It always amazes me when people write reams of repetitive boring supposedly intelligent comment when in reality all they need to say is "not for me" or "1080i is amazing I love it which it is" ( granted if your eyesight is poor then logic apply's)
But really one of the real reasons that BluRay has been slow to take of is that :- for instance if there had been a special release PS3's last year with the Double Trilogy of StarWars on BluRay then the PS3 / BluRay would be a lot more popular , dont you think, almost the top 30 biggest Box Office movies ever have not come out on BluRay, Why??? I dont know Im waiting for Lawrence of Arabia to come out on BluRay which should be fantastic, But will I live to see the day (I Am 55)

One thing that i think needs review is, I dont belive that it costs the Manufacturer 40% extra in costs to Make BluRay Discs. I think that if they lowered the Price they would find there Profit would go up.
I mean people stand in a store with in one hand say "The Reader for $19.99 DVD" and "the Reader for $29.99 BluRay" in the other, Most people will chose the cheaper because most modern movie DVD's produce very good quality on 1080 screens

But yes on the whole 1080i resolution is fantastic and CBS live HiDef broadcasts are fantastic,
these days there is no excuse not to buy a 1080 screen as your new TV
Can you remember being charged $1000 dollars for a 36" "Tube screen" 15 years ago I can, now there selling 47" 1080i widescreen for $1300 .
I call that price reasonable seeing your screen is bigger and the Resolution has to be seen to be believed, the first week or so you marvel at the Detail and clarity
Also if you buy the PS3 as your Player, you get a machine that is easy to update as regards the BluRay Firmware that Sony will bring out in the future, and you get a good Games Player in to the bargin for $399 Lastly the PS3 has WiFi
I have a PS3server on my WiFi equipped PC- that links up with my Playstation 3 so that i can Browse Pictures from my PC to my PS3 in colossal size
But there again some people are just stuck in the last Century arnt they !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey I am an average joe public and to be honest DVD is fine for me. I really dont see this Blue Ray as a viable option for me at all. My eyesight isn't fantastic and to be honest HDTV's dont help at all. I'm sure there are others like me out there!

oh absolute nonsense on the first argument...i see your point on the 1 vs 1,000,000 units sold argument but lets be real here...DVD sales are down (and continue to fall) while BD sales are up (and continue to rise)...that trend alone is good news for BD...you seem to think that im spelling the demise of DVD here...i am not...all I am saying is that BD is not a dead tech as you would like everyone to believe...

moving on...no, i never said DVD;s would disappear...either you're trying to put words in my mouth or you are in serious need of some reading comprehension skills....DVD is going nowhere...but all i've always said..is Blu-ray is gaining market share...and continues to grow...it is not a dead tech as you would like everyone to believe...(gee i've heard that before somewhere...)

1080p vs 1080i....yes..the resolution is the same...1920x1080...period..you can't argue that FACT...because its a fact...lol...and frankly the picture quality IS the same...because again...1920x1080...the same...FACT...now if you want to argue interlaced vs progressive we can do that...and ill agree that in general progressive is better...especially for fast motion as the screen is refreshed all at once...but i'd bet anything your eyes can not see the difference between an interlaced signal and a progressive signal...but again...in your infinite wisdom you would also know that all fixed pixel displays (LCD, Plasma, DLP) are progressive in nature and therefore cannot display an interlaced signal...but must first de-interlace the image...meaning no matter what...you are seeing a progressive image on the screen....the only time 1080i ever comes into play are on old CRT HDTVs.....but im sure you knew that....come on man...at least TRY and actually prove me wrong on this stuff...

it also has nothing to do with size either...1080i is able to display every single bit as high quality and detailed image as 1080p...but again like i said...the only drawback would be motion because of the way the screen refreshes...but then again...as i also said...all fixed pixel displays are progressive....so the image you see is progressive anyways...(is there an echo in here?)

720p is also not necessarily a better image than 1080i...it CAN be...but not always..1080i is capable of capturing much more detail than 720p...but sure ill give you that 720p would be better for motion such as sports...which is the reason ESPN broadcasts in 720p instead of the much more common 1080i....and i agree...don't waste your time explaining these differences because obviously you don't actually understand them yourself....

network HD is great...but to say its in the same league as Blu-ray in overall quality is a joke...will everyone notice a night and day difference?? no of course not...but if they knew what they were looking for they would...why do ATI and Nvidia continually push the limits on video cards...or AMD and intel battle it out to see who can make the best cpu when probably 99% of people could get by on a 2.0ghz pentium with 256 megs of ram running windows xp home??...are video cards a dead technology because the VAST MAJORITY of people will never buy one, if they even know what it is??..no of course not...lol...

i have no problem figuring out why people don't have 1080p TV's....because they are expensive...and the economy is in the crapper....i mean honestly...i have never made these arguments that you accuse me of unfortunately for you....

christ...can you even read?...i told you to keep your catalog titles on DVD...let a BD player upscale them...but i see no reason, if you have an HDTV...to not buy BD for NEW titles that you buy...i mean really...lol

the Mac eh?? Apple has no intention of being the market share leader in the PC industry at this point and frankly its unfair to ever expect them to be...they are the sole producer of computers using the Mac OS...now when you factor in how many companies produce PC's using Windows...its impossible for Apple really compete there...not to mention...I'm pretty sure Apple is damn happy where they are right now...the like being a niche (your favorite word obviously) product...

right...and about capping...you're lost my friend...the caps that are in place are blanket caps on bandwidth usage...period...doesn't matter where it comes from or where it goes...if you transfer data it builds toward your cap...but lets play along...say Time Warner were to not cap usage of THEIR movies...oh how consumer friendly that is...so now i can only watch Warner movies because they are the only ones that won't cause me to go over the my cap...NONSENSE...digital downloads of movies on the scale at which we currently consume is 10 years AT LEAST into the future...it certainly IS the future of distribution...but its so far off...not to mention when we start talking about pricing structure...storage...ownership rights...you name it...

easy to look up prices?? so easy that 3 posts later you've shown ZERO proof...awesome...

are you honestly going to compare total BD sales 3 years into the game with that of DVD having been on the market since 1997??...honestly who is out of touch here...nobody is even making the argument that we are going to wake up tomorrow and everyone will be buying all their old movies on BD and never buying a DVD again...all im saying..is...blu ray is not the dead tech you want everyone to believe it is...gee there is that echo again....funny...

about your 3.5%...its also funny that they post no source...and yet quick look ups of numbers all over the web show week to week market shares between 8-12%...now im not saying those are GREAT numbers...and obviously DVD is still light years ahead in total sales...but if the best you can do is a yahoo.com article with no sources as your only source...you might want to zip your lips as far as spouting your nonsense...

"I don't care if you like it. And yes, the BR proponents have posited BR as a REPLACEMENT for DVD, not as a niche addition."

and it will surpass DVD eventually...i have little doubt of that...the percentage of people that even have HDTV's is still small....as the HDTV market grows so will blu-ray....

"Bottomline, BR does not present a compelling reason to buy for the MAJORITY of the market, and you can't handle that fact as born out by market figures! Otherwise you wouldn't be arguing either side of the issue. You would simply be content to buy what you like and shut up."

no, the real bottom line is that nearly every month sales for blu-ray are UP...and they continue to rise...that is the real bottom line here...unfortunately you like to make up market figures (3.5%?)...

