I see that said everywhere. But Im wondering if both the PS3 and PS2 are used in the data to interpret that belief. Because the PS2 put 50 million DVD players on the market in a matter of two years and at a time where DVD standalone started to really catch wind in terms of sales rates.
I sure your assertion is true in year 1, 2 and 3 when you overlap DVD and BluRay sales. But I haven't seen anything that supports that notion in year 4, 5 and 6 when you include all DVD and BluRay devices.
The report credited the growth to PS3. As long as the choice is there, people can use it when opportunities arise. They also mentioned that 66% of PS3 owners watch Blu-ray movies whereas about half go online on PS3. Standalone BR players fell to $99 this year. For many who replace their DVD players, they may consider a Blu-ray player instead. BR players will get embedded into related media devices (PS3, TV, PC) too.
"Disc-based business is irrelevant" was never my point, only that disc-based business will never be as relevant as it once was in terms of market domination.
We already knew DVD sales is declining and both Blu-ray and DD growth could not make up the difference.
If you have a PC and broadband you already have access to DD.
Sure, Hulu and Youtube are free. Cables, satellite TV, Vudu, PSN Video, XBL and Netflix all need subscription plans and/or an additional player. More and more people buy or rent Blu-ray movies on their new players in the mean time. The DVD player argument doesn't help or block Blu-ray nor DD.
Cable is expensive, but that would only matter if Cable or Satellite TV's subscribers weren't many. But it has pretty expansive coverage here in the US, there are more cable tv subscribers than people who own bluray.
Yes, Blu-ray is borned in the age of TV networks. Their presence has already been taken into consideration by the consumers and businesses. Blu-ray sales continue to climb for whatever reasons. As long as there is a need for it, it will stay or even grow.
True, BluRay doesn't need DVD. But if BluRay could have used the existing DVD base it would have way more penetration in the marketplace then it has now. This is how DD has been able to penetrate so broadly and deeply into the market it makes use of the existing userbases of several different devices and services because it very cheap to incorporate.
That's what Blu-ray is doing too. DVD players break and people need to replace them. It also gets embedded into TVs and PCs. Streaming does not use DVD user base. Which old DVD players allow you to stream ?
Basically, you are describing how invasive and persuasive DD can be. The concept that BluRay players extending their features beyond just playing BluRay discs and serving as DD devices would be proof that BluRay is not going to be the dominant format that DVD became.
Nope. I don't think DD is invasive. It is different from Blu-ray. Whether Blu-ray will dominate, I don't think you and I can tell. I know it can play disc movies. Now I know it can also instant stream movies. It is also a HD movie spec and a consortium of media companies. Next year or so, the 3D movie specs is supposed to be out, plus 250Gb writeable Blu-rat format are under consideration too.
Furthermore, you seem to construe that my arguments are conveying that BluRay will not be a success or be a major content provider. I am not trying to argue that point. My arguments are relaying my beliefs that BluRay will coexist with DD with both as major players in a landscape that was once almost totally dominated by DVD.
That's a given though based on current spending trends. DVD is down, both Blu-ray and DD are up. It's been like that for the past year or so.
