then bluray 4k is not the format for them. Its full of half measures and limitations because its based on an old format and shoe stringed to work.Nah, I want them to contribute to developing 4K Blu Ray.
You may be fine with crappy streaming media but there are many who want the best pic and sound possible.
maybe. With 8k tvs close behind 4k tvs I will wait it out. I have about 60blurays since 2006 even if you add the hd dvds to it that would be about 150 total (most of those were bought at clearance) that is a fraction of the 2000+ dvds I own/owned and still multiple times more bluray discs than anyone else I know. Everyone else has moved on to Netflix / hulu or renting from a service like iTunes or google play or even xbox videoIt'll still be better than anything else they're likely to offer.
Yes the broad market doesn't care about quality.
That is why MP3 and other lossy formats took over.
But there are some people who want the best quality possible. Who knows if 4K discs will be a viable business. I just want them to put it out and sell content for it, so there's an alternative to Netflix and Amazon 4K streams, which will probably be little better, if at all, than regular Blu-Rays.
2006: $300, 1x speed, 50GB capacity. Replication $2 per disc.maybe. With 8k tvs close behind 4k tvs I will wait it out. I have about 60blurays since 2006 even if you add the hd dvds to it that would be about 150 total (most of those were bought at clearance) that is a fraction of the 2000+ dvds I own/owned and still multiple times more bluray discs than anyone else I know. Everyone else has moved on to Netflix / hulu or renting from a service like iTunes or google play or even xbox video
I would have liked a similar capacity jump as dvd to bluray. It was 4.7 to 25 gigs or a 5.3 times increase in storage space.
Bluray 4k is 66gigs on dual layer . So 16 gigs more 1.32 times more or 100 gigs on a tri layer or double the capcity of a dual layer bluray. ITs very unimpressive for a 10 year tech jump
2006: $300, 1x speed, 50GB capacity. Replication $2 per disc.
2013: $25, 6x speed, 100GB capacity. Replication is in cents per disc.
H265 also provides 2x compression efficiency. So Bluray 4K provides a 4x improvement at a 12 times lower price compared to 2006, and it's using the same drive, supporting 100GB discs needs only a firmware update for most drives.
No.So what your telling me is that they went with costs instead of an improved format. Hmm what was the other brand that went with costs and a slightly improved format but really made up its ground with a better compression tech ? Oh right HD-DVD ...
Lets face it , Bluray 4k is not where the quality is it was done as a quick and dirty cash in . It wont be long until H265 is used for everything so things like Netflix and hulu and xbox video and iTunes will get the same advantages as Bluray 4k and file sizes have been increasing as bandwidth has gone up
Yeah, you're onto something there. It's better to have the better format rather than the cheaper one. Like Minidisc. And SACD. And Laserdisc. There's nothing consumer respond to better than the highest quality, no costs barred solution...So what your telling me is that they went with costs instead of an improved format. Hmm what was the other brand that went with costs and a slightly improved format but really made up its ground with a better compression tech ? Oh right HD-DVD ...
It's the content providers, the big 7 film studios, who decide which format they want. It's never been about the consumer.
I am using my zen breathing technique and I am not reacting to eastmen insecurities
No.
Netflix 4K is 12GB per film.
Bluray 4K is 100GB per film.