Blu-ray launching on May 23rd; player will cost $999

[Megalith]

Gamespot reports (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6145076.html):

Today, Sony announced that is launching another all-new video format used by one of its game platforms with an even more limited selection of movies. On May 23, the electronics giant will debut its Blu-ray Disc (BD) format, which will be used by the PlayStation 3, in North America with eight films of varying vintage, popularity, and acclaim: 50 First Dates, The Fifth Element, Hitch, House of Flying Daggers, A Knight's Tale, Resident Evil: Apocalypse, XXX, and the 1978 concert film The Last Waltz. They will be followed by a second wave of releases on June 13: Kung Fu Hustle, Legends of the Fall, RoboCop, Stealth, Species, SWAT, Terminator, and Underworld: Evolution.But while the variety of BD films will be limited, consumers will have even less choice when it comes to Blu-ray Disc players. Sony's announcement said that its BDs' debut will "coincide with the launch...of the first commercially available BD player from Samsung Electronics." That would be the BD-P1000, which will play HDMI (High-Definition Multimedia Interface) video at resolutions of both 720p and 1080i (720 lines progressive scanning and 1,080 lines interlaced scanning)--and will retail for around $999.
I can't help but think that this format is doomed from the start. The general consumer has no concept of what HDMI is, and the overall investment in the required technology is massive.

[xDrZaiusx]

wow, this crap is gonna go down like a led zeppelin

[Serapth]

...and that my friend is both the sound of one hand claping and a tree falling in the woods.

And somewhere else, atlas shrugged.

[Zanzibar]

Not much more to say.

Except: These MF'ers are insane.

[thecrazyd]

With the slight exception of Kung Fu Hustle and House of Flying Daggers: What a shitty selection of movies to play on your $1000 DVD player.

[Kamalot]

I've got a kick-ass projector with an HDMI connector. No way in hell would I pay $30 for a movie, just cause it is in HDTV. I get Over-The-Air HDTV signals using a $90 HDTV tuner card, and already that feels like a rip.

In all honesty, HDTV isn't worth it.

[askheaves]

I'd normally totally disagree with the assessment that high cost and low launch availability would necessarily spell doom for a format using the empirical evidence of DVDs. However, DVDs didn't hit the market nearly simultaneously with another equivalent format as well as with a significantly superior format on the horizon.

There's only 2 ways this will probably go:
DVD-R vs. DVD+R
two rediculously similiar formats 'competing' while every player on the market starts playing both and consumers could give a crap which they pick
or
Laser Disc
the prohibitive cost of equipment and media for marginally better quality which lasts far too long until overshadowed by a new format.

Don't you think Sony would have learned by now not to try to pioneer a media format?

[GrinR]

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/6545/giveafuckmeter2ik9el.gif

[Kamalot]

Wait a second...it isn't even 1080p?

I thought that's what the big to-do was over HD-DVD and Bluray; that they would all play in 1080p!

http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showpost.php?p=211076&postcount=118

What a rip.

[fnname]

I thought the competition between Blu Ray and HDdvd would cause lower prices? I would pay $400 for one of these...but 1k is mental!
The winner of the wars will be the cheaper format...
Plus do we really want to see XXX and Resident Evil Apocalypse ever again?
Where is HD LOTR and HD Star Wars?? That might spark some interest.

[Zanzibar]

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/6545/giveafuckmeter2ik9el.gif

That is god damned genius.

[Megalith]

DVD had so many obvious incentives though. No one could deny the leap in audio and visual quality, and although this sounds trivial, the novelty of going from cassette to a disc also helped distinguish it from the prior format.

Blu-ray is going to be placed on the same shelf as UMDs. Sorry.

[Mason]

The PS3 will be out this year.
The PS3 will have standard BluRay playback.
The PS3 will cost less than $500.

...pick two.

[AversionFX]

With the slight exception of Kung Fu Hustle and House of Flying Daggers: What a shitty selection of movies to play on your $1000 DVD player.

What?!

Terminator > thecrazyd.

[thecrazyd]

What?!

Terminator > thecrazyd.
Oops, missed one. I will grant that Terminator is a pretty good movie.

[Schnoogs]

The PS3 will be out this year.
The PS3 will have standard BluRay playback.
The PS3 will cost less than $500.

...pick two.

