7 Reasons to Forget Blu-ray
When Sony's Blu-ray and Toshiba's HD DVD launched their fight two years ago, high definition was spotty even in network prime-time shows, and only a few cable channels offered HD versions. Nobody thought about downloading an HD movie over the Internet. How times have changed. Sony's Blu-ray now faces stiff competition for HD dollars:
XStreamHD: Satellite networks DirecTV and Dish Network are fast adding high-definition channels to their services. XStream says it will launch later this year and promises an even better video experience, with full 1080p images and 7.1 surround sound coming directly into the home. The box will cost $400 plus rental/purchase charges, and we've yet to see which and how many movies XStream will offer. But even if XStream doesn't succeed, Blu-ray faces stiff competition in the added offerings from DirecTV and Dish.
Toshiba: You didn't think Toshiba was going away, did you? Toshiba and many competitors make standard DVD drives that do a good job of converting yesterday's disks to nearly high-definition resolution. The drives can be found at well under $100, in contrast to the cheapest Blu-ray drives, which run $300 on sale. Blu-ray will find it tougher to supplant standard DVDs than those disks did in replacing videotape. Many consumers will be happy to keep their current disk library with a good upscaling drive.
Comcast: The cable provider is leading its industry's efforts to offer more movie titles on demand, saying it hopes to have 6,000 a month available by year's end. Half of those would be available in high definition. Comcast is also adding HD channels and has reportedly said it could eventually offer hundreds. But that would mean a breakthrough in cable tech; today's coax systems limit most cable providers to a dozen or two HD channels.
Verizon: High-def content is a key motivation for Verizon and AT&T to spend billions of dollars to upgrade their systems for new television services. Verizon is running fiber optic cable to homes that can probably carry as many HD channels as Verizon can buy, including any that start offering movies in the top 1080p resolution that now only Blu-ray can produce. Verizon says it hopes to soon offer 150 HD channels. But so far, the telcos are offering only a few dozen channels in a lineup similar to those of most cable providers.
Vudu: This $300 box is the best dedicated device yet for downloading video from the Internet. Vudu has an innovative remote and software that makes video simpler to play than even Blu-ray, which means having to get and insert a disk into a player. On the downside, Vudu works just in homes with top-speed Internet access. Also, it so far offers fewer than 100 HD titles, the quality doesn't match Blu-ray's, and rentals are available only for 24 hours once they start playing.
Apple TV: This $230 box is fast becoming the best of the digital media adapters, which include Microsoft's Xbox 360 and are designed to link the TV to computers and the Internet. The latest Apple TV version can now function without a PC, enabling direct downloads from Apple's iTunes store and access to YouTube videos, among others. The iTunes store has only about 100 high-def titles available—and like Vudu, the quality doesn't match Blu-ray's, and rentals are available for just 24 hours once they start playing.
WNBC: Yes, the lowly antenna is more of a competitor than it was two years ago. The late-night shows have all gone high def, as has most prime-time and news programming. And while broadcast stations can't deliver 1080p as can Blu-ray, the HDTV delivered over the air is crystal clear—and cost free.
Tags: television | HDTV
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (88)
Reader Comments
your an idiot
I'll stick with Blu
Mmmm, compression
I guess if you're a really big fan of compression and smooth, detail-less movies, or films in fake, upconverted HD, any of these options would be ok . . . I'd rather see films the way they were meant to be seen without blocking and compression artifacts.
Uh, wow?
Downloading is downright awful right now. The infrastructure isn't there, and there are secondary issues (do you "own" the movie, or are you just renting it? what happens if you lose your data?). Physical media, and in this case, Blu-ray, will always have leg up on these newer downloadable technologies. And let's not forget: most downloadable HD content isn't even 1080p, it's at a lowly 720p with a horrid bitrate (which leads to artifacts similar to an overcompressed JPEG image).
As to over the air (OTA), no thanks.. I don't like sitting through advertising and movies that have been edited for TV.
Bitter Tears
Yet another bitter tears response to the Blu-Ray victory.
Sure, Internet downloads and pay-per-view and TV are great options, but so is Blu-Ray. These options will coexist and consumers will use a mix of all of them regardless of how many bitter pundits try to rain on the Blu-Ray parade.
What a Genius
We are still using CD Dave ......................
Wow, he doesn't even read the news...
You should really read some tech news sites before posting something like this:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6230960.html
Nice try, but...
...this list is nothing more than a string of pretenders, rental services and TV stations. "True" 1080p and 7.1 surround over cable or satellite? Not happening with today's tech; it'll look like a pixelated nightmare. How does that translate to competition for true HDM? It's like comparing a Ruth's Chris steak to that $3.50 "sirloin" at the Waffle House.
What all the critics out there seem to forget is that DVD overtook VHS because consumers demanded quality, and DVD delivered. And they were willing to pay for it--early DVD players cost as much as Blu-ray players, and early DVD's cost more than most Blu-ray movies.
