The Viability of Blu-Ray?

ArlanKels · 10-08-2006, 05:42 PM

This is not game related. This is about blu-ray itself and not anything to do with the PS3. Please do not mention that item in this thread. Thank you.

As it currently stands people are primarily using DVDs to play and watch a variety of movies and shows. Some are even using DVD recorders, which are becoming more prevelant, and the DVD reader itself is becoming a cheap and common placed item in most stores. It has easily replaced the VHS, and most likely is far more durable than any VHS system could hope to be...especially since we don't have to worry about the recorder gnawing on the innards of our dvd players like we did with vhs players.

But with Blu-Ray currently existent it is somewhat...odd. Exactly how well is this going to work? Why should we bother with it? Should it even exist?

Given that Blu-Ray players are expensive(Some reputed to be in excess of one thousand dollars) this is obviously not for someone with a few extra dollars in their pocket. To be fair, the fact that it's for high-definition videos, which means you'll need an HD TV in order to use it to it's fullest, also puts a nasty price on it.

The last I knew of only a very small percentage of the population actually have HD TV's.

So what do you guys think? What's the exact future of BluRay? Is it going to get knocked over by HD DVD's, or somehow reign supreme?

Mike McC · 10-08-2006, 05:51 PM

BluRay does have more storage capacity than HD-DVDs. But these formats were only natural. Having discs with higher storage capacities is always a plus, because it saves on storage space and on materials needed for printing.

Sky Warrior Bob · 10-08-2006, 06:37 PM

Personally, while the industry is pushing Blu-Ray & HD-TV I'm not seeing change anytime toon. First of all, people are just getting to the point where DVD is the go-to device & now the industry to prompting them to upgrade? Not going to happen. The majority of the public aren't gamers, and are not going to stand for an upgrade every time technology improves.

And lets look at the Blu-Ray. More storage capacity, yet significantly more expensive than they DVD player you already have. The answer is clear, the public will stick with current method of swapping disks, until Blu-Ray offers something a bit more substantial than extra capacity, or if movies become something more than straight video.

I lumped HD-TV in with Blu-Ray because again, it is an example of the industry trying to push something that doesn't represent a huge improvement. Yes, in many ways its better than standard TV, but its fairly expensive & it isn't all that much better.

The TV hasn't changed that much over the years, and there's a HUGE backlog of old & used TV sets that people are still using. I just don't see the change happening all that soon, if at all.

SWB

steve11 · 10-09-2006, 12:42 PM

Blu-ray is not really viable compared to HD-DVD.

First both have an insane amount of DRM content protection. However blu-ray goes beyond that and adds in a whole boat load of blu-ray specific ways to screw the consumer. It was because of this that some movie studios support it in their never ending quest not only to end pircay, but prevent you from making back ups or using your disk over multiple devices (some talk of even using it to help kill off the rental buisness).

I'll not that it's because of that DRM that MS and other companies sides with HD-DVD, even though they have no steak in who wins.

The next issue is the actual quality of the image, at this point HD-DVD looks better, because it uses a better codec, however the few blu-ray movies on the VC-1 codec look just as good. So the end result is that it's all in the codec.

Durability: This is a tricky one. In theory blu-ray uses the TDK coating that makes disks very scratch resistant. However in practice that doesn't do much. The data is recorded so close to the disk that the slightest damage and it's done, and the disk spins so close to the lens that you get disk read errors like crazy, or god forbid it crashes into the lens.

Storage capacity: This does not matter for movies, it only matters in the IT industry. Currently it's a non issue. As dual, and even tri layer HD-DVD is common, yet blu-ray is largely single layer. However due to the fragile nature of blu-ray disks only an idiot would use them for storage. Furthermore holographic storage is just starting to reach the market, with 300gb to 1.6tb disks making both of these obsoleet already.

ChaosMage · 10-11-2006, 01:40 AM

Personally, I think Blu-Ray is just a case of Sony trying to push a format to improve what is looking like a dismal, dismal year for them.

Don't let the big talk fool you, Sony is having financial troubles. I recently read an article (I can't remember where anymore) that even postulates that the selling of the PS3 would actually hurt Sony more than it helps because of the amount of money lost, which is bad since the video game division is the only thing keeping Sony from massive capital losses on all fronts. Whats the best way to increase revenue?

Make someone rebuy their entire collection of something. Make them think they really really need it. Or at least make it more convenient to do so. I'm going to go ahead and say now that really, any argument regarding Blu-Ray is impossible to fully make without mention of the PS3. Here's why.

Sony wants the PS3 to be Blu-Ray's PS2. You know when DVDs became really popular? Right when the PS2 came out, and suddenly a hell of a lot more households had DVD players sitting around. The difference is that the DVD technology was fairly well developed and sufficiently cheap that Sony didn't lose buckets of money for every PS2 lost (though there was certainly money lost).

The way things are running now, by estimates done by Fortune Magazine, at $600 the losses on the PS3 are actually greater than the money taken in (ie, it costs Sony at least $1200 to make, ship etc one of these things). Which means that Sony isn't just losing a little bit of money on each PS3. It is losing more than it is taking in (rather than simply losing some amount on each PS3). Sell 400,000 of those (the initial US shipment) and you're suddenly in the hole $240 million.