"And 1080i is the same resolution as 1080p? Do you have a clue as to what the differences are between interlaced and progressive scanning? Obviously not."

the REAL question is do YOU know the difference? because simply put...100% FACT both 1080i and 1080p are 1920x1080 pixels...PERIOD...there is no argument to be had there...its undeniable truth lol...it so happens that interlaced signals are not displayed all at the same time...but the fact still remains...1080i and 1080p contain 100% the exact same information pixel for pixel just displayed in a different way...not to mention...if you have a 1080p or 720p set your TV de-interlaces the signal and displays it as progressive anyway...so if your 1080p set has a good de-interlacer the image quality will not suffer a bit anyways....i honestly dare you to continue and try toprove that 1080i and 1080p are not the same resolution....i'll get a good laugh out of it...

"And the Pioneer units were available in 2001 and 2002 contrary to CNETs post dates (dv656a and 578a) and retailed for between $179 for the 656a to $99 (a great sale at Circuit City) for the 578a."

source? proof? i mean lets be honest...you can't even remember that blu-ray's market share is still growing and that was like last month...im supposed to trust your memory back to 2001??

"And your comparison of market adoption rates are apples and oranges. But then, if you understood that you could compare BR to the adoption of video tape that took almost 15 years to become commonplace! And still longer to become ubiquitous."

lets go ahead and make the comparison then...because it only helps me...my argument is the simple fact that you can't say after 3 years that a product of this type is dead...not while its sales continue to increase month after month, year after year....im not business major, but if im selling a product...and year to year sales are growing by 100+%....im pretty happy lol...

"even though i do believe it will overtake DVD eventually"...."Eventually" LOL! I would hope!!!!!!! I guess you mean that DVDs are not the last AV technology we will ever see... LOL! Duh!

"The news is that is it taking so long in a market that is already well familiar with DVD. It is essentially just an 'improved resolution' DVD (with absolutely lousy glacial response characterisitcs). It SHOULD be a no brainer - except that the MAJORITY don't feel the difference in price for the resolution presents a compelling need to buy over a larger catalog of commodity priced DVDs available to be played on upscaled commodity priced DVDs. But then I guess you think every house has a 60 inch 1080p set as well...And why not???"

and the MAJORITY of people would not benefit from Blu-ray...because they don't even have HDTV's...but as the HDTV market grows the benefits of blu-ray will become easily noticable to anyone who tries it....even the most technologically ignorant people i know are easily impressed when i show them a blu-ray movie on my 720p Samsung LCD, let alone my 67" Samsung DLP where the befits ARE night and day...

"The reasons for the slowness in adoption is simple to understand. Its readily apparent to most folks...except to fanboys like yourself blinded by their emotions who think that simply reciting technical specs is sufficient..."

and again you confuse me for a fan boy when im not...like i said...idc about blu-ray...i just want to best possible home theater experience...and that is BY FAR blu-ray...period...if HD-DVD had won out i would be a supporter of HD-DVD...but of course if that had happened we wouldn't need to have this argument because BetaNews was so obsessed with everything HD-DVD from the get go that they would never post a negative article about that format...

"But if it were, everyone would be driving a Porsche GT3 or better vehicle..."

no...because just like in every market there are various price points for a reason...not everyone is going to have the top end equipment...but eventually the majority of people will have HDTV's and will therefore be in a position to benefit from Blu-ray's continually improving price point...

"And the market bears these facts out. A fact that you continue to debate."

you mean the facts that show blu-ray sales continuing to grow??

"You keep trying to say that I have some personal stake in this. I don't care about either. But I have to admit that I don't find a compelling need to upgrade to BR either. Their catalog depth stinks and the increased resolution is meaningless for the vast majority of programming sources."

get out of here...if this was 2006 i'd by your catalog argument...but there are thousands of titles available on blu-ray and the catalog continues to grow every week with more releases...and ALL new relevant films are being released on blu-ray day and day with their DVD counterparts (or in the case of the upcoming Snow White BEFORE the DVD release)....go ahead...keep your catalog titles on DVD lol...a blu-ray player will upscale them for you...but the benefits of blu-ray on new titles is enough for you to upgrade if you are even the slightest bit an A/V enthusiast...

"But then you are like Ted Turner who insisted that classic B&W titles (which were intentionally filmed in B&W after color was available!) needed to be colorized and improved. Right! LOL!"

of course...because this is not apples to oranges?? hmm....

"You just don't get it."

you sure?...because i would argue the opposite...

"I just think its hilarious how the BR fanboys continue to claim that BR is on the verge of taking over the world. LOL! Yup, any minute now - like the open source folks have claimed that it was imminent that Linux would take over the desktop..."

on the verge?...come on...HDTV has not even reached enough homes yet...nobody is claiming that Blu-ray will be surpassing DVD within a years time or anything of the sort...what people are doing is disputing your baseless claims that it is a dead tech and will always be a niche product...

"The fact: BR will continue to be a niche product."

no see...that is an OPINION...

"And by the time it ever does become doiminant, there will be other new and existing technologies that will be able to argue the same tired whine the BR proponents use today."

and that will be what? the chinese version of HD-DVD that got all the BetaNews editors wet back after HD-DVD died?? lol...or digital distribution?? yeah with all the ISP's and their pay by the gig, and bandwidth cap plans...thats going to happen within 10 years right?? haha....

"Deal with it fanboy."

explain how one can be a fanboy when they do not care at all what format they are buying just that its the best?...because im missing it...

Yawn...

Well, you certainly prove that you do not understand the business side of technology. No argument there...

Let's when something that formerly sold one unit, now sells 2 units, that is a 100% increase in sales. But a itenm that formerly 'only' sold say 1 million units now sells 1,100,000 units, that is a palty 10% increase in sales. So OBVIOUSLY, the unit with increases in sales of 100% is the winner.

Not a math major either, apparently.

Yup, BR is definitely taking over. DVD sales are dead and so are the players.

How can anyone argue with such a luminary as hokum the fanboy, who doesn't let anyone dare say they are not interested in BR. You see, "EVENTUALLY" blue ray will dominate. "EVENTUALLY"

Whatever nitwit.

So, I guess from the title of this article, and your compelling arguments, we can expect to see DVDs disappear by the end of the year in all but the most backward venues and BR will cease to be limited to a 9 foot section of WalMart and they will swell to fill the AV section currently lined with DVDs. And the product catalog of BR titles will swell...oh wait...they won't, as it will take years for them to remaster the titles - especially those whose masters are in rough shape and deteriorating...but you see, we need them in BR as upscaled DVD is simply insufficient.

But not to worry, as the nitwit has told us that as the resolution of 1080i is the same as 1080p, that the picture quality is the same, and the interlaced picture is equivalent to the progressively scanned picture. LOL!

Obviously not familiar with video or electrical engineering either, I see. Yup, nitwith, the SIZE of the pictures are the same, but the content is not. But then it will confuse you to learn that 720p has a better quality picture than does 1080i as well. But then, as you haven't a clue, and apparently you base quality solely upon size, we won't waste our time explaining the differences in resolution and scan topologies.

But , if anything indicates that your assumptions are a bit overly optimistic, just stop and listen to how many on this site alone have said that BR does not offer a compelling reason to buy. All the while you lament broadcast television's version of HD and can't figure out why so many do NOT have 1080p televisions and who think that network and cable HD are just great. LOL! Oh, but I guess they are not quite a 'intelligent' as you!