There is also a sharp contrast between consumers who primarily rent, and those who primarily buy (or rent, THEN buy). I can see HD OnDemand and AppleTV thriving with the rental crowd, but the fact remains that most movie lovers will seek a means to OWN their films, instead of paying exorbitant rental rates. Especially if owning it comes with all the bonuses such as true 1080p video, lossless audio, and a ton of bonus features.
So thanks for the list, Dave, but the bottom line is that this is an apples to oranges comparison here.
7 Reasons to Forget This Silly Blog
* XStreamHD: This is your first argument against Blu-ray? A technology that may or not materialize months or years from now with no clear indication what it will deliver and at what price? Pretty shaky premise.
* Toshiba: Sure, now that Toshiba can't sell it's own HD DVD players, you're now buying into their strategy of going back to DVD and trying to artificially improve the image of a 10-year-old technology? I bet you were one of the last hold-outs with VHS.
* Comcast: Right, cable systems have proven to be such strong providers or high-technology and great and reliable customer service. You're banking your future entertainment experience on their promises? And at what quality high-def clarity?
* Verizon: More future promises. Blu-ray is here now and offers permanent storage and back-up that electronic services can never offer.
* Vudu: Yes, putting a disc in a player is such an arduous task. And you noted all the disadvantages of Vudu already. So, why is this a reason to forgetBlu-ray?
* Apple TV: More future, more promises. If and when it delivers on those promises at the scale and quality promised, then maybe it can be an ancillary or alternative device. For now, it's not ready for primetime.
* WNBC: Huh? A few local network affiliates in part-time high-def and on a fixed schedule is an alternative to feature films and TV shows in full 1080p high-def 24/7 on-demand?
I think you were trying to grab attention with your headline that is not supported at all by these points.
Vudu sounds awesome!
You don't have go through the hassle of finding and inserting a disc, instead you have to spend countless hours downloading from a selection of less than 100 highly compressed movies that you can only watch for 24 hours!
Su-weet!
Seriously, this article is so full of fail. Has digital satelite ever been a threat to DVD? ...
what's your argument
That cable and Satelite providers have HD? That you can get HD content online? This is nothing different then we already know. Do you have an actual opionion of your own on this. Have you tried to download HD content from the internet? Unless you have the money for the bandwidth it will take along time. Beside some people want to have a disc so they can watch a movie at their leisure and so there is some quality control as well. I have HD through Satelite and it doesn't compare to the quality of a blu ray disk nor does an upscaling DVD plaer. So come on Dave give us an opinion not the facts that people already know about.
No.
Movie companies are still going to want to eventually have one format. It will further help lower distribution cost. Most people still are going to want to really own their movie and not everyone is going to be able to hook their computer up to their television for HD downloads and there aren't that many people who care to gather around a computer. Portability is still an issue. You may be able to download on to a hard drive and save it but then what about data loss or the pain of having to recover all that was lost? What to do? Well people may as well accept blu-ray, have a disk that they'll be able to take anywhere and have for many years as long as they take care of it and not lose it. I enjoy my Dish Network HD DVR but nothing will replace really owning a movie you really enjoy.
Doesn't understand HD
Dave, HD is not just about resolution... quality is defined by bit rate... and if you bothered to do some research rather than just trying to make headlines, you'd realize that none of the alternatives you discuss offer comparable video quality. Nor do the address the social reasons favoring physical media: collectability, portabiliy, spontaneous purchasing, lending, retail distribution, etc. While you could have written a very interesting article talking about the strengths, weaknessess and business models of each of your alternatives... you took the tabloid route and produced drivel at best, and misleading information at worst. Shame on you.
See you in at least 10 years
I buy movies, I usually don't rent them. So about all of the services here don't suit my needs.
Let me know when I can download an uncompressed 50GB, 1080p movie with lossless sound and all of the bells and whistles. Also for this to work, we need a dependable form of storage to keep all of my movies which would be around 750-1000 titles. How big of a hard drive would one need for 750-1000 movies at 50GB each? It's going to be a while before a hard drive that size hits the market. And I'm not going to spend thousands of dollars on movies just to have my hard drive fail, and have to re-buy them, no way. Not to mention ISPs like Comcast are limiting how much a user can download in a month. It will take downloads at least 10 years to compare to Blu-Ray in quality and reliability. Downloads couldn't overtake DVD, how are they going to overtake Blu-Ray?
Broadcast such as cable, OTA, satellite, and FIOS will not hurt BR because the Home Video industry blossomed under a world of broadcast. Censorship, lack of content, commercials, and living off someone else's schedule aren't going to change.
Digital Downloads are merely rental solutions and the best connections available only allow you to stream at about DVD quality, and the "HD" offerings from VUDU and apple have been tested and found marginally better than DVD.