Someone once made the same argument for the PS2. I can remember having a bunch of friends over to demo my new Mtisu 55" rear projection HDTV. When I demod the first DVD on the PS2 the room went dead quiet...I looked at the image and thought to myself "fuck...the TV is broken".

Then I hooked up my FIRST gen Pioneer DVD player and BAM!!! The image looked great (at the time).

Moral of the story...if Sony is able to add BluRay for less than $500 to a cutting edge console I garuntee you they're using budget decoders, etc.

[DriveALW]

With the slight exception of Kung Fu Hustle and House of Flying Daggers: What a shitty selection of movies to play on your $1000 DVD player.

Exactly my sentiments. Kung fu rules, Sony sucks.

[agentgray]

Sony?

I'm not surprised.

Remember those analysts that stated the PS3 might be $999? Maybe they weren't wrong.

[thecrazyd]

Sony?

I'm not surprised.

Remember those analysts that stated the PS3 might be $999? Maybe they weren't wrong.
That is what they want you to think. So when they launch at 399-499, you will be think it's a steal.

[Nite_Moogle]

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/6545/giveafuckmeter2ik9el.gif
I lol'd irl. You win at life sir.

[Crabby]

Pardon me while I laugh my ass off over that pricetag and the futile efforts of Sony.

[DaedalusFolly]

When does BluRay porn hit the market?

Exactly my sentiments. Kung fu rules, Sony sucks.

PS: Not to derail the conversation, but I didnt care for Kung Fu Hustle. I wanted to, but I'd give it a strong "meh"...

[Achilles]

This is odd. It’s not saying 1080p, and $999 is a lot for something that’ll be in the PS3 at latest, later this year. If the first round of movies aren’t in 1080p, but the PS3 supports 1080p movies, will they re-release those movies later?

It looks like the movies are also going to be between $24.99 and $39.99 which is a bad idea, though usually the suggested retail is higher than the price you’d pay at a store like Best Buy when it comes to DVDs.

[Taco]

$999 for a reader? That's a bit wacko. Were DVD players any higher than 300-400?

[Mason]

Someone once made the same argument for the PS2. I can remember having a bunch of friends over to demo my new Mtisu 55" rear projection HDTV. When I demod the first DVD on the PS2 the room went dead quiet...I looked at the image and thought to myself "fuck...the TV is broken".

Then I hooked up my FIRST gen Pioneer DVD player and BAM!!! The image looked great (at the time).

Moral of the story...if Sony is able to add BluRay for less than $500 to a cutting edge console I garuntee you they're using budget decoders, etc.

I'd be floored if they could pull it off, even with a ridiculously cheap and shoddy BR implementation. Unless they're willing to slash their BluRay player prices in half in six months, there's just no way for them to deliver.

If BluRay had launched last year, the PS3 would be expertly poised to come sweeping in as the lauded populist BluRay savior. But the timing is all wacky now, so it really seems like they have a choice between undercutting themselves on the players and pricing themselves out of the console market. Or just sitting on the PS3 until the numbers even up.

There are lots of possible solutions, I just really hope they're picking wisely.

[Citizen Philip]

Gee Wally, I think I'll wait on this one.

Besides! I heard Lucas is working on making Starwars in 3D instead! Just imagine! Jar Jar. 3D.

Win!

[Achilles]

$999 for a reader? That's a bit wacko. Were DVD players any higher than 300-400?Yeah there were. The PS2 was far cheaper than most other DVD players that were available at the time, back in those days they were around $500, and they'd already been out for a while. My guess is that they're following the pricing they used on the DVD format in the beginning.

[agentgray]

This is odd. It’s not saying 1080p, and $999 is a lot for something that’ll be in the PS3 at latest, later this year. If the first round of movies aren’t in 1080p, but the PS3 supports 1080p movies, will they re-release those movies later?

It looks like the movies are also going to be between $24.99 and $39.99 which is a bad idea, though usually the suggested retail is higher than the price you’d pay at a store like Best Buy when it comes to DVDs.
Shutup! don't give them any more ideas to milk money from consumers! :D

[bean19]

Just imagine! Jar Jar. 3D.

I foresee this as the day a million televisions get shot.

[Zeal]

I said all of this years ago.

[WileE.Coyte]

I'll have to pull the old wait and see. I have HDTV and my DVD's look pretty damn good coming out of my XBOX 1 with monster component cables already. Even when I watch LOTR on HiDef HBO or TNT with my HDMI hookup, the quality is hardly better than my DVD player that I can see.