As after all, Beta and Laserdisk 'took over' too based upon their superior specs as well, back in the day too.

But then, that doesn't matter to an erudite scholar such as yourself, as you have read some specs and simply ignore the market fundamentals and blithely announce that BR is taking over, even if 1080p playback capable TVs are not.

You cit4e specs, but you fail to do even the most fundamental SWOT/TOWS analysis of the market dynamics for BR. The Edsel was the hottest consumer oriented car in the 50's and it somehow failed to capture the market. Go figure.

But then, someone is probably still sitting around with a spec sheet ready to tell anyone who will listen how it should have. And perhaps it 'should' have.

But it failed to address more fundamental market issues.

Just as has BR. For even if I wanted to buy BR, I would only be able to replace approximately 20 of my nearly 1000 titles with BR disks. Not because I didn't want to, but because I couldn't if I wanted to! And these titles are not scheduled for BR release in any foreseeable future. In fact, they are slowly only emerging for DVD. And we are STILL waiting on titles such as The African Queen for just DVD. And titles like the Thin Man series, Bringing Up Baby, Captain Blood, You Can't Take It with You, and hundreds more...but gee, I can get all of the Adam Sandler titles! Oh, but to you, a classic is an 'old' movie like The Matrix! Not to mention if you like old TV series like Have Gun Will Travel, Twilight Zone, Andy of Mayberry, Wild Wild West, etc.... (oh, and would it help you if we told you that there was actually a TV series before the 'classic' movie featuring the Prince from Belaire?) LOL!

Oh...but if I want the Simpsons, boy, one just HAS to see them on BR! LOL!

Funny, your market figures are not much different from the Mac. And we all know that with their market increases, that the Mac is about to displace the PC 'any day now'. Right?

And like with the Mac, how can anyone argue with your "facts that show blu-ray sales continuing to grow??" Yup, and still Batman the Dark Knight still sells more full screen versions of the movie than BR copies. Yup, BR is eating it up. As you can tell from that figure, "resolution" is the determinant factor in deciding whether FULL SCREEN or 1080p will dominate!! LOL!

And I LOVE how you cite download caps. But then you obviously aren't familiar with what is driving the Net Neutrality debate, are you. You "missed that" too, I see.

For you see, they want the ability to throttle OTHER'S services! Not their own. So if say, Time Warner wanted to offer streaming services, they don't have to cap their OWN distribution, just OTHER COMPETITORS. I would explain further, but I suspect that if you haven't figured out that that is a method of controlling competition on one's own network while simultaneously providing themslves with a strategic marketing advantage, well you've missed that too.

But thanks for the entertainment, as you are BR's equivalent to internet7, the Mac wacko. And unfortunately you display the same acumen as does the PC character in the Apple commercials.

Oh, and just to confuse you further, the Pioneer units were easy to look up, as I bought them for their capability to play DVD-A and SACD disks - in 2001 and 2002.

BTW, SACD is taking over too - with its increased resolution and detail, regular CDs are shaking in their transports..."eventually"

But you are right in one regard, and I would be crazy to debate that: You are indeed "missing it"...

But BR industry cheerleaders are hoping for 6M units in sales in the 4th quarter huh. Whoopee! Take a look at the sales figures for DVDs 2007 at: http://www.the-numbers.c.../charts/annual/2007.php

And those are only for the 100 largest selling titles, not for all DVD sales. So BR will hopefully garner 6M unit sales. Heck, if they were able to garner 24M unit sales in 2009, it would still pale compared to standard DVD sales. But don't let reality confuse you. We like you just as you are. After all, you make us laugh. And its always fun to have something to laugh at.

LMAO!

Oh, and the 3.5% thst you claim is fabricated, the source was cited when it was first mentioned 3 days ago, but then one has to know how to follow a link and then to read for meaning:
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/123584

Maybe you can find someone to help you.
But I seriously doubt it...

here is your problem fox....i don't give a rats butt how blu-ray does...i just want the best available material...and right now...nothing can hold a candle to blu-ray lol...

when did i EVER make an argument that BD is for everyone??...i never have....even though i do believe it will overtake DVD eventually....

id love to see some proof of good dvd players retailing for less than $200 back in 2000 btw...

also...you certainly dont need a 1080p TV to benefit from bluray....and ill even stick to the simple math for ya....720p....1280x720....more than 720x480....yup....1080i?? same resolution as 1080p...so guess what?? thats better than 720x480 too!...

im not saying you're wrong about TDK sales numbers...but lets see some proof because as we all know by now...you love to just make up numbers when it comes to making blu-ray look bad (3.5% market share anyone??)

as long as blu-ray sales continue to grow...and grow A LOT like they are...you're idea that it has already failed is stupid...

Poor in the dark.

I don't care if you like it. And yes, the BR proponents have posited BR as a REPLACEMENT for DVD, not as a niche addition.

Bottomline, BR does not present a compelling reason to buy for the MAJORITY of the market, and you can't handle that fact as born out by market figures! Otherwise you wouldn't be arguing either side of the issue. You would simply be content to buy what you like and shut up.

And 1080i is the same resolution as 1080p? Do you have a clue as to what the differences are between interlaced and progressive scanning? Obviously not.

And the Pioneer units were available in 2001 and 2002 contrary to CNETs post dates (dv656a and 578a) and retailed for between $179 for the 656a to $99 (a great sale at Circuit City) for the 578a.

And your comparison of market adoption rates are apples and oranges. But then, if you understood that you could compare BR to the adoption of video tape that took almost 15 years to become commonplace! And still longer to become ubiquitous.

"even though i do believe it will overtake DVD eventually"...."Eventually" LOL! I would hope!!!!!!! I guess you mean that DVDs are not the last AV technology we will ever see... LOL! Duh!

The news is that is it taking so long in a market that is already well familiar with DVD. It is essentially just an 'improved resolution' DVD (with absolutely lousy glacial response characterisitcs). It SHOULD be a no brainer - except that the MAJORITY don't feel the difference in price for the resolution presents a compelling need to buy over a larger catalog of commodity priced DVDs available to be played on upscaled commodity priced DVDs. But then I guess you think every house has a 60 inch 1080p set as well...And why not???

The reasons for the slowness in adoption is simple to understand. Its readily apparent to most folks...except to fanboys like yourself blinded by their emotions who think that simply reciting technical specs is sufficient...

But if it were, everyone would be driving a Porsche GT3 or better vehicle...

And the market bears these facts out. A fact that you continue to debate.

You keep trying to say that I have some personal stake in this. I don't care about either. But I have to admit that I don't find a compelling need to upgrade to BR either. Their catalog depth stinks and the increased resolution is meaningless for the vast majority of programming sources.

But then you are like Ted Turner who insisted that classic B&W titles (which were intentionally filmed in B&W after color was available!) needed to be colorized and improved. Right! LOL!

You just don't get it.

I just think its hilarious how the BR fanboys continue to claim that BR is on the verge of taking over the world. LOL! Yup, any minute now - like the open source folks have claimed that it was imminent that Linux would take over the desktop...

Yup, any minute now...

The fact: BR will continue to be a niche product. And by the time it ever does become doiminant, there will be other new and existing technologies that will be able to argue the same tired whine the BR proponents use today.

In the meantime, all of the articles whining that the BR domination of the world is imminent, are wishful thinking marketing pieces.

