Sony Announces Blu-ray Movie Pricing

[rabidrabbit]

Guite a few people I know have a HD capable display, not LCD TV or plasma TV, but a front projector.
And many are seriously considering buying one in near future.
Also many who've bought a new TV have bought an affordable HD LCD TV in 26"-32" sizes.
I'd say HDTV is catching on quite well here, even though there is virtually no HD content available
Personally, I'd wait some months to see how 1080p display prices will be, mainly the front projectors, especially now as Epson has just announced their new 1080p chips for PJ's.
There's really no hurry yet to buy a HD display here, as the only way you'd be able to view HD films is some HD satellite programs (or via HTPC or imported HD tapes).

 

[pipo]

I'd say HDTV is catching on quite well here, even though there is virtually no HD content available

I do expect awareness to grow over here when soccer-mania hits Europe. The cable companies are preparing a big push...

 

[London Geezer]

Don't get me wrong, i've said it many times and on here i seem to be the "HD yay al the way!" guy, things are getting better and will definately get better. I'm just saying that today, i'm the ONLY guy i know who has a HD-Ready TV.

Actually no, i just convinced a guy to get a HD-Ready Plasma the other day. He was gonna spend 1500 quid on a non-HD one, the fool... I made him get a 1200 quid HD-Ready one...

The above also explains a lot about people buying TVs today, he was gonna spend all that money on a non HD one, the idiot, instead of spending LESS for a fully HD one. Just because he really didn't know what HD is, and just liked the look of that 1500 quid one.

Thank god i exist.

 

[pipo]

The above also explains a lot about people buying TVs today, he was gonna spend all that money on a non HD one, the idiot, instead of spending LESS for a fully HD one. Just because he really didn't know what HD is, and just liked the look of that 1500 quid one.

Thank god i exist.

QFT.

Although I'm not sure about the last part.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Actually no, i just convinced a guy to get a HD-Ready Plasma the other day. He was gonna spend 1500 quid on a non-HD one, the fool... I made him get a 1200 quid HD-Ready one...

Why on EARTH are companies selling SDTV at that insane price? Apart from the obvious 'sell it expensive without features the user doesn't know about, and then when HD comes and they can't use it, screw them for the cost of another TV ha ha ha ha'.

Honestly, why make a fuss about HDTV if it's not going to get the backing it needs? They should ensure all TVs over a certain pricepoint are HDTV to ensure penetration while not cutting out the 'budget' TV market. They're just making more problems for themselves.

 

[London Geezer]

Why on EARTH are companies selling SDTV at that insane price? Apart from the obvious 'sell it expensive without features the user doesn't know about, and then when HD comes and they can't use it, screw them for the cost of another TV ha ha ha ha'.

Honestly, why make a fuss about HDTV if it's not going to get the backing it needs? They should ensure all TVs over a certain pricepoint are HDTV to ensure penetration while not cutting out the 'budget' TV market. They're just making more problems for themselves.

Well i must say, it was a Philips and the guy found it online... Don't ask me, i think he was just unlucky to find that one.

Point is, misinformation at its best isn't it...

There are still LOTS of SDTV plasmas around and people buy them because they don't have a clue. And sometimes they're even more expensive than HD ones, don't ask me why.

But from the companies point of view, for them it's all money, they HAVE to get rid of old stock (so do the stores/websites you get the TVs from, and sometimes they advertise 860x480 sets as "HDTV" - on the same line! - which is plain stupid) so yes, they're going "hahaha look at this idiot, he just paid 2 grand on a 4 year old TV! STOOPEED!!!"

 

[London Geezer]

This is how clueless people are: (it's a 3-way conversation so it might get confusing. It's basically me talking to this couple of guys. yes they're gay. and legally blonde)

i'm SO happy with mine. Mine is LCD though. i think you need to be careful what you buy. tell him to make sure he gets a "HD-Ready" TV or it will be like buying an old TV, and when the new Sky comes out in the next few weeks.
Mine is fabulous, and i can't wait till Sky goes HD, like in the US. Even normal TV is gorgeous on it, when the new HD stuff comes out it will make my eyes bleed!!



do u know what he's buying? Normally plasmas are more expensive than LCD but are bigger than LCD, and LCD gives better picture.

i think it's a plasma one. it's on sale in argos for 799 or 899. not sure about the HD-Ready bit, tho.



moose, have you checked it out? miss tv has opened up an advice column.....

problem is that an HD plasma will cost u much more than an HD LCD. But there are no 42" LCD, they tend to stop at 37 or 40.



If you really don't intend to ever get Sky or HD stuff, then by all means stick to old plasmas, but if you think you might in the future (and i'm sure u will), then might as well future-proof it.