DVD is the only thing holding BR back. But all BR players are backwards compatible and once adoption is sufficiently widespread, retailers will be chomping at the bit to only carry one SKU of the same product.
Toshiba is out and you didn't mention Xbox Live. So the only thing I am wondering is who pays you to right this drivel, you shill?
Blu has nothing to fear from downloads...
Downloads will have thier place, but will not be able to replace an entire physical library any time soon. After you own a bluray player, all you do is buy a disk and you have that movie in better quality than a download will be for a very long time. I like to actually own my movies, not rent them to my harddrive only to not be able to watch them later without re buying them like some services. Those download services in a way remind me of divx. Even when you buy a download that has no limits, signals are not always constant, harddrives can go bad, its not consistant and early on will be plagued by lower bitrate and compression.
Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you there, "Dave"?
Your bio says you're a closet geek... maybe it's time to "come out".
Blu Ray for true 1080p and 7.1 surround
Yeah, i'll stick with Blu Ray. Sure those other options are good for rentals or watching whats on. But for a great movie that i want to watch more than once, blu ray is the way to go.
Upscalilng?
Hmm, which is better 8 track or cassette? Cassette or CD? CD or....
VHS or DVD? DVD or HDDVD, HDDVD or Blu Ray.....
Um, what am I saying...I don't know...what are you saying? Anyway, Blu Ray wins and I wont be upscaling anything.
You should have waited
Well, I feel smart. I waited to see who won the format war, and I'm glad Blu-Ray did. Now I have a good excuse to get tat PS3 I have wanted but convincing myself to not get. Plus my computer is not state of the art, so downloading movies for everyday watching is not possible, and even if it was, I want to sit on my couch, not an office chair when I watch a movie, and get to hear it with my surround sound system than interestingly enough my computer does not have. I f I wanted to see a video on my computer, I'd go to youtube.
Blu-ray
Boy, people are mean.
I am very happy with my Blu-ray and High Def television.
It has great picture, superior sound, plus tons of interesting extras on some flicks, like Harry Potter and Blade Runner.
My cable tends to pixillate at unexpected moments.
If I don't want to own the movie, I can rent all the Blu-rays I want for $18 a month from NetFlix. And the qualit is superior to any of the alternatives you sugges.
This article proves...
..you don't have to be intelligent or well-informed to work in the media. You just have to show up for the interview.
This is you PROFESSION, man! How can you know so little about the technologies involved?
As has been pointed out ad nauseum above, we're nowhere near Blu-ray-like downloads. More than half of Blu-ray discs released are 50 GB discs, with most of that capacity being used. It'll be 5-7 years before most of N. America (let alone the rest of the world) is wired to make 50GB downloads even remotely feasible. And you'll still have DRM, video/audio artifact, fried hard-drive/stolen laptop, extra charge for excessive downloading, etc. etc. etc. issues to deal with. Physical media will NOT be going away, even if 50GB filsm could be downloaded in 1 minute. People want to possess the professionally-recorded disc, so they can watch it whenever they want to.
Pass on Blu? Not so fast ...
And on what are you going to store these giant-sized movies you've downloaded? Just six of these would nearly wipe out a 200GB hard drive.
If only there was a writeable medium out there that held nearly 25 to 50GB a pop ... if only ... Wait a minute—There is!
Here's a hint: Its initials are BRD ...
Unbebeleivable that this guy is paid for this. It is clear that he does not have a firm grasp on the technology he is talking about. I review movies on Blu from Lionsgate and Starz/anchor bay and I have used this wonderful technology for well over a year now. On my 50" Pioneer Kuro plasma nothing touches a GOOD blu transfer.
I have sampled the various on demand services available today from Xbox live and Time warner cable. Although they claim to look as good as pre-packaged media THEY DON'T.
The technology simply hasn't advanced to the point where you can download HD without additional compression added to the signal. Maybe I am being elitist but I will keep watching the best images I have ever seen in my life on Blu.
Blu ray will steal lead
Who wants to download shows? People will want to still stick with traditional way of popping in a disk and watching their videos in HIGH QUALITY. If you're a person who's always traveling and barely gets to stay home, then go ahead and download your shows. I'll be sitting on the couch watching in hi-def and playing amazing games on my ps3.
blu ray
this is the type of un informed "reporting" that makes tabloids..
dang dude...do some real research before you write this drivel...
just googling and net surfing doesnt make you an expert, which you seem to want to appear as.
You forgot something Dave
None of these look as good as Blu-ray. Not one. Nada. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch.
Blu-ray is the best picture you will get for the next decade (or longer?).
Why would you settle for less? Why would anyone?
Rank incompetence...
Let's give this drivel a quick review, shall we?
XStreamHD: Speculative vaporware vs. an established format I can actually buy today? No contest here.