Sony is counting on high Blu-ray adoption to cover those losses due to its recent acquisition of MGM and their rediculous movie library, along with the sales of games. But game sales alone aren't going to do it because market penetration is going to be low. Its hard to establish a firm presence when you're only shipping 1 PS3 for every 750 people in the country. And most of the games shipping with PS3 are semi-generic revamps of old games. So the movies are going to have to be where that money comes back. Who will buy Blu-ray movies right off the bat?

People that own Blu-ray players and HDTVs.

Who owns Blu-ray players and HDTVs?

People with a lot of expendable income, and people who own a PS3.

The problem is convincing people that they really really want a Blu-ray player, HDTV and/or a PS3. I think this is where Sony is making its foolish leap of faith. In the United States, HDTV penetration is 20%. In Europe, 10%. Japan, with its love of small things? Even less (Gamasutra). Certainly there will be increases in the number of HDTVs owned. But the mistake I feel Sony is making here is that rather than taking an established format and simply making it very easily accessable (DVD) they are taking a new format that is essentially untested and unused and trying to cram it down people's throats.

steve11 · 10-11-2006, 12:34 PM

It's even more foolish then that.

Anybody who owns an HDTV capable of 1080p (the only good part about blu-ray) is not going to watch blu-ray disks on a half assed console with a crappy disk player. They will shell out and buy a high quality stand alone player.

Remember how much the DVD player sucked in the PS2? The blu-ray player will suck in the PS3 just as badly.

I know several friends who have shelled out good money for a 1080p HDTV, and they all have the same mindset as me. I am not going to hook up a cheap disk player in a console to a 2000+ dollar tv, with over grand of audio equipment (needed for the true Dolby audio provided by high def formats), and wire the console into a several hundred dollar reciever. Hell no. I'll go out and buy a good stand alone player.

So the only people that would be watching blu-ray movies on the PS3, are people who didn't have an HDTV in the first place in which case blu-ray is worthless.

It's also worth nothing that DVD crushed Sonys format that time before the PS2, and that DVD had widely caught on by then. PS2 didn't really help it, where as blu-ray could end up taking down the PS3.

10-08-2006, 05:42 PM	#1
ArlanKels <-- Pickle Eater Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,244	The Viability of Blu-Ray? This is not game related. This is about blu-ray itself and not anything to do with the PS3. Please do not mention that item in this thread. Thank you. As it currently stands people are primarily using DVDs to play and watch a variety of movies and shows. Some are even using DVD recorders, which are becoming more prevelant, and the DVD reader itself is becoming a cheap and common placed item in most stores. It has easily replaced the VHS, and most likely is far more durable than any VHS system could hope to be...especially since we don't have to worry about the recorder gnawing on the innards of our dvd players like we did with vhs players. But with Blu-Ray currently existent it is somewhat...odd. Exactly how well is this going to work? Why should we bother with it? Should it even exist? Given that Blu-Ray players are expensive(Some reputed to be in excess of one thousand dollars) this is obviously not for someone with a few extra dollars in their pocket. To be fair, the fact that it's for high-definition videos, which means you'll need an HD TV in order to use it to it's fullest, also puts a nasty price on it. The last I knew of only a very small percentage of the population actually have HD TV's. So what do you guys think? What's the exact future of BluRay? Is it going to get knocked over by HD DVD's, or somehow reign supreme?

10-08-2006, 05:51 PM	#2
Mike McC Time is something else. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Wherever I am needed, I will be there. Posts: 5,065	BluRay does have more storage capacity than HD-DVDs. But these formats were only natural. Having discs with higher storage capacities is always a plus, because it saves on storage space and on materials needed for printing. __________________ WHERE MIKEY IS IN 2022! tumblrs - http://werewolf.zone twitters - @itmightbemikey

10-08-2006, 06:37 PM	#3
Sky Warrior Bob bOB iZ brOkeN Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: It's a nice place to visit... Posts: 3,755	Personally, while the industry is pushing Blu-Ray & HD-TV I'm not seeing change anytime toon. First of all, people are just getting to the point where DVD is the go-to device & now the industry to prompting them to upgrade? Not going to happen. The majority of the public aren't gamers, and are not going to stand for an upgrade every time technology improves. And lets look at the Blu-Ray. More storage capacity, yet significantly more expensive than they DVD player you already have. The answer is clear, the public will stick with current method of swapping disks, until Blu-Ray offers something a bit more substantial than extra capacity, or if movies become something more than straight video. I lumped HD-TV in with Blu-Ray because again, it is an example of the industry trying to push something that doesn't represent a huge improvement. Yes, in many ways its better than standard TV, but its fairly expensive & it isn't all that much better. The TV hasn't changed that much over the years, and there's a HUGE backlog of old & used TV sets that people are still using. I just don't see the change happening all that soon, if at all. SWB __________________ :bmage: Because breakdancing is evil, and so am I, you will click on this link: The power of evil compels you... You are in error. No one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation. Yes I know the breakdancing BM link doesn't work, and I don't care.