Dixons are quite good, i got mine from them.



What is your budget? i'll give you a list.

Well I was gonna get this one possibly but it doesn't mention HD at all ?


http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/5361548.htm



and apparently according to the guy in john Lewis at lunch ( oh so technical) he said the resolution difference between plasma and LCD is non existent except that plasma can suffer from image burn ( where you leave one image on a screen for a prolonged time and it burns onto the screen ) ( but when exactly are we gonna do that !!!!)

so now I'm really confused , do I pay �600 more for the same size one in LCD hhmmmm damn you Danny boy now I'm lost

oh lord... (and now i'll scare u with my geekiness but it's for your own good!)



1) never listen to the staff. They just wanna get rid of old stock.



2) how far will you be from the TV? All these new TVs need to be watched at a relative distance otherwise you'll be very disappointed at how crappy it looks. Obviously the bigger it is the further away you have to be to have an acceptable image. That plasma has a 852 x 480 resolution which is just like your old TVs, just much bigger and flat, making all the flaws with old TV standards stand out even more. Mine isn't even a top of the range and has a 1366x768, which is double and will be perfect for HD material, and the difference really shows. If you're sitting closer than 4m to the TV, a 42" plasma will look like crap.

I went for a 32" one, cause at the distance i'll be sitting, it's just perfect, and these days u can find them for 850 quid.





3) This year all new High Definition services are launching, from new DVDs to the new Sky (called SkyHD) and that will solve the problem, but you really need to future proof yourself and make sure it mentions HD-Ready. That plasma would look ok, but unless you want to change it again in the next 12 months, you might as well get an HD one. Not sure you've been to the US lately and seen High Definition material... it's normal there, but here it's all launching this year.





4) remember that if you're gonna spend a grand, you might want to see a few sets in action before splashing out. hand on heart, 1500 quid for that one is a waste of money.


x

im not going over �1499 considering both LCD and Plasma have a shelf life or 4 years before they need replacing and lose the definition , http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/5361548.htm

and isn't this one 42 " LCD?

and its HD compatible as I just googled it

hehe welcome to the big rip-off scam from companies like Sony and Philips.



HD-Compatible is different from HD-Ready.



HD-Compatible means it will "work" with HD stuff, without actually showing you HD resolutions (bit like watching a video tape on it instead of a DVD).



HD-Ready is a standard which means the set can show HD stuff and has the right connections to do so.



Companies like Philips and all others really are trying to get rid of old stock by confusing people into buying something they don't know anything about.



Plasma and LCD have a much longer life than 4 years these days, unless you leave them on 24/7. Plasma do start to lose brightness sooner than LCd though. Both should last at least 10 years even if watched everyday for 8 hours.


i'll give you a nice list now.



To you it makes no difference if it's LCD or plasma, other than LCD looks better, so i'll try to see if there are a lot of 42" LCD.

my own tv guru hurrah

and your invited to come watch it fall off the wall and crash to the floor at our house warming party when we got it all sorted lol

In the end he went (or is going) for the Hitachi PD6600.

 

[rabidrabbit]

But the Hitachi is not "true" HD either, it's 1024 x 1024, not 1280 x 720.
It is HDCP, isn't it?
I know, to get the "HD Ready" sticker, the vertical resolution needs to be at least 720, and it doesn't care about the horizontal resolution.
As both resolutions are that much off the native HD resolution, the set has to do the scaling, and that introduces artifacts if the scaler is not good.
But it's much much better than the 852 x 480 resolution for sure, and close enough for HD, especially considering the price. Don't think I could find a better set to recommend at the drop of a hat.

 

[London Geezer]

But the Hitachi is not "true" HD either, it's 1024 x 1024, not 1280 x 720.
It is HDCP, isn't it?
I know, to get the "HD Ready" sticker, the vertical resolution needs to be at least 720, and it doesn't care about the horizontal resolution.
As both resolutions are that much off the native HD resolution, the set has to do the scaling, and that introduces artifacts if the scaler is not good.
But it's much much better than the 852 x 480 resolution for sure, and close enough for HD, especially considering the price. Don't think I could find a better set to recommend at the drop of a hat.

It's fully HD. The best HD plasma out there, the Panasonic LX500, has a resolution of 1024x768. They're not square pixels. It gives the best picture quality, even against panels with 1280x720 resolution.
It is also HDCP, as it has a HDMI port, and it's fully HD-Ready because it ticks all the boxes it needs to tick.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Well, I believe you. It does have more pixels than the 1280 x 720 sets after all...
HDMI doesn't guarantee HDCP, but that set should have it too.
I disagree though on that "LCD looks better". Both have advantages and disadvantages.
Generally plasmas are though to be better if viewed in dimmed rooms. The LCD's in lower price ranges often show washed out blacks and uneven backlighting, on the other hand, cheaper plasmas can have noise in dark areas, crushed blacks and colour banding.
On that price range, I think you're right though, that LCD's look better, which makes the Hitachi set even more impressive if it hasn't those typical plasma faults in disturbing quantities, which I am optimistic as Hitachi has made pretty good plasmas.