Toshiba: A 480p signal blown up to 1080p is just that: a blow-up. You can't make something out of nothing; the image quality simply isn't there. Toshiba failed at HD and is trying to save face any way it can.
Comcast: So a service that can only carry a few heavily-compressed HD channels with "lossy" sound now is going to compete with what Blu-ray can offer HOW, exactly? A few BILLION dollars in network upgrades? Some unknown future magical technology?
Verizon: Right now it isn't much better off than cable. The fiber in theory can carry everything but the kitchen sink, but like you said we're billions of dollars of network upgrades away from even getting a decent number of HD channels, let along anything that can compete with Blu-ray movies on demand. Whoops.
Vudu: An expensive box that lets me download inferior-quality content and watch it for a limited period of time? Color me unimpressed.
Apple TV: Again, an expensive service that provides an inferior product. No thanks.
WNBC: Is this a joke? Commercials, censorship and mostly lame programming vs. the latest movies in 1080p HD and lossless 7.1 surround sound?
Tired of the crying and whining!
All the points that I wanted to make have been made. Why are we seeing all these blogs crying about the loss of HD DVD? It's time to move on!
In my opinion
I think if what you say is the case, then the dvd market wouldn't be a 20 billion doller a year business. Blu Ray will take bites out of that and they still have they're work cut out for them, and yes those options are good ones for HD picture and Sound but my experience is that people like building movie collections. I don't see TV taking the place of DVD or Blu Ray.
Wow, just wow.
I sure hope you don't get paid for writing this stuff.
Until a lot of things happen, such as the creation faster, more reliable, affordable, and available bandwidth, storage costs dramatically decreases, technology to ensure that movies don't disappear with hardware crashes becomes consumer-proof, etc., only a fool would say that downloading "pseuo" HD movies is going to replace Blu-Ray in the forseeable future.
Enjoy those downloads while we enjoy real HD movies.
The competition isn't really competition
I too prefer to own movies so that I can watch them again and again. I will occasionally rent a movie before purchase to see if I want to own it.
I have a 60" 1080p television and none of your "alternatives" would look as good on my display as blu-ray. Compression and bitrate and upconversion all are factors of the image quality.
You really need to better understand the people that purchase higher end equipment. They generally want the highest quality image that they can get.
Pseudointellectualism and pseudo-expert in the media at its finest.
This "closet geek" and "guru" is getting owned by the real geeks out there. Why? Because he doesn't know what he's talking about. It's very obvious in his wording and grasp of the technology. USnews thinks they can pull a guy from somewhere with glasses and look somewhat intellectual to write tech for them. This is pseudo-intellectualism folks. HD download might be viable in the future but it's going to be a long time until the mainstream consumers get the bandwidth high enough to handle full 1080p. Additionally DRM restrictions on downloads are ridiculous. I'd rather buy the media and know that I'm the owner. Can't beat Pan's Labyrinth in 1080p with 7.1 lossless DTS-HD MA sound. Additionally...
Few reasons why this article is the dumbest thing since Ralph Wiggum:
1. It was sponsored XstreamHD, reason enough for the biased views.
2. It is published on USNews
3. The guy looks like Ted Danson.
Blu-ray isn't going away
I've tried most of the above, including Blu-ray. None of the alternatives match Blu-ray's quality -- at least not yet. Also, the points are well made that people prefer a disk when they buy a movie, and high-end consumers want the best.
But I was writing for the mass market. Many renters don't care about a disk. And I suspect many renters and even some buyers will forgo Blu-ray's added image quality for the convenience and/or cheaper cost of alternatives.
I don't think Blu-ray will be the success that DVD was. There are more alternatives now. They are of varying quality and convenience, but are viable reasons for many people to look elsewhere for home video.
Congratulations to Sony and the Blu-ray camp. I think we're all relieved to see the format fight over.
this dude is crazy....
Bottom line is the other options arent as GOOD as blu ray. I have Directv and think it kicks a$$. That said, I don't want to sit and DL stuff off it personally. And the thought of trying to improve DVD's by Toshiba is insane...
In case you didn't get the point...
...not many people agree with you.
Personally, when it comes to movies, it's the plot, characters and story-lines that matter to me. I was happy with VHS, but DVD brought the widescreen format; which I immediately fell in love with. Quality isn't that much of an issue to me. I don't need to see each flake of makeup as it falls off of Brad Pitt's face as he turns his head, you know?
Honestly, I'm fine with online downloads. I've seen some that are stellar in quality. I plan on buying an AppleTV once I get my finances straight.
I really don't understand why there's so much anger in so many of these responses. It's as if you've slept with their significant others, and there's a massive vendetta against you.
I thought your article was informative. I didn't know so many online rental options existed, or were in the works. Thanks for letting us know. :)
-kevin
Wrong again David
By the time the mass market gets involved, the $100 Blu-ray player and $15 new releases are going to look a lot better than the $50+/month people will need to pay just to have an internet connection that will be able to handle the bandwidth of a crappy 720p/DD5.1 download.