10-09-2006, 12:42 PM	#4
steve11 Troopa Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Washington DC Posts: 91	Blu-ray is not really viable compared to HD-DVD. First both have an insane amount of DRM content protection. However blu-ray goes beyond that and adds in a whole boat load of blu-ray specific ways to screw the consumer. It was because of this that some movie studios support it in their never ending quest not only to end pircay, but prevent you from making back ups or using your disk over multiple devices (some talk of even using it to help kill off the rental buisness). I'll not that it's because of that DRM that MS and other companies sides with HD-DVD, even though they have no steak in who wins. The next issue is the actual quality of the image, at this point HD-DVD looks better, because it uses a better codec, however the few blu-ray movies on the VC-1 codec look just as good. So the end result is that it's all in the codec. Durability: This is a tricky one. In theory blu-ray uses the TDK coating that makes disks very scratch resistant. However in practice that doesn't do much. The data is recorded so close to the disk that the slightest damage and it's done, and the disk spins so close to the lens that you get disk read errors like crazy, or god forbid it crashes into the lens. Storage capacity: This does not matter for movies, it only matters in the IT industry. Currently it's a non issue. As dual, and even tri layer HD-DVD is common, yet blu-ray is largely single layer. However due to the fragile nature of blu-ray disks only an idiot would use them for storage. Furthermore holographic storage is just starting to reach the market, with 300gb to 1.6tb disks making both of these obsoleet already.

10-11-2006, 01:40 AM	#5
ChaosMage Evil Makes Me Smile Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Where Spyware Comes to Die Posts: 904	Personally, I think Blu-Ray is just a case of Sony trying to push a format to improve what is looking like a dismal, dismal year for them. Don't let the big talk fool you, Sony is having financial troubles. I recently read an article (I can't remember where anymore) that even postulates that the selling of the PS3 would actually hurt Sony more than it helps because of the amount of money lost, which is bad since the video game division is the only thing keeping Sony from massive capital losses on all fronts. Whats the best way to increase revenue? Make someone rebuy their entire collection of something. Make them think they really really need it. Or at least make it more convenient to do so. I'm going to go ahead and say now that really, any argument regarding Blu-Ray is impossible to fully make without mention of the PS3. Here's why. Sony wants the PS3 to be Blu-Ray's PS2. You know when DVDs became really popular? Right when the PS2 came out, and suddenly a hell of a lot more households had DVD players sitting around. The difference is that the DVD technology was fairly well developed and sufficiently cheap that Sony didn't lose buckets of money for every PS2 lost (though there was certainly money lost). The way things are running now, by estimates done by Fortune Magazine, at $600 the losses on the PS3 are actually greater than the money taken in (ie, it costs Sony at least $1200 to make, ship etc one of these things). Which means that Sony isn't just losing a little bit of money on each PS3. It is losing more than it is taking in (rather than simply losing some amount on each PS3). Sell 400,000 of those (the initial US shipment) and you're suddenly in the hole $240 million. Sony is counting on high Blu-ray adoption to cover those losses due to its recent acquisition of MGM and their rediculous movie library, along with the sales of games. But game sales alone aren't going to do it because market penetration is going to be low. Its hard to establish a firm presence when you're only shipping 1 PS3 for every 750 people in the country. And most of the games shipping with PS3 are semi-generic revamps of old games. So the movies are going to have to be where that money comes back. Who will buy Blu-ray movies right off the bat? People that own Blu-ray players and HDTVs. Who owns Blu-ray players and HDTVs? People with a lot of expendable income, and people who own a PS3. The problem is convincing people that they really really want a Blu-ray player, HDTV and/or a PS3. I think this is where Sony is making its foolish leap of faith. In the United States, HDTV penetration is 20%. In Europe, 10%. Japan, with its love of small things? Even less (Gamasutra). Certainly there will be increases in the number of HDTVs owned. But the mistake I feel Sony is making here is that rather than taking an established format and simply making it very easily accessable (DVD) they are taking a new format that is essentially untested and unused and trying to cram it down people's throats.

10-11-2006, 12:34 PM	#6
steve11 Troopa Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Washington DC Posts: 91	It's even more foolish then that. Anybody who owns an HDTV capable of 1080p (the only good part about blu-ray) is not going to watch blu-ray disks on a half assed console with a crappy disk player. They will shell out and buy a high quality stand alone player. Remember how much the DVD player sucked in the PS2? The blu-ray player will suck in the PS3 just as badly. I know several friends who have shelled out good money for a 1080p HDTV, and they all have the same mindset as me. I am not going to hook up a cheap disk player in a console to a 2000+ dollar tv, with over grand of audio equipment (needed for the true Dolby audio provided by high def formats), and wire the console into a several hundred dollar reciever. Hell no. I'll go out and buy a good stand alone player. So the only people that would be watching blu-ray movies on the PS3, are people who didn't have an HDTV in the first place in which case blu-ray is worthless. It's also worth nothing that DVD crushed Sonys format that time before the PS2, and that DVD had widely caught on by then. PS2 didn't really help it, where as blu-ray could end up taking down the PS3.