 

[London Geezer]

Well, I believe you. It does have more pixels than the 1280 x 720 sets after all...
HDMI doesn't guarantee HDCP, but that set should have it too.
I disagree though on that "LCD looks better". Both have advantages and disadvantages.
Generally plasmas are though to be better if viewed in dimmed rooms. The LCD's in lower price ranges often show washed out blacks and uneven backlighting, on the other hand, cheaper plasmas can have noise in dark areas, crushed blacks and colour banding.
On that price range, I think you're right though, that LCD's look better, which makes the Hitachi set even more impressive if it hasn't those typical plasma faults in disturbing quantities, which I am optimistic as Hitachi has made pretty good plasmas.

HDMI does guarantee HDCP, it's DVI that doesn't.
Not sure what you mean with "washed out blacks" but a set with unever backlight is a set to be returned cause it shouldn't do that.
The "LCDs look better" was one of those statement you make to people who don't have a clue really. He'd go "wowww" at the super-brightness of an LCD like mine, and it would be cheaper for him to get an LCD. At that size though, he's better off with a plasma.

And of course you believe me, you'd be nothing without me!

 

[rabidrabbit]

With washed out I mean the blacks when viewed in the dark are often more dark(ish) gray than black. Still pretty much an unsurmounted problem of LCD tech, though the better ones (not necessarily the expensive ones) are good enough already when it comes to deep enough blacks. Some people might even prefer a black that is not too deep, as that makes the image look brighter and the dark scenes "easier to see".

The uneven backlighting is also something I think almost all LCD sets have because the panel is lighted with various amount of cold cathode ray tubes or something, often with just four, one on each edge, which leaves the center darker than the edges.
The better ones have of course more, or better positioned tubes, so the lighting can be even enough. It never is equal to a display where each pixel is self light emitting though.

Yeah, I think you're right about the HDCP and HDMI. I confused the DVI thing with it.

Believe me, I would be a much better person without you. You haven't even given me any rep, not even when you got the Power

 

[London Geezer]

With washed out I mean the blacks when viewed in the dark are often more dark(ish) gray than black. Still pretty much an unsurmounted problem of LCD tech, though the better ones (not necessarily the expensive ones) are good enough already when it comes to deep enough blacks.

Guess you answered yourself, it really depends on the set. :smile:

Some people might even prefer a black that is not too deep, as that makes the image look brighter and the dark scenes "easier to see".

Well that is probably correlated to a problem many TVs have - not only LCD, but also plasmas. Some TVs just lose detail in dark scenes. A black should be as black as possible, still retaining detail inside that dark area. Also worth noting is that the source itself needs to be good. Some DVDs are encoded in such a way that they just don't have detail in dark areas, and there's nothing the TV can do about that.
In the end, blacks depend on so many variables, it's hard to pin-point. All i acn say is that my LCD - and it's not even the best one by a mile - now gives very nice blacks, after a lot of tweaking. Better than the CRTs i've seen.

The uneven backlighting is also something I think almost all LCD sets have because the panel is lighted with various amount of cold cathode ray tubes or something, often with just four, one on each edge, which leaves the center darker than the edges.

???? Back light means there is light all the way behind the panel. The tubes go all the way across the screen, not by the sides like one of those old mobile phone screens. Unless i've lived under a rock for the last few years and misunderstood how LCD panels this side of the 90's work.

Yeah, I think you're right about the HDCP and HDMI. I confused the DVI thing with it.

'Course i'm right...

Believe me, I would be a much better person without you. You haven't even given me any rep, not even when you got the Power

I tend to give good rep to good posters and bad rep to rude posters. I must admit i've been very close to bad repping you at times, many times, but didn't because it would have sparked a War of the Queers of unfathomable proportions.

 

[rabidrabbit]

You ***** ** *** ******** *******!!!

My (crappy, I admit) Hyundai 17" PC LCD display only has four light tubes, and they give very uneven lighting, not so much visible in adylight but as soon as I dim the room and watch anything with darker screens, it's very bad.
The monitor was bought two and a half years ago (new).

Edit: Ok, enough of this. Back to topic, which is
Blu-ray disc pricing.

 

[London Geezer]

You ***** ** *** ******** *******!!!