No, not only is Blu-ray not going away, but it will supplant DVD in about 3 years in the buyers market and 5 years in the renters market.
Digital downloads are still about 20 years away from becoming commonplace.
Downloads are going nowhere
"Pseudointellectualism and pseudo-expert in the media at its finest."
+1
The "mass market" wants a physical disc, not a download that disappears in a few days.
If renters go the download route exclusively (which they won't), they will all fail miserably.
'HD Downloads' is a very small market driven by Apple and a few other companies to justify the amount of money they put into it. Of course they will try to convince us we "need" downloads. They need to keep their investors happy or their heads will roll. Reality is, the infrastructure is not there and won't be until Comcast, Verizon and AT&T figure out how to cut costs and screw the consumer with the newly available (and expensive) bandwidth. Years away.
I'm sticking with Blu-ray.
This guy was paid by Toshiba...
Only half of us Super Geeks will transition to full Downloawded Movie libraries. Most uf us want portability of a disc to bring in the car or bring on vacation. I will not be giving up my Blu-ray player, I will continue to purchase TV and Video on Disc and music online.
I`M SORRY DAVE...
...said HAL from 2001, on blu-ray. Get a grip.
hahaha
hahahaha
HD Movie Downloads vs. Blu-Ray Movies
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=37522
Dave should have done a little research before writing this article
puppy
THIS GUY IS PAID TOSHIBA PUPPY.
THE WORLD IS BLU GO WITH BLU.
DIGITAL DOWNLOAD SUCKS.
CABLE IS NOT IMPRESSIVE IN HD.
VUDU AND APPLE IS COSTLY DOWNLOADS.
Read this davie boy
HD Movie Downloads vs. Blu-Ray Movies
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=37522
Dave should have done a little research before writing this article
What a Tool.
Agree w/ all above but will add the question: "Which studios do you suppose will support (low quality) distrubution of their films through the 'alternatives' you suggest?"
Lack of studio support killed HD DVD, do you really think the studios are going to cannibalize BRD sales by distributing through the likes of Vudu and Apple TV?
Dude, use your Toshiba doorstop as an upconverting DVD player and go out and buy blu.
Thanks for the laugh
I'll stick with my blu
This guy is an HD-DVD fanboy.
Just because your beloved format died, doesn't mean you need to act like a case of sour grapes.
LOL, HD downloads are far from ready, and even when it's ready, people will always want a physical copy to own. Physical media will never die in my opinion.
The only real competition Blu-ray has is with SD-DVD, and not with those mega compressed crappy movie boxes (Vudu), or Broadcast HD channels (Comcast, Dish Network, ETC..).
Wow Dave and they pay you for this nonsense?
Blu Ray is well ahead of the competition and continues to gain ground. I love my Blu Ray player and the fact that they are burnable discs is fabulous. I think we are just seeing the beginning of Blu Ray wait until HD is forced out of the market Blu Ray is here to stay. Dave you have given hope to everyone that has ever dreamed of being a writter for U.S. News, If you can do make it surely anyone can...
Axe to grind???
Someone lost a boat load of cash on Toshiba stock today, didnt you Dave??? I thought reporters were to be unbiased? There was only one sentence about Blu Ray being better than the the downloads etc. If downloads were so great they would already be in perfect 1080p with True HD audio, bottom line is that they are not, not even close. I cannot even imagine the download times for a 50 gig movie with HD audio, it would be hours. I have had a Blu Ray player for 4 months and no complaints, I am building my BR disc library and will watch other technologies as they improve. I have Comcast HD w/ On demand but still prefer my BR discs for excellent video and audio. On Comcast on demand I was watching Apocalypto, in the chase scene with the jungle trees and fast running action the screen would move then freeze, continue and freeze again. The bit rate of Comcast is just not fast enough to support that type of screen action. Blu all the way!!!!!
lmao loser!!!
lmao.
this guy obviously bought an hd-dvd player and now he feels like bashing on blu!
tough luck for investing on the wrong product!
i'll continue watching blu ray,because hard copies are more collectible than a digital file. bleh!
What's wrong with you?
Man, you should be more professional. Just accept it, you made the wrong decision and I think that's all the issue with you. Sell your HD DVD player fast
Me like Stick better than rock
I think Toshiba may call you about position they have open. Dvd reconstructionupscaling and their new toaster line.
Think Again
CD's are still huge, bigger than downloads actually.
Blu-ray is the new HD format, why not embrace that and enjoy beautiful PQ/AQ?
Can't wait until March 11th!!
No Country for Old Men/ID4/I Robot/Dogma.
Again, just embrace BD, you'll live longer, it's fact.
Sold out-
Who bought you out Dave?