Just like the one cited here.

Deal with it fanboy.

bd is the future atm regarding movies on disc but who knows what will come next.

Right now i saved up for bd player and hdtv and there is a huge diffrence between bd and dvd and thats a reason enough for me to keep going for bd.
There is of course not any reason to buy some old dvd releases on bd if they didnt had a good source to begin with.

Yup - "month after month sales grow".

Spoken like the fool who is desperately trying to convince himself!

So, after 7 years of market hype and publicity, in a mature market that easily understands the format and who is very comfortable with buying videos, and after HAVING to buy a new digital TV, BR has ONLY risen to a pathetic 3.5% of the market sales!!!!

Yup, you and BR are on your way!

you people harp on the price point of blu-ray so much i figured we should take a look back in time....

DVD hit the markets in 1997 or so....
Blu-ray hit the market for real with the launch of the PS3 in 2006....so 3 years later its 2009...

lets take a look at an article regarding DVD players in the year 2000.....

http://www.soundstage.co...quip/panasonic_a320.htm

some snippets from the article....

"If you look back into the SoundStage! archives you’ll come across my review of the Panasonic DVD-A310, a DVD player that I felt was outstanding value for the money, and a very fine performer....some really high-end models from Denon, Theta, Pioneer, Proceed, Runco, CAL, and Panasonic. It’s now possible to spend more than ***eight thousand dollars on a DVD player***...."

holy s***e my friends!!.... $8k for a high end DVD player 3 years into the life cycle??...high end BD players AT LAUNCH were $1k or so....hmm....sounds to me like that expensive DVD format has NO SHOT!!....lets continue...

"However, the big question still remains -- is there a huge difference between the DVD players that cost fifteen hundred dollars and up compared with those that are priced at under one thousand dollars?"

notice...that they infer that players price under 1 grand are more affordable players....hmm...

"Unfortunately, most of us can’t afford to spend that kind of money on two pieces of video equipment; that is where a DVD player such as the Panasonic DVD-A320 fits nicely into the equation. Although its current retail price is listed at $499.95, I managed to pick one up for $400 and I have even seen the DVD-A320 go for as little as $349.97..."

wow...so $499 is REASONABLE for them...and its actually a great deal to find the player for $350!!...and this is 3 years in....you can score a BD player for lass than $200 TODAY, 3 years in.....

so....im not exactly sure where all this price point talk is going...but if the initial price point of DVD is any indication of how BD is going to perform in the long run....i think BD is going to be just fine....

of course...hocus and fox will now come back and spout off some nonsense about how they say sales are bad...and the mass market has chosen to ignore BD...blah blah blah....and they will be wrong again....

im sorry....i tried to look through your post or some facts and couldn't find any....

Obviously!

As the only FACT that matters and which has totally escaped your grasp is the fact that after 7 years of hype and marketing and DESPITE a forced march to buy a digital television in the US, BR has only grown to 3.5% market share!

Whine and moan and cite BR specs, it really doesn't matter. The VAST MAJORITY of the market simply doesn't care.

LMAO!!!

and yet you totally fail to see anything other than your blind hatred for the format....blu-ray has not been on the market for 7 years...regardless of when it was "announced" nobody even heard of it until the launch of the PS3...so lets be real here...stop trying to make it seem like BD has had 7 years to gain market share and is only at 3.5% because that is misleading to say the absolute least....

first of all...lets take a look at some things...

sales of Iron Man....guess what?...BD sales make up nearly 75%!! for that particular title....hmm....

not to mention...i would love to know where your 3.5% market share numbers come from...because even this site...anti-sony/blu-ray news has reported market share numbers above 8%...and for the most part week to week sales show blu-ray hovering around 10% of the market share...now...

http://web-japan.org/trends00/honbun/tj000703.html

this source puts DVD market share in Japan at 23% as of "early 2000" which is 4 years after DVD players started hitting shelves in Japan....yes higher the BD's market share but considering the super duper improvement DVD was over VHS...and how you always talk about how everyone wanted DVD but nobody wants BD...it doesn't show that DVD was growing leaps and bounds faster than BD....

now continuing....

http://www.allbusiness.c...rs-video/7544410-1.html

im looking for sales data...but we will work with rental data for the time being....

acording to that source....dvd rentals made up 33% in 2002(!) 5 years after the format hit shelves in 1997....and that was a doubling from 17% in 2001...thats 4 years in case fox has trouble counting...now considering BD is not even 3 years in...and pulling down sales numbers around 10% of market share...its tough to argue that BD is a failure....but fox will anyways...

i could continue to find data to show fox he is losing it...and its so much fun to watch how mad he gets over blu-ray....but even after all this time he has no new arguments...and its getting old...im tired of having to own him over and over again....

lets tackle your post now...

cost of entry??...you're comparing a tech thats been on the market 3 years to a tech thats been on the market for over a decade...its like saying i should not buy the new car when i could buy the 12 year old car instead for less money....that argument is pure insanity....the EXACT same thing was said about DVD vs VHS....

yes i keep comparing DVD to VHS because it shows that you can't call BD a dead tech so early in its life cycle!! because even with the light years jump in tech from VHS to DVD it still took the format 7 years to pass VHS!!...and DVD had PITIFUL numbers until the launch of the PS2 in 2000....it takes YEARS for products to hit stride...using your logic DVD plants should have shut their doors in 1999 and said forget it....our players cost too much and were not selling enough....RUBBISH!!

incremental difference in quality?....heh...720x480 vs 1920x1080....i don't even need to touch that argument...anyone with a brain in their head knows which one is better...and forget audio capabilities...

you totally missed the point on my bringing up the cost of DVD players in 2000 (but i would not expect you to understand the first time around anyway)....i was not talking about super high end players....i was talking about your run of the mill mid level systems costing $500 in 2000....yet at the same point in the life cycle of BD...good players can be had for less than $200....hmm...

and your next paragraph again totally misses the mark...im not comparing high end units...im talking "affordable" mid level units cost twice as much in 200 for a DVD player has a BD player in the same range costs now....

the porsche vs truck argument?? seriously??...the additional speed certainly would be worth it for a race car team...again i can use your own argument against you...the truck does fine for what it is....but if im trying to win races for a living...i need the porsche...and certainly the additional cost is justified....

about upscaled "1080p" for someone who claims to be so knowledgeable about HT gear i would expect you to understand that upscaling even means....upscaling does not make something magically contain all the detail of a true 1080p image...because it can't....the system can take a guess at what information should be there...but the simple fact remains...your upscaling player CANT make a image that contains 720x480 pixels of information contain the detail of a 1920x1080 image...the detail is simply not there....also...when i turn on my 1080p TV...and hook it directly to a coaxial cable with basic cable...guess what im seeing on my screen? 1080p!! even though it can look like absolute trash...its upscaled 1080p lol....

ahh the old..."mine is bigger than yours" argument...what exactly does this super "stereo" consist of...and how do you know it costs 10 times what my home theater costs?? you have no idea what my home theater is....and i don't care what type of tools and equipment you have...ooo im so impressed by your ability to use software to analyze sound...i mean come on...i could have software and analyse the sound coming from the mono speaker of a 13" color TV...big deal...just because i can analyze it, has no bearing on the quality of blu-ray lol....and im sure your software, if its worth the money you wasted on it would let you know how much better a DTS:MA track is than some of the crap on DVD....

small increase in picture quality??....ok man....again...someone as knowledgable as you say you are should just plain no better....

adam sandler?? will ferrel?....come on man....you have been using that argument since 2006...its old, its tired, and its played out...every new release hits blu-ray just like dvd....and it amazes me...were you even around when DVD came out in 97??...if you were...are you delusional enough to think that all of a sudden on that magic day in the late 90's every single movie ever made was released on DVD??...i mean come on!!....your sheer lack of logic is SCARY!!

and do you even know what the "digital" transition is??? digital DOES NOT equal HD...there is no forced march for people to go buy HDTV's....anyone who is currently hooked to cable doesn't need to change a thing to be ready for the digital transition lol...but of course you knew that already...the only people who need to buy anything are they people who's tv's only accept a signal through the "rabbit ears"....