[trip1eX]

All new tech starts out expensive. DVDs and Cds did too.

[agentgray]

I'll have to pull the old wait and see. I have HDTV and my DVD's look pretty damn good coming out of my XBOX 1 with monster component cables already. Even when I watch LOTR on HiDef HBO or TNT with my HDMI hookup, the quality is hardly better than my DVD player that I can see.
Amen!

Here's a snatch though. I get PBS HD on air and it is the most beautiful, sharpest, and most vivid picture I've ever seen. It is better than DVD by far! DirectTV doesn't get it. None of the on air networks get it, but publicly-funded PBS is amazing.

My guess is that PBS is using as much of the signal bandwidth as possible and the other networks and DirectTV are not.

[Sl1pstream]

Remind me why I should buy a bunch of movies that weren't shot in HD in the first place while A) I have them in my dvd collection and B) I don't give a fuck about 90% of them.

[Achilles]

Shutup! don't give them any more ideas to milk money from consumers! :DAck, you're right. I mean; If they re-release the same movies at a bit higher res later nobody will buy them, and they shouldn't do it. Yeah that's the ticket.

Actually I think the whole 'super DVD' format movies will be a niche market. People already have their DVD collections and most are not going to re-buy their library for the kind of small boost in quality that you get from running it in 720p. So to throw in the additional extra purchase of a 1080p upgrade of a movie you already re-bought once in 720p and you're not going to find many takers. New movies will sell in the super formats, but a lot of what made DVD successful was people buying old movies/TV shows on something that wouldn't degrade and had extra features.

[Derella]

I just don't see the incentive to buy into Blu-ray. The insane price tag + the limited selection of movies just... doesn't make sense.

[Meatgortex]

Cable & Sat HDTV signal is compressed to hell and back, which is truly idiotic. When we start getting H.264 compressed signals instead of MPEG-2 then you'll start seeing a real difference in quality. Until then the over-the-air broadcasts will generally look far better.

[rein]

wow. Talk about a big let down on the all the way around on this one. Crap first title selections, no 1080p and a price tag that I will not come close to paying for something that plays movies. If they can get the titles out and 1080p I could see some people going for it. I think about the people who spent thousands on projectors to get that home theater built. I can see those people stepping up for a $1000 player. But for them to do it they would need a lot more movies and something a little better than what they are offering.

[xanthome]

There's plenty of tech heads willing to pay $1000 to have the latest gizmo. Plasmas/LCD/DLPs were well over $5000 in it's infancy and now you can get them for <$2000 and at costco no less. Early adopters will always pay a premium, no matter what type of tech it is.

I remember when I bought my DVD/LD pioneer combo player for ~$800 in early 1998.

But I get it, sonybashing is cool these days... :) Atrac3 needs to die, not BD.

[Schnoogs]

I'll have to pull the old wait and see. I have HDTV and my DVD's look pretty damn good coming out of my XBOX 1 with monster component cables already. Even when I watch LOTR on HiDef HBO or TNT with my HDMI hookup, the quality is hardly better than my DVD player that I can see.

Wow...you must either need glasses OR are using a 15" screen.

[Sl1pstream]

Nobody in my family has even heard of Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD for that matter). How are they even going to launch this thing in less than a month while a big share of the average customers hasn't even heard of the technology?

People will walk in to a store, look at a Blu-Ray player and just think of it as a real expensive DVD-player.

[Rafer]

$1000! Samsung is suppossed to be selling a blu-ray burner for around $500 (http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/26/samsung-sh-b022-blu-ray-burner-reviewer/) in a few months, how does just a player cost twice that? How do they come up with these prices, a dart board?

[Sl1pstream]

Yes, a Hawaiian dart board.

[Neosho]

Wow, sony is really, really content to rape themselves, loudly in the corner.

And bravo, grinr, bravo.

[Adam Blue]

I'll have to pull the old wait and see. I have HDTV and my DVD's look pretty damn good coming out of my XBOX 1 with monster component cables already. Even when I watch LOTR on HiDef HBO or TNT with my HDMI hookup, the quality is hardly better than my DVD player that I can see.

That's not true. The XBox doesn't even have a progressive scan DVD player.

Besides that, the rest is ludacris.