7 Reasons not to take US News & Dave Seriously
Sorry, not everybody wants to watch Video-on-Demand or Digital Distribution when we can just buy the movie or rent it through Netfliks/BlockBuster for way cheaper.
None of those arguments were well thought out. For shame at spreading such ignorant tripe.
The Writing Is On The Wall
Just below and to the right of the headline:
"(Courtesy of XStreamHD)"
Does your soul hurt when you sell it or does it only sting for a little while?
Blues
Comcast HD is 1080i. Blu ray discs are 1080p
Toshiba is completely getting out of the HD-DVD business and concentrating their future in computers and especially large capacity flash drives.
Blu ray DVD is the future. Live with it.
mass market?
"But I was writing for the mass market. "
Really? The mass market of HDTV/7.1 surround system owners, HD cable or dish subscribers and high speed internet users?
You're right. It would be much wiser for those mass market folks to buy a $230 to $400 box from their ultra-reliable cable/broadband/satellite providers for HD content. Hell, I know I've never had my cable go out, never had any macroblocking or audio drop outs during programming, and never had to talk to an angry Canadian customer service rep with my CA based concerns.
Why should those mass markets people purchase a silly ol' PS3? All you can do with it is watch full HD movies, upconvert standard DVDs, play HD video games, store pictures and music, download trailers/wallpapers/game demos, chat with friends and connect to the internet with built-in wifi. And of course, you would also have to deal with that dreaded physical media that people hate or are totally unfamiliar with.
I'm with ya, Dave. Forget Blu-ray!
Sorry Dave
Sorry Dave, but you just got owned.
What was the point of this blog anyways?
"Hey guys, we should all settle for inferior quality, because HD-DVD is dead" ??????????
i follow this up to a T. I have a 42 inch lcd hdtv, and a 27 inch sdtv. Hd movies look the same on both. Blu-Ray only hold a slight advantage on it. The market figures if you can spend 500-5000 on a tv then you can spend 700 on a blu-ray player and 50$ a disk. I have over 500 dvds in my collection, and they dont look bad on my upconvert dvd player to 1080i. Sure its not "perfect" but it sure beats trying to get those 500 dvds onto a platform that costs an arm and a leg. a blu-ray convert kit for the pc costs all together about 500$ the blu-ray-rw's are like 50$ for 10. so you figure id spend almost 3,000 to convert my dvds to blu-ray, thats not adding the 3-4 hours each dvd would take to convert to blu-ray.
I will wait another 4-5 years until i start to update my dvd collection to blu-ray.
And yes i have a blu-ray player and i have a ps3. So dont try to reply with "he doesnt have the equiptment" because I do.
Dude, you are spot on!
The blu boys are out in full force! Most of your points are valid not to mention that the Blu-ray players specs still are not finished! To even have a blu-ray player with the same features as HD-DVD you need to wait until profile 2.0! That while ship maybe near the end-of-the year. Best to wait til then and see what is available. Give me a really good download and I'll take it in a heartbeat.
I stick with blue ray
It'll be several years(decades) before downloadable gets as good as blu ray disks. AppleTV HD are just a fraction of blu ray HD. By then Blu ray will go away with the CDs, DVDs and the dodo birds.
I stick to Blu-ray...
Seriously, all of your "reasons" are a joke. Nothing compares to Blu-ray as far as picture and audio quality. It's the same reason that people were willing to pay more for Blu-ray than for HD DVD. People don't care of interactivity or PiP content, nor do that want to have to download a movie. What people DO seem to want, and what they said they wanted when Blu-ray won the format war, is simply awesome picture and audio quality, which you'll only get from Blu-ray. For standard DVD quality maybe, but for TRUE high definition, downloads won't last long.
No Toshiba dollars or job offer
Some folks misunderstood this column as being HD DVD vs. Blu-ray. It was meant as disk vs. the alternatives. And it was one man's opinion from experience.
The HD disk formats just didn't look that much better on my 42" plasma than did the alternatives, which impressed me with their convenience. Most performed better than I expected. I almost exclusively rent disks. I don't like the restrictions, especially the 24-hour viewing window.
I presume Blu-ray won mostly on technical merit. It did also have the sexier name, eh?
Yes, I own an HD DVD player, for which I recently paid about $100, almost on a lark. At that price, why not try it? I didn't buy any HD DVD movies. I didn't have a dog in the format fight.
XStreamHD was courteous enough to let us use their logo to illustrate the piece. No dollars from them, either.
Well...
On a 42" display, you have a point. I presume you were to far back for your eyes to see a distinct difference. There in lyes the conundrum. Your eyes can only see so much detail at a certain distance. However, put you screen at 55 or perhaps a 110" projecter..and its obvious. Or sit close enough, and it will be as well. It will be interesting to see if the marketing or REAL improvment will win out in this. However your piece seemed to be without these considerations.