LOL!!!!

Dimwit, citing the specs again for the 100th time does not make a more compelling case for your position.

And 1080p playback is of little use on a TV incapable of rendering it. Regardless of the lines of resolution you want to continue to post. But then you will say 'it is still better' despite its limitations rendered on a 1080i or 720p set.

And of course digital is not HD, numbnuts. But the entire populace of the US, with the exception of those who are simply going to stick with their SDTV and a digital tuner (boy, now they are convinced that BR is hot...right????) have had to buy a new TV - NOT because they thought the SDTV picture sucked, but because they felt they HAD to - and in the middle of the HD marketing craze, how many do you think would run out and simply by a digital SDTV??????? And if they are buying anything other than SDTV, why would they not buy a 1080p capable set????

So, fanboy, tell us why the majority of the US does not now have a 1080p TV??????????????

Good answer!!! LOL!

You see, as you continue to fail to address that dilemma, you fail to make a case for your BR.

As you see, most do NOT have a 1080p capable set. Most are more than satisfied with what the networks call HD. Most are more than satisfied with upscaled DVDs. Most simply don't give a fuk about your rant about BR.

The true irony is that the sale of BR should have been easy, given the context of a forced march to buy a new TV and the advent of HD and BR.

Especially as people have already become intimate with the DVD. People do not need to be introduced to the concept of playing a video disk. They do not have to be convinced that they should abandon the VHS player. This has already happened. So, according to your illlogic, it SHOULD be an easy, natural, foregone conclusion that they should upgrade to BR. ...But they are not. LOL!

They have DVD players and DVDs.

The difference? Simple.

Most did not justify the cost of a new 1080p capable TV, and more importantly, most do not find the cost of an additional player at several times the cost of the DVD player, only to buy BR disks at 3-5 times the cost of the much larger catalog of 'already adequate' DVDs worth the price difference.

If they did, as you keep saying, BR would not be at a puny 3.5% of the market a full year AFTER the format war ended - with both the HD-DVD crowd and the BR crowd all settled on BR!!!!

The fundamental point? Most do not find BR COMPELLING. Despite your specs.

And your citing $400+ DVD players in 2000. LOL! Nitwit, Pioneer, for instance, had DVD-A, SACD, upscaling progressive scan DVD players available in 2000 for about $180 retail - with a more compelling reason to buy them as hybrid CD, DVD-A, SACD, and DVD players that could play Everything.

Ironically, still more titles than what your current BR players are capable of playing.

And the severely limited catlog titles. Nitwit, DVD had to undergo the digitizing of the analog source material. And now you whine about the time it takes to transfer them to BR. Who cares? We are not waiting. I watch as many if not more classic titles than the sh!tty, more recent CGI/special FX schlock that dominates the BR catalog. But then, you still think that The Matrix is a classic title.

Your arguments all continue to swirl around your emotional argument of why you feel people SHOULD be buying BR. But you utterly fail to explain why they are not. You fail to address the reality that BR is but a small niche product. You fail to present a compelling reason for folks to buy equipment that is significanty more expensive, optimally requires a TV that is not what they bought - even as they had to buy a NEW TV simply to keep watching the d@mned thing, and why they should be limited to buying titles from a restrictled list of current releases of which few care.

According to your illogic, the BR players and disks should be flying off the shelves. Instead, The Dark Knight sold more FULL SCREEN DVDs then it did BR disks! And THAT is, and d@mned well should be, a VERY scary issue for BR! Note, we did not even mention wide screen DVDs - but simply FULL SCREEN DVDs.

You see, you can rant all day, but you have failed to make your point even to those whoare still buying the FULL SCREEN versions of movies! And it should be an easy task to argue that full screen should not even be relaeased at all!

But you have failed. The irony, based upon real world fact, it is easier to debate that FULL SCREEN is taking over and that BR is dead already based on REAL world sales.

But then, your rant is more about what others SHOULD be doing. As in point of fact, they are NOT.

And you keep crying that BR is only 3 years old. Yup...Sony announces it in 2002, HD-DVD comes out 2 years after that, and yet you want to limit the concept of HD content soley to when BR disks ship. LOL! After the majority of the people have converted and are well aware of DVD. Prior to most going out and HAVING to buy a new digital TV (and why would they not by a 1080p set????).

Funny, the purchase of BR is simply one step out of several. And you have FAILED to present a compelling reason for the MAJORITY of the market to fulfill buying a 1080p anything at any of those steps. The closest they have come is to buy an upscaling DVD player for a fraction of the cost of your cherishd BR - with boucoup more available titles! More than adequate for thei Hime theater in a box systems that they are more than satisfied with.

And you erroneously think I hate HD. I don't. Not at all. But is their a compelling need to buy it? No. As I have said, high quality audio is a much more compelling aspect of home theater than is HD video.

And while you can rant all day and all night, you have NOT made a compelling case to the MAJORITY of the market.

3.5% after 3 years. Especially when that figure should have almost doubled just from the consolidation of the HD-DVD folks into the BR camp... LOL!

And the rest of us had been waiting for almost 4 years prior to the format announcement, also hoping to use it in IT. And you have even failed to capture us! In fact, the It industry has all but abandoned BR. Deal with it fanboy.

You can't even convince the loonies buying FULL SCREEN videos!

But then, you keep right on telling us what people SHOULD be doing as you utterly and completely fail to acount for what they ARE doing!

LMAO!

With only a slight s*** in just a few more articles, BN could easily become an online version of The Sun or the National Enquirer, with their fantastic stories that share only a brief reference to a real product, person or event and then go off into fantasyland in their interpretation and spin.

i also love how BN throws in the "no thanks to PS3" part lol...considering nobody said ANYTHING negative about the PS3, and the the contrary there is a quote saying continued growth of PS3 ownership WILL HELP.... but BetaNews' hatred for anything Sony shines through again...bravo BetaNews...you've outdone yourselves again!

give it a rest fox...no matter how much you try to convince everyone that BD will fail...month after month sales grow....

So we randomly pick one of the only pundants of BR's impending success to push here at BN... LOL!

Meanwhile the press is awash with articles more in line with the following that choose instead to focus on market realities rather than emotionally loaded wishful thinking...and notice the diffence in sales figures!!!!

WOW!!! BR sales have grown an astounding 250%...to an astronomical 3.5% of the market!!!!

But keep up with the good work BN. The market just can't slip anything past you folks!

LMAO!!!!

DVD sales plummet, Blu-ray unable to save the day
Wed Feb 18, 2009

The numbers for 2008 are in and they don't look good: DVD sales are now showing the first signs that they're about to go into free-fall, just like sales of CDs did a few years ago.

