specwarGP2
Regular
It's just rentals. It's a viable alternative for people who don't want to drive to the video rental store, that's about it.
*Rumors Spin-off* 360 & Blu Ray
- Thread starter patsu
- Start date
It's just rentals. It's a viable alternative for people who don't want to drive to the video rental store, that's about it.
Or those who really like tv . There is almost no tv series out on bluray and even then its only the newest seasons and at Bestbuys and the like they are $40-60 for series that are $20-$40 on dvd or part of the netflix package.
Maybe the logic behind giving a BRD option to X360 is to compete better against a more and more attractive PS3slim that's not the overpriced console it first was?
Just reading this thread - it seems there are people out there that own a X360, don't have a BRD player yet and see the PS3 as the most attractive bet to fullfill that need. If there was a cheaper BRD add-on for X360 though, that might change. If they sell it for $100, it's still cheaper than a PS3 slim and could be sold at a profit which would only make sense.
Just reading this thread - it seems there are people out there that own a X360, don't have a BRD player yet and see the PS3 as the most attractive bet to fullfill that need. If there was a cheaper BRD add-on for X360 though, that might change. If they sell it for $100, it's still cheaper than a PS3 slim and could be sold at a profit which would only make sense.
ShadowRunner
Veteran
With netflix now scheduled to be available on PS3 it is no longer a choice of either streaming or bluray. With PS3 gaining parity with 360s other media functionality lack of bluray is likely to be seen as more of a negative than before.
Perhaps but it seems you have to jump through hoops to get netflix to work on the ps3 and it may have the long load times common with BD Live content (apprently you acess netflix through a disc you load and run bd live off the disc) so it may not be as popular as it was on the 360.
Also considering we are now heading into 2010 ms might just feel that having 1-2 more holiday seasons with the 360 lacking a bluray drive is just fine with them. A new 360 can come in 2011 or 12 . Price drops should pave the way for them to stay competitive even with out the drive.
BD-Live long load time was a problem with earlier standalone Blu-ray player. It could take minutes to startup. However PS3 BD-Live stack is much faster than those. Newer standalone BR players also perform much better these days. Afterall, embedded Java runs efficiently on much smaller platforms.
From the perspective of a movie tech/service provider, it may not be a smart business move to alienate themselves from Blu-ray. e.g., Vudu consistently tried to separate themselves from Blu-ray, touting its advanced streaming tech. Unfortunately, Netflix came along and align themselves with as many Blu-ray players as possible, now they gain much better traction.
Microsoft has other reasons for their move because they have a different business plan.
From the perspective of a movie tech/service provider, it may not be a smart business move to alienate themselves from Blu-ray. e.g., Vudu consistently tried to separate themselves from Blu-ray, touting its advanced streaming tech. Unfortunately, Netflix came along and align themselves with as many Blu-ray players as possible, now they gain much better traction.
Microsoft has other reasons for their move because they have a different business plan.
specwarGP2
Regular
Older TV series are SD, so of course they're not going to be on BD. What's the point? they look the same as they would on DVD.
You could argue convenience with more episodes on one disk, which actually should be cheaper to produce and distribute as well. Plus they could be higher quality using higher bitrates and making the most of the extra storage.
People buy Blu-ray for a different reason. It's because they want to own the movie. e.g., I bought the Hunt for Red October when some retailer had a discount for it. It's one of my all time favorite Sean Connery movies. And I want to keep it. The same goes for Planet Earth.
For other movies I don't particularly care, I will rent. The Netflix streaming service will likely increase TV show viewing in my household. But we will continue to rent BR discs from Netflix since it's hassle-free. I will still buy District 9 and Star Trek when they come out. ^_^
At this juncture, I believe RedBox is the other fast growing rental services. You should be able to see them in grocery stores and gas stations. In their model, you simply rent a disc at very low cost ($1) without any subscription fees.
They will adjust their model and pricing to compete well. Don't be surprised if they raise the price for some releases.
Few people I know buy Blu-ray at MSRP. Most wait for Amazon to have buy X get Y free deals. The price you quote won't be the same as the average selling price. A few savvy ones will rip it too, so they don't have to rent different movies for different devices.
Quantum Leap and Knight Rider have HD transfers that appeared on the Universal HD channel. Don't know how common it was for old tv shows to be filmed rather than done on NTSC video.
Last edited by a moderator:
specwarGP2
Regular
Right now BD can claim a price premium over DVD because the audio and video is supposed to be superior to anything on DVD. Putting DVD quality A/V on a BD would only hurt BD's adoption, which is why there is so much criticism when there are poor transfers (doesn't look much better than DVD).
If (when) BD replaces DVD, I'm sure we'll see lots of older SD material, but until then it's pointless to purchase SD on BD when you can get it a lot cheaper on DVD.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
The issue here is 720p VS 1080p. There's a large difference from SD to 720p. It's obvious and everybody without exception can tell one from the other.
BR's big deal was always 'true HD' because of 1080p, and that wasn't a bullet point against DVD. It was a wedge against digital distribution, most of which comes at 720p. Which again, is fine for most people.
So DD doesn't need to compete up to BR standards to be successful. It just has to hit that 720p HD level and it's good enough.
I'm sure just like all the audiophiles who got their panties twisted over the .mp3 and the popularity of the ipod killing 'real music', HD fanatics will have a hissy saying that you need 1080p and that's why you need BR. But it's really not true. Most people can't tell.