XstreamHD: subscription via satellite
Toshiba: upconverting DVD players
Comcast: subscritpion via coax
Verizon: subscription via fiber
Vudu: digital download rental
AppleTV: digital download rental
WNBC: OTA (over the air)
1 of those isn't even HD. Upconverting DVD can only get you so far and it isn't HD. OTA is free, so no competition there for HD dollars. You really only have 2 alternatives with several different providers each. Face it, this article is nothing but dreck. Beginning with listing Toshiba when meaning upconverting DVD players, say what you actually mean. Following with listing XstreamHD which is still, for all intents and purposes, vaporware. And all of them provide PQ/AQ that is inferior to what you can get from Blu-ray with perhaps the exception being XstreamHD but then, see my previous point, we have no idea how good or bad it will actually be.
Hmm
Nice paid advertisement that you pass off as a "blog". I see the XStreamHD paid advertisement right at the top off the page. You're a hilariously unqualified person to be posting a blog such as this. Go get educated and come back to me with some real reasons to abandon a growing format.
PS - Viva physical media!
Downloads are the future of music, which is used as a background activity (exercising, driving, etc.) -- When you watch a movie, it requires your full attention and you want it to look and sound its best. Collectors will ALWAYS want something they can actually hold onto.
BLURAY.COM PS3 FANATICS
The only reason there are so many posts against your Article is because it was posted on bluray.com the home of the most hatefull deluded fanyboys any product has ever had a following of. Go and read some of the posts over there and you will see that the success Bluray has enjoyed so far is due to a Hardcore group of earlyadopters and PS3 lovers.
DAVID = BITTER HD-DVD FANATIC
Funny how all of those services are failing miserably. Even Apple's iTV is dogged by poor sales and is the only product in their lineup that they actually lose money on.
Dots
I'm in my fifties ,lived through the dot thing years ago,
do ya know what trinatron is? Now I get to go through square
dots . Yaaaaaaa enhanced colors? Is it worth it?
I'm so sorry!
You bought an HD DVD player didn't you, Dave?
I don't know why everyone is being so mean to you! I empathize with you. It really sucks to fork out all that money and be told it was a COMPLETE waste! You just bought the most expensive DVD player that will ever exist. I'm so sorry.
1080p is the biggest rip off, so are upconverts
Upconvert players, such as the toshiba and others mentioned above do almost nothing to standard dvds. The 3:2 pulldown technology provided in these devices are often less quality than the tv's themselves. That is why your better off to just connect any standard dvd player to your tv via component and let the tv upconvert, rather than the player. I guess you might see an advantage of upconvert players on tv's such as Vizio, Olevia, Westinghouse, and other valued brands, but for the most part they are a waste of money.
As far as 1080p is concrened it does not make a lick of difference on tv's up to 50 inches, unless you like to watch your tv from 3ft away. The naked eye is only capable of so much. Save the money and buy 1366 x 768 resolution tv (720p).
I'm kind of interested in this XStreamHD box. Blu Ray does not look good because it outputs 1080p, it looks good due to the fact is operating at a 60 frame per second rate. Now if this XStreamHD will offer the same feature it just might give blu ray a run for the money. AS we know right now HD broadcasts tend to have some bandwith issues. We all know video rental stores are on there way out. Having the convience of renting through a box at home with the same cost of renting at a video store is on the rise and the recent decline in sales at video stores has proven this.
You can't see the difference?
I'm sorry, but if you can't see the difference between the uber compressed broadcast channels against a quality Blu-ray transfer, you my friend, need to get a new prescription from your eye doctor.
A Response To Dave
Dave wrote the following:
"Some folks misunderstood this column as being HD DVD vs. Blu-ray. It was meant as disk vs. the alternatives. And it was one man's opinion from experience."
I don't believe many people confused this post as being HD DVD vs Blu-ray. The problem with your "column" is that your opinions don't really seem based on experience and that your opinions don't seem to mesh with the general consensus of most peoples experience with HD content.
"The HD disk formats just didn't look that much better on my 42" plasma than did the alternatives, which impressed me with their convenience. Most performed better than I expected. I almost exclusively rent disks. I don't like the restrictions, especially the 24-hour viewing window."
Which alternatives, exactly?? How did you test or experience XStreamHD, since it isn't in production yet? You mentioned it as a viable option -- the first thing on your list, no less -- yet, you have not true knowledge of what kind of product it is, right? Do own or did you test Vudu and AppleTV? What is your experience with any of the products you listed?
"Yes, I own an HD DVD player, for which I recently paid about $100, almost on a lark. At that price, why not try it? I didn't buy any HD DVD movies. I didn't have a dog in the format fight."
It seems like you do have something against Blu-ray, specifically, in that you came up with 7 reasons to suggest others not to use the product. You didn't write this article a month ago when there was still some hope of HD-DVD making it through the year and in doing so you're only critiquing the winning product, not both the products that had fairly similar features (ie disc based, 1080p, new formats, etc.). You waited until a couple of days after Toshiba dropped out, thus making Blu-ray the winner, to make a statement about Blu-ray, again specifically, and how it does and does not compare to your list of alternatives.