Wow you found all he 5 banned words in this forum?! You deserve a prize. A Barbie doll.

 

[NANOTEC]

1366x768...

 

[NavNucST3]

The interactivity of the title screens are hardly a pivotal point for the value that a BR disc could offer, imo. It's a nice icing for the cake, but it's the performance of the actual cake that really defines its reason for being, no?

If this does concern you, is it not reasonable to expect the support of BD-J features will come down to the implementation of software/firmware that should be readily upgradeable? This isn't really fundamental to how the optical system operates. I think it is safe to believe a PS3 BR player could be software updated when the time is ready and if it is Sony's intent. As for standalone players, you can always wait for a later model, and that is likely what would happen anyway if you are waiting for a more mass market pricing.

I didn't get the feeling that a mere update could incorporate BD-J into the system, while the article was short, you would think someone would have mentioned it. I also think you are slightly over-simplifying the situation. If people haven't bought HDTV sets which is clearly a better picture, why would they buy a BD-ROM whose feature set (when BD-J is not included) is the SAME as DVD. Because of BD-J not being included you also miss:

Also left out of the first-edition players will be the capability for them to connect to the Internet and download streaming media, for distribution throughout the home. This capability, we're told, also requires BD-J to be present.

As an HD early adopter, those missing things aren't as trivial as you make them out to be,especially since hd-dvd, according to the interview I read which lead me to TG, will have its featureset from the outset.

Sage: A couple of additional notes:

All 1st generation HD DVD players will ship with iHD support, allowing much more flexible interactivity design than DVD.
All 1st generation HD DVD players will ship with features such as Picture-in-Picture, that content authors can take advantage of.
All 1st generation HD DVD players will ship with network connectivity.

NOTE: the reason I posted this in this thread is because we have had the most sane discussion. I also posted this here because I don't want to pay a premium price for something with artificially limited features. The last time I did that was a few months ago and its name was Madden '06 for the 360, not...gonna...do...that...again. I also posted it because I was wondering from a marketing stand point if the cases will need to be marked with (*) denoting features that can only be used on the "full-profile" machines. Because in the US every company is one customer away from a class-action law suit.

 

[Mr. Hanky]

Delivering the movie is the primary factor, afaic. Fancy interactive menu screens are nice, but if they are simply less fancy (standard DVD menus), I'm not going to lose much sleep. I believe some members here have already strongly commented in the past that they could really care less for extra/bonus material on DVD's, anyway. So I'm sure they would similarly not care if they could view PIP material alongside the actual movie or not. (Personally, I do enjoy the extra material depending on the movie, but it is definitely still "B-side" material for me to get to, aside from actually watching and enjoying the movie.)

At the same time, if you are the "early adopter" of anything, you are fully aware that potentially not every feature is completely ironed-out for the first model of the product. It's not a desireable or encouraged aspect- it just is.

 

[cthellis42]

As an HD early adopter, those missing things aren't as trivial as you make them out to be,especially since hd-dvd, according to the interview I read which lead me to TG, will have its featureset from the outset.

Actually, it seems like HD-DVD is getting caught up in the same kind of thing.

Toshiba American Consumer Products on Thursday announced an ambitious marketing push in support of HD-DVD but conceded that some of the high-definition optical disc format's interactive features won't be available in the two first-generation players slated to hit stores next month without a "firmware upgrade."

Some better news regarding the possible AACS-related delay, though:

Meanwhile, sources close to the rival Blu-ray Disc camp say an agreement has been reached on an interim license for the AACS copy-protection system both formats will use, removing one of the final obstacles that had been standing in the way of a launch.

 

[NavNucST3]

Actually, it seems like HD-DVD is getting caught up in the same kind of thing.

Toshiba American Consumer Products on Thursday announced an ambitious marketing push in support of HD-DVD but conceded that some of the high-definition optical disc format's interactive features won't be available in the two first-generation players slated to hit stores next month without a "firmware upgrade."

Some better news regarding the possible AACS-related delay, though:

Meanwhile, sources close to the rival Blu-ray Disc camp say an agreement has been reached on an interim license for the AACS copy-protection system both formats will use, removing one of the final obstacles that had been standing in the way of a launch.

Yeah, I read that earlier today, and it lets me know further that I will not be buying any of the first-gen players now, I would rather take that 500-1000 and spend it on d-vhs movies or more 360 games, the latter being much to the dismay of my wife. I am currently using the small white lie of, "I pre-ordered these, months ago".
However, if PS3 can get as close to full-profile (aka sans recording) as possible, I will have to give more than serious consideration to prepaying for that one. That would be a serious "coup" if the 300-600 PS3 comes with features lacking on say an $1800 pioneer elite, I'd buy one in a heart beat.