[Sensei-X]

$1000, ouch, the average consumer will look at it and probably say, "You know for $1000 I can go to Target and get a DVD player and a nice library of DVDs, or I can get Blue-Ray and see Vin Diesel's ugly bald head in high-def."

[shnastybiznastic]

When does BluRay porn hit the market?
Yes! I don't see a new format with (comparatively) little to offer the home theater market taking over.
But for something like porn? The extra space would allow for multiple angles, better more extras, etc.

And if the industry goes for the multiple angles and extras as opposed to higher resoloution, then they could possibly avoid having to hire better looking models, like during the VHS to DVD switch.

[kanzaki]

How can the player be $999 when Samsung's blu-ray burner is only $500? o_O

http://www.engadget.com/ <-- New samsung on there

[KamaItachi]

Could this $1,000 price tag not just to make the PS3 look cheap in comparison?

After the backlash overall the talk of how expensive the PS3 is supposed to be, seeing a stand alone player for $1,000 would make even a 500 dollar console look cheap if it functions as a BR player too.

[Mason]

Nobody in my family has even heard of Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD for that matter). How are they even going to launch this thing in less than a month while a big share of the average customers hasn't even heard of the technology?

People will walk in to a store, look at a Blu-Ray player and just think of it as a real expensive DVD-player.

If they had 1080p and the right marketing, Blu-Ray players could easily sell themselves as the latest status symbol. I imagine by this fall we'll have all of the local newscasts breathlessly reporting on the remarkable (manufactured) public interest in this exciting new piece of consumer electronics, and from there nature will take its course.

Of course, the current ~7% HDTV penetration (and way lower for HDMI) will be a major limiting factor, but at least your family will definitely know about the format.

[Dakar]

$1000, ouch, the average consumer will look at it and probably say, "You know for $1000 I can go to Target and get a DVD player and a nice library of DVDs, or I can get Blue-Ray and see Vin Diesel's ugly bald head in high-def."

But that's the point, this isn't for the "average consumer", it's for the early adopter.

Just like back in the day people were going "durrrrr I could get a bunch of VHS instead of this super-expensive DVD player.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

$1000! Samsung is suppossed to be selling a blu-ray burner for around $500 in a few months, how does just a player cost twice that?

HD video requires some pretty heavy processing power (relatively speaking) so that drives up the price of the standalone players. PC-based units can offload video processing to the CPU and GPU, so they don't have to include all that hardware. That said, I'm sure there's a huge markup on this (as there usually is on first-generation home video hardware), but it's probably not $500.

[DragonRushX]

super sweet, finally I can watch Hitch in all it's HD glory. Worth 1 grand? Your damn right worth 1 grand!! I just might buy 2.

[Gerbs]

super sweet, finally I can watch Hitch in all it's HD glory. Worth 1 grand? Your damn right worth 1 grand!! I just might buy 2.

Why stop at 2? Get one for all the T.V.s in your house, and one for when you travel. Maybe I can get a deal if I buy five.

[midrael]

Could this $1,000 price tag not just to make the PS3 look cheap in comparison?

After the backlash overall the talk of how expensive the PS3 is supposed to be, seeing a stand alone player for $1,000 would make even a 500 dollar console look cheap if it functions as a BR player too.

The more I think about it, the more I think KamaItachi is right. At first, I completely balked at that price. $1000??? You've got to be kidding me.

But I don't know. I wouldn't put it past Sony to set the price on a blu-ray player, for which they don't plan on selling too many units, very high in order to better position the cost of the PS3. This makes even more sense considering all the poor PR regarding the PS3 as of late.

[DragonRushX]

The leap from VHS to DVD was a huge one. Is the leap from DVD to blue-ray that huge?

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

It doesn't make much sense for Samsung not to price this thing as high as they think they can get away with. After all, the early adopters are pretty much guaranteed to be home theater freaks with deep pockets who won't necessarily balk at paying $1,000 for a player. They could sell it at a loss for $500 (which is apparently what Toshiba is doing with HD DVD) if they really wanted to rein in more casual buyers, but Samsung has no reason to do so because a) they don't have anywhere as much invested in Blu-ray as Toshiba does in HD DVD and b) Samsung has no media division, so they couldn't make up the hardware losses with software sales.