Additionally, If the alternatives you listed performed so great for you, why would you continue to own a HD-DVD player? Given that there will be very few new films released in that format in the near future and no films in the not so near future, it seems like a silly investment. Being a "geek" and all, I would imagine you already have a nice upconverting DVD player in your home theater. I can't imagine you'd be qualified to write an article about the future of HD equipment and not, in fact, have a decent home theater set up.
"XStreamHD was courteous enough to let us use their logo to illustrate the piece. No dollars from them, either."
That just tells me you're dumb or a liar. If you give free advertising to a company and promote their products, without ever having tested them, and get nothing in exchange, then you're being used. I'm willing to bet that you got something for doing them a favor, it may not have been dollars, but you received something.
The recap: you're a liar and shill and you should not be writing about things you obviously know very little about.
1080P native is the way to go
1080P does provide a noticably more detailed picture on panels as small as 42", provided they support 1080p native resolution.
So many of the cheap panels on the market today downconvert 1080i/p to a resolution that is 2.5x lower.... 720p. It's likely that David is not comparing signals on a suitable set, like the poster recent poster who came to totally the wrong conclusions about upscaling, refresh rate, and picture quality.
If you're going to compare services HD, you need to do it using a reference platform consisting of modern >42" 1080p 24fps panel, with similarly capable Blu-Ray player, and a 7.1 lossless surround setup. Once you've benchmarked one of the reference quality Blu-Ray movies, then compare the same movie from the other service providers.
Don't forget to include the entire purchasing and customer experience... movie selection, purchase, provisioning, player operation, in-movie controls, additional content.... as well as the after viewing experience... pausing / resuming view days later... watching again months later... lending to friends... taking to the cottage... displaying on a shelf.
Let's see how the services all stack up then.
HDTV won the DVD war for me
I used to run out first thing and buy the new technology until I gut stuck with not only betamax but also the quick to fail RCA Discovision. Instead of rushing for the HDDVD I was sure would win I decided to sit it out until their was a winner. In the interim I upgraded to DISH HDTV package. I discovered there are more good films available than I can watch on any given month so the battle did me a favor. I have stopped dumping a couple of hundred dollars a month on DVDs and am in no rush to purchase blue ray. As long as HDTV continues to expand I have more than enough entertainment to keep me satisfied. So in my view, neither format won. The real winner is HDTV
Apple TV
Love my Apple TV with the new update 2.0. it is attached to my LG 1080p 47 inch HD TV and could not ask for more. Thanks Apple!.
The only benefit DirecTV and other satellite and cable providers have over BluRay now is that you can record HD programming. That's it. And this will be evaporating pretty quickly as BD drives are now available and you can now record on BD discs. Generally, you have to wait a bit longer to see some movies in HD on cable and satellite, but most new movie releases are simultaneously released in Blu Ray and regular DVD format. So I don't think any of those things will provide good competition for Blu Ray, but they will provide some alternative to people who want to get quick movie fixes without buying the movie.
Actually, the one format that can potentially still present a problem to Blu-Ray is actually regular old DVD format. It is so cheap to produce and the you can buy a DVD player for as lower as $40. However, I think this is a short run issue as Blu-Ray and BD drives becomes cheaper to produce.
BTW, if someone thinks there is no difference between 1080i on Directv and 1080P on a Blu-Ray, try looking at Cars on both formats. There is no comparison.
WAS THIS GUY DROPPED ON HIS HEAD?
WOW - MY PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN - I CAPTURE, EDIT AND FORMAT TO BD-J IN 1080p - AND NOT ONLY IS THE TECHNOLOGY EASY TO PLAY - I'TS EASY FOR AN INDIPENDANT FILMMAKER LIKE ME TO CAPTURE - THIS GUY HAS OBVIOUSLY NOT HAD ANY REAL EXPERIENCE WITH HD. MAYBE YOU SHOULD STICK TO WRITING IN HOUSE PRESS RELEASES FOR FOR COMPANY - COMCAST OR APPLE OR WHATEVER - THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN AND EARLY ADOPTERS LIKE ME SAW ALL THE ADVANTAGES THAT BD'S HAVE- LAIKE JAVA. I WAS PRODUCING BD'S IN 2006. MAYBE YOU SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN AN ARTICLE ON HOW BLU-RAY WORKS OR SOMETHING!
blu ray???
movies....you want to see a movie? get your lazy butt off the couch
an go to the movie theatre...hd tv....you better have a high def
pocket book when it needs fixed......
I dont think so buddy
I dont think so buddy ! you go ahead and do that, I'll stick with blu ray.
Feb 20, 2008 13:26:42 PM [permalink] [report comment]