For the second year running, DVD sales have slipped. After hitting a high of $24.1 billion in 2006, the total sales volume hit $21.6 billion in 2008, an overall decline of about 10 percent off the 2006 high.

DVD's purported savior -- Blu-ray -- has been unable to rise to the rescue so far. Blu-ray (and leftover HD DVD) disc sales hit just $750 million last year, which doesn't nearly make up for the loss in sales of DVD media. Since Blu-ray discs are more expensive than DVDs, the overall unit sales decline is even more worrisome for Hollywood -- and some studios are seeing income plummet accordingly. For example, Fox operating income dropped 72 percent last year after seeing DVD sales fall just 15 percent.

Hits aren't going to save the day, either: Warner Bros. had the #1 selling DVD of 2008, The Dark Knight, but saw overall DVD sales drop 24 percent nonetheless. Disney -- running out of "classics from the vault" to reissue -- had a whopping 33 percent drop in DVD sales last year.

Naturally, the recession is being targeted as the culprit for all the bad news, but pundits say other factors are at play. One big issue? Former Fox and Disney executive Bill Mechanic says that the introduction of Blu-ray media has led studios to radically cut prices on their older DVDs as they attempt to position Blu-ray as a superior good. That plan may have backfired, instead driving consumers to snap up cheap DVDs instead. Says Mechanic, "It’s devalued the libraries. If you can buy Titanic for $4.99 versus $19.99 for a new, but lesser, movie on Blu-ray, consumers will say, 'Well, wait a minute…'"

To be sure, Blu-ray is growing -- up 250 percent since 2007 -- but it still represents less than 3.5 percent of the overall market. Analysts now wonder whether Blu-ray will be able to pick up steam fast enough -- or if the future has already been handed over to online downloading and streaming alternatives. With companies like Netflix rushing into streaming as quickly as possible, that certainly seems like a strong possibility.


http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/123584

The problem is that most of us are done with it. You confused us with the stupid HD-DVD war vs. PS3's Blu-ray. I just no longer care if I ever own a Blu-ray.

I have nice quality HD movies via Dish, Direct-TV, Downloads, etc. Why pay a premium to own this disc? It really doesn't make sense.

Have you ever watched a 50's black and white film? And noticed that you completely forget about the audio and visuals and actually still get into the story? It's amazing how a good movie can do that!

"Finally"

If only....

LOL!

Why do so many people seem to care or want it to fail?

Fact is, if you want HD movies on disc, blu-ray is the only way to get them now. They look great and do look better then DVD. I've got a 720P projector and can even tell the difference. On a 1080P projector, its even MORE noticable.

Blu-ray is growing and will continue to grow. Will it ever pass DVD? Maybe/Maybe Not. Its too early to say, but it is going to continue to grow.

I'm not sure this is going to be its year with the economy the way it is, but it could be its best year so far just due to the larger install base it has and will continue to add to.

i see Hocus and fox still can't get over the fact that HD-DVD lost and are still using the same old tired arguments against blu-ray over and over again no matter how many times they are proven wrong...

you guys make me yawn now....

Poor baby.

I couldn't care less about the HD-DVD versus BR war.

In fact, go back 7 years ago and I was an early BR supporter. SEVEN years ago, until Sony proved it couldn't get real product out in a timely fashion. Nor at a price point where it could have truly complimented and augmented IT as well as AV markets.

Now its simply a matter of strategic market positioning where the entry costs and continuing consumable costs are prohibitive while the depth of the product mix is far too limited - even if one wanted to use BR.

Upscaled DVDs continue to supply 90+% of the performance at ~25% of the cost. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is, as the larger market has spoken.

But you keep telling us where the market will be in 'how many' years... as BR is no where near doing it this year...or next...as you live in the world of 'what if' and 'if only' instead of market realities of 'what is' and of what the vast majority of consumers want.

you are so delusional lol....how can you expect a new technology to be released to the market at a price point to match current DVD prices??...i mean seriously...it took DVD 7 years to overtake VHS....blu-ray is doing fine...i think you confuse yourself and hocus as a representation of the mass market lol...im glad you think so highly of yourselves...someone needs to...

We just watched Bolt on standard DVD with our DLP projector, 103" screen and PS3 doing the upscaling. I would be hard pressed to tell the difference between what we just watched and the BD version. It was incredible looking.

My wife thought it was HD. We own a couple dozen BD's and some movies look head and shoulders better then the DVD version, but only on older movies like Twister, etc...

I A-B's Pixar's Cars in both projector inputs, one from standard DVD playing in my Toshiba HD-DVD (upscaled) and the BD version from the PS3. It was pretty close, the BD version had better detail in tiny areas like the carbon fiber and sheet metal gaps in Lighting McQueens hood.

I'm not complaining but BD and HD-DVD are not six times better as they claim. I would say 40-50 percent better at best and only with certain movies. With others, you cant tell the difference. Save your money people, stick with standard DVD.

Frankly, if you watch a sh*te film, you're not really going to notice any difference...
There's an ocean of difference between Blu-Ray and DVD, it's not actually the fault of the format if you can't tell.

Anyone who loves picture quality isn't going to be using a projector at home to watch movies...so stop with the hating or get a decent TV to compare on

I'd rather have 20" of HD than 103" of anything projected large.

I'd also like 60 fps in every movie, but no one seems to share the same passion for high frames per second in movies that I do. It makes such a big difference when the camera is moving or with any fast action.

Are you ****ing retarded?

"Anyone who loves picture quality isn't going to be using a projector at home to watch movies"

The whole idea of using a projector and screen is to re-create the actual movie theater. Mine has incredible picture quality, the most accurate color gamut, and better contrast that most of the projectors out there.

You have obviously never seen a true 1080p projector with Blu-Ray if you think that. I forgot that most of you slobs think a white painted wall and a $300 Dell presentation projector is a true home theater experience. I'm in a whole different league than most of you. Luckily, I have a wife who doesn't say a word when I go out and buy expensive toys without telling her.

uh, again, **** the movie theatre experience? I also don't have 15 speakers around my house, nor the desire to see grainy film on a screen with visible distortions in pretty much every analog film out there..

Movies look far better on LCD than they do on projectors: period. Projectors require low light, they require pretty much absolute darkness, they require expensive screens, and they are LOUD, to cool the powerful lights and cost thousands to replace. They require the room to be designed around them, and they might be portable, but they present an ugly picture.

Most people are casual movie watchers. We want entertainment at a good bang/buck. blu doesn't give people that compared to DVD+ large screen lcd's/CRT's. It doesn't come close.

"Anyone who loves picture quality isn't going to be using a projector at home to watch movies"

Poor Hollywood.

You just don't get it!

Picture quality? You think "picture quality" is the critical factor that has driven the "home theater" market? LOL!!!

You just don't get it.

The fact is, the majority of the market, and of those here, aren't buying your crap. Your arguments don't change that. Your rationalizations or your excuses don't change that either!

They are satisfied with the "picture quality" they have.

And you just can't grasp the concept that it is "big audio" that has defined the "home theater" experience.

A U D I O

Not BR, not upscaled DVDs, not HD. But AUDIO!!!

