198$, so how do units cost at least 400$? And then there is the other side, yes there are players at over 1000$ but there are also DVD players >1000$ in both cases they are the minority
3)so there are DVD players with different feature sets, everything has them. You can buy a DVD player that does not upscale, an other that does a crappy job, one that does a good one, does it play SACD? DVD-A? MP3?……since when is choice a bad thing?

It does get extremely suspicious when stories get the facts wrong, like the prices of players or the lack of features.

But, the first question: Do they want the best HT presentation or not?

If someone does, then the choice is obvious. If someone doesn't care, then there isn't much point worrying about convincing them to go Blu, no matter how cheap the players get.

Would anyone with a serious HT setup really give a damn if they needed to replace a $400 player in a year?

Gary