Just like most people own physical media because it was the easiest form of access. With instantly available on-demand programming that can be repeatedly accessed for the same monthly fee as what was spent purchasing physical data, most people don't put a premium over having something in their hand. iTunes proves this point.
Physical media will go the way for video just as it went for audio. Only the ubergeeks who need the top of the line best system will require it. For the rest, the degraded quality will be more than compensated for by the ease of availability.
BR's big deal was always 'true HD' because of 1080p, and that wasn't a bullet point against DVD. It was a wedge against digital distribution, most of which comes at 720p. Which again, is fine for most people.
So DD doesn't need to compete up to BR standards to be successful. It just has to hit that 720p HD level and it's good enough.
I'm sure just like all the audiophiles who got their panties twisted over the .mp3 and the popularity of the ipod killing 'real music', HD fanatics will have a hissy saying that you need 1080p and that's why you need BR. But it's really not true. Most people can't tell.
Just like most people own physical media because it was the easiest form of access. With instantly available on-demand programming that can be repeatedly accessed for the same monthly fee as what was spent purchasing physical data, most people don't put a premium over having something in their hand. iTunes proves this point.
Physical media will go the way for video just as it went for audio. Only the ubergeeks who need the top of the line best system will require it. For the rest, the degraded quality will be more than compensated for by the ease of availability.
If looking from a pure resolution perspective, then you may be right. But the Blu-ray business and the digital distribution business are more complex than that.
There are available library, DRM model, billing model, release schedule, distribution coverage, quality, pricing, etc. to play with. The music industry lost total control because they didn't treat digital distribution with respect. They also got blindsided by iTunes.
Yes, digital distribution will play a huge part in the movie industry; but there are still quite a few years to play for disc-based businesses (Netflix says 20 years). In the mean time, the studios and consumers will try to milk as much as possible from both channels. For now, Blu-ray is on the up-trend.
There are available library, DRM model, billing model, release schedule, distribution coverage, quality, pricing, etc. to play with. The music industry lost total control because they didn't treat digital distribution with respect. They also got blindsided by iTunes.
Yes, digital distribution will play a huge part in the movie industry; but there are still quite a few years to play for disc-based businesses (Netflix says 20 years). In the mean time, the studios and consumers will try to milk as much as possible from both channels. For now, Blu-ray is on the up-trend.
It´s always possible to form an argument where resolution doesn´t matter.
People can´t distinguish between 720 and 1080, under which circumstances?
On a 28 inch screen, a 42, a 50 inch? PJ? a new TV an old TV? At which range? All i know is that TV´s are getting larger and larger (and smaller in some sense). And better and better as well.
Of course it´s a personal choice and often convenience wins over quality. But it´s to easy just to say "few will notice", it depends on so many factors.
When we have a subpar game here, just a tad below 720p we have no issue telling the difference
EDIT: The MP3 analog to Video is almost as good as car analogies in PC discussions
It´s always possible to form an argument where resolution doesn´t matter.
People can´t distinguish between 720 and 1080, under which circumstances?
On a 28 inch screen, a 42, a 50 inch? PJ? a new TV an old TV? At which range? All i know is that TV´s are getting larger and larger (and smaller in some sense). And better and better as well.
Of course it´s a personal choice and often convenience wins over quality. But it´s to easy just to say "few will notice", it depends on so many factors.
When we have a subpar game here, just a tad below 720p we have no issue telling the difference
EDIT: The MP3 analog to Video is almost as good as car analogies in PC discussions
There are physical limits that dictate screen sizes. In my home for example, it makes little to no sense to install a screen larger than 50" -- in fact, that screen would be slightly too big as 40-45 is my sweet spot in my viewing room. Just as I hate when I have to sit at the front row of a cinema, when I arrive late to a full house, I don't want to have to deal with that at home.
Most cinema standards recommend around 45 degrees field as ideal. 1080p can be resolved in 32 degrees. That's probably why digital cinema is 2k. 1080p is just good enough to meet the bare minimum to meet the farthest distance recommended, it's not ideal to support the ideal recommended or the closest recommended which is around 60 degrees field.
So how far back are you from your 50" screen for typical viewing ?
So how far back are you from your 50" screen for typical viewing ?
DING DING DING.
Netflix may not be ideal for the newest content but in terms of the amount of content you get for $8 a month vs Blu-ray costs at $10-70 depending on what you buy. That can get you anywhere from 90mins of entertainment to a season of tv (24 hours ?) . The $8 a month can not only get you unlimited streaming including dozens of tv shows but you also have acess to 1 movie at a time on dvd for the newest release. For $2 more a month on any of the plans oyu can get bluray disc rentals also.
So for many this out weighs the need to buy bluray discs as the content ratio is so much better in terms of netflix .
It will be interesting if netflix has any affect on bluray disc sales once it hits the p3
specwarGP2
Regular
As Patsu mentioned, it's much more complex than that. Movies are marketed and priced according to what comes in the box. Editions with multiple discs cost more than those with fewer. Take for instance the recent terminator 2 reissue. The least expensive version is like $15 and has only 1 disc. The most expensive judgement day edition has 7 discs (I think), an endoskull replica and costs over $100. This is for a movie that is almost 20 years old! How can studios generate these multiple revenue streams from a single movie if they're digitally distributed?
Similar threads