And WalMart has upscaling DVD players for $39!!!!
BR is but a footnote.

maybe it is A U D I O in YOUR opinion. Frankly, it's YOUR opinion... There are many people who either care equally (as I do, when I setup my home theater, I got both high quality audio AND video), or people that care maore about video quality... You just seem to have this mental defect that prohibts you from acknowledging that other people might have an opinion different than your's...

now STFU and let people have their opinions without bashing the person.

Only low end projectors are loud, hence the Optoma and similar junk you find on eBay for $500. The movie theater is dark too, hence the "movie theater experience".

It's an expensive hobby, which is why most of you will never have a true home theater, just your "perfect" 30' HD LCD. Don't be mad because some of us have cool wives, decent salaries, and the space for a 103".

Movie night at your house is two people crowded around a tiny LCD wishing for a shot at the good life. We have stadium seating for eight in two staggered rows, four motorized recliners and dual cup holder between each seat, a real popcorn machine, and enough candy in the counter to give you diabetes. it's pretty sweet. My next purchase is a fountain drink dispenser and a cotton candy machine.

By the way, we also have several HD LCD's and plasmas scattered about. None of them hold a candle to watching a movie on the big screen and two of them are Runco / Planar, which is pretty much the best you can get. You sir are retarded.

Decent audio comes cheap compared to a great projector. You can spend under $2000 for a receiver, dual subs and 7.1 surround these days and sound better than most theaters.

No one watches movies with their audio system balls to the wall unless they are showing the system to their buddies. Audio ..... give me a break. Even that BOSE junk can give you a decent sounding system.

Just another example of someone with no disposable income trying to say their "home theater" is great because of the audio. You just don't get it and never will.

So many people complaining about Blueray, why such anger for a format you feel will fail? If people suggest the format will grow other people seem to magically come out with all this information on how its not, like they took so much interest in a "failing" format to learn everything about it so they could bash it whenever anything positive is said. Sad.

As with any new format it takes time to be adopted by the public. Took years, and a Christmas gift, to get rid of my grandmother's VCR. I was the first in my family to adopt DVD. The problem isn't the format, its that not everyone can afford a Hi-Def TV and many are still happy with their 20yo CRT. As time goes on and more people buy HDTVs and actually take advantage of the resolution they get, how many people buy HDTVs and still watch standard def TV because they just don't know any better, you'll see Blueray grow. Eventually prices will come to a point where manufacturers see no need to make standard DVD players and DVD players will join the CRT TVs. Then the public will be forced to buy Blueray players and the price differences in new discs will be so minimal it wouldn't make sense to buy a low def dvd to save a buck.

As far as streaming movies. Well PPV and VOD didn't destroy DVD and store rentals. The tech savvy will swear by digital downloads but most people aren't familiar or comfortable with the idea. A lot of people, like me, want something physical. I can see people complaining about loosing their entire video collections because of their hard drives burning up, then having to burn their movies on Blueray blanks anyways have a safe backup.

Who is angry at Blu-Ray?

Some are angry with the business practices of Sony, and with the evolution of the HD format market, but that is quite different than being angered by a format.

Nor do I want it to fail. But the fact is, with the continuing business and marketing positioning, it will. Simple market analysis, reinforced by personal opinion in that I, like the vast majority of the market, cannot justify its significant price differential and lack of compelling catalog offerings. And it certainly does not justify the high cost of entry for the few titles I might like to have in BR.

The fact is, BR could be a resounding success if it were competitively priced with upscaled DVDs.

Lower the price of players to $100 and the media to the $8-$15 range typical of standard DVDs and folks would buy it - provided they aggressively added titles to their catalog! (As what is currently available is simple recent schlock with only a few 'truly collectable' titles - and almost no legacy classic titles)...

The qualitative difference is a small incremental improvement that is not required by much of the contenet. But the continued high cost of entry and the exhorbitant comparative cost of consumables simply does not justify the investment for the small realized qualitative difference.

No anger at all. Especially as though while I can appreciate the qualitative differences, they simply do not matter to a medium where the limitation is more the availability of compelling content than of compelling quality.

In other words, the relatively small difference in quality is simply not worth the the high price and limited availability of catalog titles.

I would love to be able to justify the purchase of a Porsche GT3/4 for my personal use as well. But likewise, the ability to rationalize the value/price differential just isn't there...

No anger - we just aren't buying.

Here at least we have something we can agree Foxfyre
(and IIRC we always have).

When it comes down to it it's now perfectly obvious that Blu-ray was the really stupid choice if what you were interested in was seeing a mass-market media for HD movies on disc.

Like many people I know in life and on-line I have 10X the number of HD DVDs to Blu-rays.
I very rarely buy Blu-rays and then only certain titles.

This situation is repeated all over, Blu-ray movie sales show that even the small minority of the PS3 gang that are interested won't come out to buy unless the movie is directly aimed at them (ie largely adolescent males who like those childish, predictable and laughably shallow 'action' movies).

Blu-ray is inherently problematic for mainstream adoption.
Don't tell me you seriously expect any of our non-tech literate friends, and family to accept or handle firmware updating as a 'normal' thing or take to a video player that occasionally refuses to play discs because the manufacturer of that player needs to bring out a fix for their specific player on certain titles.

It's got 'fail' (beyond the a/v enthusiasts & PS3 fanboys gang) written all over it.

The sales confirm it.

Like I said, at this painful crawl they call 'growth' even in 5yrs it will be nothing but a tiny niche of the market, still dwarfed by DVD and by then 8 years old and going nowhere.

My beef with Blu-ray (once the format war was over) has always been that it's great if you can accept that that as 'the new laser disc' this is all it will ever amount to
(they even managed to wreck it's chances as a PC storage media with ridiculous blank media and burner pricing - particularly in the face of incredibly cheap HDDs).
The only time I ever felt annoyed about it was watching the PS3 fanboys rush in to proclaim Blu-ray as moments away from becoming 'the next DVD' and urging all concerned to put their hard-earned into it.

Blu-ray is not 'the next DVD' and as events are proving never can be.

It is merely a stop along the way to what everyone knows is coming, digital distribution - and an unnecessarily very expensive one at that.
We all know that is the future, the rest is merely a debate about timing.

In my country we are 5yrs away from fibre to street telecomm cabinet.

In these tough times. No way.

BR will catch on when you can get 4 of them for $20 used, or buy 3 used and get 1 free, or buy 2 for $10 - you get my drift. They'll catch on when they're super cheap in the after-after market, that's really how I feel.

From personal experience I'm not a big extras or dvd cover 'stuff' fan, so I've never had an issue with buying used DVDs or non-Deluxe (aka, 1 DVD in the box) dvds. That being said, my collection boomed when blockbuster started having those 4 for 20 DVD sales. I got stuff I don't even watch that much :/ yeah...impulse. Now while I realize that not everyone is like me, I think there are a good number of like minded people. People who aren't hardup about having their stuff in mint condition (as long as the movie is perfect, ie: no skips, etc.- who gives an eff about the case/cover? not me!) would be more than willing to embrace BR when they sell at similar pricepoints to DVDs.

People said they would when the price was right on the players - while the price isn't 'awesome', $170 isn't a bad shot for a profile 2 player....but people still aren't willing to jump in vs. the typical $70 upconverting DVD player. And I'm pretty sure it's because used BR DVDs are still like 10 dollars a disc for old crap. I'm willing to bet that when they're selling at places like Blockbuster for 4 for 30 or movie stop for buy 3 get one free, or buy 2 get 1 free even, or at Walmart for 2 (new) for 20 then a different picture will be painted.