Besides, why sell the hardware cheap when they can wait for the PS3 and let Sony do it instead? It's more profitable from Samsung's position to target the Richie Rich types now and let Sony go after the mainstream. If Samsung wants to tap that market, they can wait till the hardware costs go down; the PS3, on the other hand, needs to appeal to the mainstream right out of the gate, even if that means Sony has to sell it at a heavy loss. I suppose it's possible the first-gen players are required to be priced like this to make the PS3 look like a steal by comparison, but such a move would almost certainly require the approval of the BDA board of directors -- it's not something Sony could do unilaterally.

[Kelegacy]

That's not true. The XBox doesn't even have a progressive scan DVD player.

Besides that, the rest is ludacris.

Hello, Adam. My name is Mr. Kelegacy. I will be your instructor for today.

Ludacris - stupid rapper

ludicrous - absurd, laughable

Example: It is ludicrous to suggest that Ludacris is a quality musician.

There's the bell. I will see you tomorrow, young sir. Have a good evening.

[mister_slim]

I doubt the price will stay that high for very long.

[Grimmjow]

maybe there doing this just to bump ps3 sales....what are you going to do. 1.pay $400-500 for a PS3 that can play BR and games among other thigns or 2. pay $1000 for a BR player and thats it....

[Chalex]

The leap from VHS to DVD was a huge one. Is the leap from DVD to blue-ray that huge?The max output of blu-ray/HD-DVD (1080p) is about 6x that of a standard DVD (480p) not to mention the improved sound. With the proper hardware the jump will be quite noticable.

[EternalGamer]

THe problem is that proper hardware is hardware that costs more than most people's automobiles. 60" HDTV's with HDMI are not the norm. With smaller HDTVs (even as large as 34 or 40") the average consumer probably won't be able to tell a big difference between this and a progressive scan DVD on a TV with good upscaling.

I have a hard time seeing how this technology will go anywhere. Even if it were the player and the media were the same price it would be an uphill battle to convince consumers to buy a new player and start purchasing their media all over again. But at rougly 10x's the cost of a standard DVD player and double the cost of an average DVD, there seems to be no way this will recieve mainstream popularity.

I think the more interesting thing is how this seems to confirm the cost of Blu-Ray technology. Up until now we have only had analyst speculations. I think Mason's play on the "problem of evil" is dead on. I personally predict they will offer two sku system like Microsoft: one with and one without Blu-Ray. It seems to be a much smarter option than either of the other two at this point.

Dan

[jeffool]

Hello, Adam. My name is Mr. Kelegacy. I will be your instructor for today.

Ludacris - stupid rapper

ludicrous - absurd, laughable

Example: It is ludicrous to suggest that Ludacris is a quality musician.

There's the bell. I will see you tomorrow, young sir. Have a good evening.:( But I like Ludacris. So far as mainstream rappers go, he's almost as underappreciated as Trick Daddy.

[Dirty Harry]

I said all of this years ago.
The only thing your even remotely good at predicting Zeal is when your next dump is and judging by the looks of your underware in your clothes hamper, i can safely say you're shit at guessing.

[thegameguru]

Couple things.. all modern movies were shot in "HD" given that 35mm has several times the pixel count of 1080P when converted digitally. So pretty much every movie will benefit in some ways from HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

Though the visual jump between SD and 480P is arguably more "impressive" to Joe Schmoe consumers than 480P to 720P/1080i

Visually there will be next to zero difference in the PQ between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies... I suspect HD-DVD's lower price will within 12 months incentives manufactures to both make movies and possibly dual format players.

There are a grand total of 2 TV's that have the neccessary HDMI transmitter version on the market today to take a native 1080P signal via HDMI.

And yes..neither TV is made by Sony.

All the other so-called 1080P TV's upscan 480i/480P/720P/1080i to 1080P internally via their HDMI ports.

Expect more and more true 1080P sets to appear later in 06 with the bulk arriving in 07.

Lets not even go into HDCP...

[crashedout]

If you really don't see the dithering, artifacts and lack of detail in current 480i/p dvd's(upscaled or not) then you won't notice the jump to HD. That being said, if the source is not effectively recorded it won't matter. A lot of what you see on HD cable is up-scanned 480 content. Mind you those scalers are very good but it is still scaled. I have not met anyone that when they see a proper HD setup are not blown away by the depth, clarity and detail that HD provides.

That being said, I think these players are DOA because people want to get their movies electronically, not via a disc...that is so 1980's. This is the 21st century who really want to spin their bits anyway.

