• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Blu-Ray just not "catching on"

To be blunt, anyone saying that BDs are more prone to scratches (compared to DVDs) is an idiot. BDs have a special coating that actually protects them against scratching. I've received quite a couple of BDs in broken boxes that also came off the holder and they didn't have a single scratch on them. So I honestly have no idea what some people are doing to scratch their disks.

And saying that disks cost $30 to $40? Come on, are you shopping at HMV and B&N? Most new releases are usually only a couple of bucks more expensive then a similar DVD release (at places like amazon).
 
The thing is that Blu-Ray didn't win so much as HD-DVD lost. Neither of them had a particularly high adoption rate when compared to DVD. Add to that the current economic situation, and it's not really something most people are going to spend money on.

However, the idea that digital distribution will supplant physical media anytime soon, as the article suggets, is a pipe dream (see what I did there? :p) due to the immense amount of resistance any large scale HD distribution system will have from the ISPs. And we can thank the current movement towards bandwidth caps for that.

Really? Last I read that Blu-Ray's adoption rate is higher than DVD's was a decade ago.

That said, I'm all for digital distribution, but I agree that it's farther off than many hope. I appreciate the increased detail on Blu-Ray discs vs DVD, but since I have a PS3 it doesn't matter to me which format wins out in the end.

I'd also like to know why nobody seems interested in doing that.

I mean, I've never had a single problem with discs getting scratches (except with my Xbox 360, which despite being unmoved and on a very stable surface, chews every game I own to buggery and for no apparent reason), but something more hardy would be nice.

SD chips, cards and the like are comprised of multiple components, the cost would be higher than the relatively cheap cost of producing a DVD/BRD.

BRD's are also pretty darn scratch resistant, you'd have to really gouge them good to make them unreadable.
 
^ Naw, you're probably right. I just wasnt sure if you were referring to Sci or myself, who both embarked on a small disc-scratching tangent a few posts back :D
 
If they released the Star Wars and LOTR films on Blu-Ray I'm sure the players would start selling much more. :p
 
^ LOTR is supposed to be out in 2009, though the rumours going around are that it's gonna be the theatrical cuts. No official info has been released though.
 
However, the idea that digital distribution will supplant physical media anytime soon, as the article suggets, is a pipe dream (see what I did there? :p) due to the immense amount of resistance any large scale HD distribution system will have from the ISPs. And we can thank the current movement towards bandwidth caps for that.

Badnwidth caps have been a part of Australian internet users experience since day dot. Frankly I am shocked when I communicate with friends in Brazil and THEY are shocked that we have them.

We have to deal with it, maybe at some point you will too.
 
To be blunt, anyone saying that BDs are more prone to scratches (compared to DVDs) is an idiot. BDs have a special coating that actually protects them against scratching. I've received quite a couple of BDs in broken boxes that also came off the holder and they didn't have a single scratch on them. So I honestly have no idea what some people are doing to scratch their disks.

Yeah, the only time I've had a problem was with GTAIV on the PS3 and even then a quick wipe fixed it.
 
Sure the quality is better but the basic issue is cost... The mainstream consumer (the family of 4 driving a 1998 chevy, shopping a wally world) is not going to plunk down $200+ for a BR player when they can get that Apex DVD player next to it for $30.

Simple economics.
 
^ See that I can totally understand. I can also understand that a lot of people can't afford a new & expensive HDTV. I can also understand that some people (like my parents for instance) just don't give a crap. ;)
 
Seems like they might get better response for Blu Ray if they bundled it with the new TV's that are coming out.


I would think, as people are replacing TVs, if they got a BR player as a "bonus" (i.e.worked into the price), people might use them more. Also emphasizing that you can still play your old DVD collections would help as well.
 
We don't want to have to change formats every five minutes and if that bothers them, they'll just have to deal.

UHD, which has 16 times the resolution of HD, is currently expected to begin to become available in about 6 years. It should be able to display existing films in at least their original resolution. (HD, while a vast improvement over previous video standards, offers a grainy picture resolution drastically below that of theatrical film.)
 
I don't think people have bothered with HD because it doesn't make that much difference to them.
 
Cost of the player is still too high. When it gets down to around $100, way more people would make that jump. Same deal with the discs, you're paying about a $10 a movie premium for the BRD, most are skipping it to go with the cheaper DVD. One thing that might help with that is if they did something similar to what HD-DVD did, and release movies with the BRD movie on one side, and the standard DVD on the flip side. That would at least get people to consider buying the BRD version, as they would be 'future-proofing' themselves, and they'd be more likely to buy the player or more of those discs.

The other aspect is the 'so what?' factor. Blu-ray was touted as this next big leap, but aside from a better picture, they aren't taking advantage of it. With so many people with either old TVs, or HDTVs that are too small, or too far away, the DVD movie looks pretty good, and the BRD isn't enough of a game-changer.

With DVDs, it was a big leap forward. Way better picture, smaller package, Special features were a new thing, no rewinding, you can start at any point in the movie, etc. What does Blu-ray add to this conversation? They touted all the extras you could cram on the much larger disc, how you could get entire seasons of a show on a single disc, etc. None of that is happening, and right now, BRD movies are just regular DVD releases with better picture. Some have even FEWER features, waiting for a double-dip. If you can't add something worth making the purchase, there's no reason to spend the extra money on the BRD version. Definitely nicer picture, but except for a couple really visual-oriented movies, most of the time DVD is more than enough...

And at this point, Blu-ray is on borrowed time. Already rumors about super-DVD, or whatever they are going to call it. Why buy into Blu-Ray when it hasn't caught on after a couple years, and it's about to become dated tech?
 
I've got a Playstation 3 and because of that I can take advantage of Blu-Ray. I would have bought a Playstation 3 even if they'd stuck with DVDs or gone with a proprietary format.
 
I know that the industry is not happy with my attitude, but at least I'm not opposed of Bluray.
These days I buy DVDs only as a bargain and any new big movie I want to own even before it hit the theatres will join my collection on bluray.
but since BR is backwards compatible there is no need for me to REbuy everything I already own.
Well, except Lord of the Rings and possibly the Star Trek movies.
Why is that so hard to understand? DVDs won't go anywhere soon, since bluray is essentially only DVD 2.0 anyway.
Over time my Bluray collection will grow while my DVD collection will have reached it's peak. But it takes time. No one expected me to get 200 DVDs over night when that format was new.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top