This article ought to be called

'Paid Blu-ray researcher gives the positive spin the Blu-ray Assoc paid for'

Just more pointless noise.

(and in the current economic climate more than a little ridiculous & laughable......they must have been commissioned before everyone knew the global economy was headed for the sh*tter for the next 2 or 3 years)

"An analyst predicts 2009 will finally be its year"

LMAO

With the best will in the world, in the current economic climate 2009 is not going to be anything but the year most did not go out and buy expensive new CE products.

Yet another year ticks by and still Blu-ray fails to break into the mainstream and out of the niche.

Even big screen TV production is being cut back as the makers know sales have nose-dived (and I had a suspicion that they might weather the storm better than some).

Blu-ray remains a tiny niche, largely confined to the PS3 boys who mainly come out to buy superficial, adolescent, female-free, 'action', crap.
(yes they do, look at the BD best sellers)

The mass-market is neither interested nor even much aware of Blu-ray.

At this very slow rate of growth (absurdly slow in a market well used to disk based video - which renders comparison to DVD growth ridiculous) in the just 5 or so years even the Samsung guy reckoned was all Blu-ray had left it just can't grow fast enough to become a mainstream product.

'The next DVD' it is not and never can be.

Great if you don't mind 'investing' in yet another short-term niche CE product.
But a bit of a pi$$er if you were dumb enough to buy into the idea that it was going to be' the next DVD' as the zealot fanboy element promised.

My roommate was kind enough to bring an HDTV into the house, so I was kind enough to get a new Upscaling DVD Player so my existing collection (200+ DVDs) didn't go to waste. I have to say, I'm quite happy with the purchase.

again, this is supposed to surprise who? Given that there is NO OTHER high definition physical media anymore, did anyone really expect BR to just wither and die? As more and more HDTVs creep into households, people are looking for physical media (yes, there are quite a few people that still can't or won't stream high-definition content from their providers or the internet) to watch on their shiny new HDTVs... What else are they going to choose?

Ugh, claims like this from these damn statistics companies drive me nuts.

"What else are they going to choose?"

Just what the vast majority have opted to use - up converted commodity DVDs on commodity priced DVD players offrering a MUCH deeper catalog of titles.

The irony is that the FULL SCREEN version of Batman- The Dark Knight sold more copies than the BR version! And one could easily argue that there is no reason for the pressing of a standalone full screen version of anything!

LOL!

The whole point of my comment was that there is no competition in the high definition physical media marketspace since the demise of HD-DVD. DVDs are still going to go the way of VHS eventually. With higher and higher resolutions, upscaling DVDs is not going to be a viable option. So, my point is, BR has no place to go but up, right?

As for "The irony is that the FULL SCREEN version of Batman- The Dark Knight sold more copies than the BR version!"

That's not irony... that's common sense... (what a horrible movie that was! lol)

"With higher and higher resolutions, upscaling DVDs is not going to be a viable option."

So are you suggesting the general public is going to upgrading their tvs on a regular basis to higher and higher resolutions?! A lot of them don't even like "being forced" to buy newer gaming hardware on a yearly basis, which is why they stick with consoles; you think their gonna upgrade their displays more often than their gaming systems? Or do you think their viewing environments are going to magically resize so that higher resolutions actually have a point?

Coming Soon, UltraSuperDuperHD(TM). It's so high-rez, reality looks fuzzy and pixelated.

Poor dotnet...

What??????????

There absolutely IS competition with “HD” (whatever that means, as no network is broadcasting greater than 720p! and every news broadcast is labeled “HD”! LOL!).

Upscaled commodity DVDs and players are selling multiple units to every one BR player and disk! And the vast majority of purchasers of “HD capable TVs” as a result of the forced march to digital DO NOT have a 1080p capable set!

And your notion that TV will continue to move to higher and higher resolutions? And the mainstream market will follow? Really… Sure they are capable…but with the goal being what exactly? So your CGI can look more ‘real’? So you can actually see the makeup rather than the illusion it is intended to create? And so that in 98% of recorded content (aside from nature films) the increased resolution accomplishes what exactly?

And the mass market is simply going to voluntarily dump their current TVs to get this higher resolution? They haven’t even done that to get BR!

Oh… But its nice to see that you don’t let facts further confuse your rant.

And dimwit, Batman the Dark Knight is the fastest selling BR title-ever!!! Sorta puts BR into perspective, doesn’t it, when a format such as low res full screen, a low res that one could easily argue should never have even been released, outsells your hi-res BR baby! And The Dark Knight is BR hottest ever selling title! Sorta takes your "HD is taking over the world' notion and trashes it! And you take issue with quality of that movie, when BR features the entire Adam Sandler and Will Farrell catalogs?!?!?!?!

Yup, you’ve certainly got high standards!

LMAO!

I have to laugh about "Full Screen". My ex-wife used to insist on buying "Full Screen" Movies because she couldn't stand to see the black bars on the tv from the wide screen movies I would buy. (I've been buying wide screen since they first started on VHS and sat Laser Disk section because they where a nitch product back then). Eventually I was able to convince her of how much she was missing from the original movie, and now Wide Screen is all she will buy. (Moving from a 20" TV to a 42" TV did help :-)

On another note, I am finally looking at buying a BD player. I can't believe it myself. :-) However, the one I am looking at will upscale DVDs, has built in streaming Netflix, YouTube and other video, includes DLNA to stream movies off of my media PC and the 2TB media NAS I am looking at. I don't know if I will actually buy any BD movies, but at least I will be able to play them if someone brings some over. They even have one that includes a VHS player in it. To bad I got rid of my VHS tapes in my last cross-country move. ;-)

"no network is broadcasting greater than 720p! and every news broadcast is labeled “HD”! LOL!"

720p is a High Definition standard, so it is HD period.
also do a google search for 'Heroes 1080p'
and you will find items like this one Heroes.S03E16.1080p.HDTV.AC3.5.1.x264-GB.mkv.
It seems to me that some networks do broadcast in 1080p.

"And your notion that TV will continue to move to higher and higher resolutions? And the mainstream market will follow?"

Screens with 2160p sometimes called "Quad HD" already exist.. then there is the new 4K Digital Cinema format that is just a tad more pixels.. just like 2K is almost the same as 1080p. Higher resolutions is most likley the future. I believe Hanc*** (2008) was one of the first films to be made in 4K format. Im sure that 2014 or whenever you will want a 2160p tv-set and an upconverting blu-ray blayer ;)

LOL!

I had better be! As even WalMart's BR section has been steadily dwindling in size and titles over the last year (I guess Adam Sandler has been taking a break -- thank you Adam!!!), and the new remodeled store sets feature (perhaps the wrong word here!) an even smaller section...

Maybe BR and Linux should join forces and together they can take over the world and the desktop...

right.....

Dude why are you so angry at BR??
Relax , no one is forcing you to buy one, you can continue to buy pixelated DVDs till you heart's content, you can drive a f***** chevy pickup truck as well for all I care, but stop spreading this B.S. about BR demise--IT'S NOT going to happen. The biggest reason for slow adaption is economics--but that will change in time, and the second biggest is ignorance and negative perception of a CLEARLY SUPERIOR product by malcontent losers who can't tell the diff between SD and HD even if they own a HD TV Set.