[Chalex]

THe problem is that proper hardware is hardware that costs more than most people's automobiles. 60" HDTV's with HDMI are not the norm. With smaller HDTVs (even as large as 34 or 40") the average consumer probably won't be able to tell a big difference between this and a progressive scan DVD on a TV with good upscaling.

These are the same arguments that were around when people were saying VHS was all we would ever need. At the time there were very few Televisions that could do a DVD justice. So the mainstream stayed away from the expensive media/players until the price came down and they had a TV that you could see the differeence on, the same will happen with the next-gen formats (or atl east the one that survived)

I have a hard time seeing how this technology will go anywhere. Even if it were the player and the media were the same price it would be an uphill battle to convince consumers to buy a new player and start purchasing their media all over again.

There is no reason anyone would have to replace a single one of their DVDs, they won't magicly stop working (Every announced player supports DVD playback.)

The only reason to ever replace a movie is:
A) You broke your original
B) It's a movie you really like, and you think you would like it better on the new format

But at rougly 10x's the cost of a standard DVD player and double the cost of an average DVD, there seems to be no way this will recieve mainstream popularity.

The same was ture of every format thats ever come out. Cassettes, CDs and DVDs were all more expensive then their alternatives when they came out. The tech/video/audiophiles always drive the early market. It's not all that hard to take a niche and bring it to the mainstream. Everyone wants the cool new thing, look at what Apple did with the iPod.

I think the more interesting thing is how this seems to confirm the cost of Blu-Ray technology. Up until now we have only had analyst speculations. I think Mason's play on the "problem of evil" is dead on.

The only reason the players are so expensive right now is because you need some serious processing power to decode the video, much more so than a standard video.

http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=152825&sid=0c175088a3829609231c398df1477e60

Minimum for the NEC HD DVD player and Samsungs Blu-ray player:
Pentium 4 3.0 GHz (or Athlon 3000+) and a 128 MB videocard.
Samsung recommends Geforce 7800 or a ATI radeon X1800 for speeding up decoding of h.264/AVC or VC1.

Since the player makers are currently only making them in small quantities for a niche market there is no way for them to get the benefits of mass production Sony will have witht the PS3 which will already have a more than capable CPU (CELL) and GPU (RSX which is at least as powerful as the 7800).

I personally predict they will offer two sku system like Microsoft: one with and one without Blu-Ray. It seems to be a much smarter option than either of the other two at this point.

Sony stands to make significantly more money off of Blu-ray licensing than they ever could off the PS3. Being that Sony owns all the tech there is no reason for them to even consider leaving out the Blu-ray drive, the difference in cost is noting compared to what they have to gain.

[Chalex]

That being said, I think these players are DOA because people want to get their movies electronically, not via a disc...that is so 1980's. This is the 21st century who really want to spin their bits anyway.
That does nothing for the people who:

Don't have the kind of internet access that would require.
Dislike the idea of not actually owning sometihng physical.
Who would rather just get an electronic copy for free than pay for it.

I'm a little of the second and a little of the third, I have about 100 some odd "purchased" songs from iTunes (all from the Pepsi promos) and a few seasons of television shows I like that I found on bittorrent.

I would not even considered paying to download any of them, there is simply no benefit to an electronic transaction except that I'm left with less control over things I paid for.

[Zeal]

The only thing your even remotely good at predicting Zeal is when your next dump is and judging by the looks of your underware in your clothes hamper, i can safely say you're shit at guessing.

I don't even bother to question myself anymore. Accumulated knowledge. All based on experience.

Blu-ray will fail.

[KamaItachi]

I don't even bother to question myself anymore.

Neither does anyone else, but for all the wrong reasons

Accumulated knowledge.

What?

All based on experience.

What?

Blu-ray will fail.

Your face will fail.

[Mason]

But at rougly 10x's the cost of a standard DVD player and double the cost of an average DVD, there seems to be no way this will recieve mainstream popularity.

I think you're exactly right, but ignoring the PS3 for a moment, I think it is fair to say that Sony is fine with not going mainstream immediately. DVD players rocketed to the bottom pretty quickly, as there was enough wide-spread demand that competition brought it down. But Blu-Ray will probably adopt the HDTV approach: keep it expensive as hell to make good margins, and represent it as a prestige item. Lower the price slowly, so as to maximize profits without letting the bottom drop.

The PS3-as-marketed complicates things, of course. And Sony's still behind schedule on the whole "building demand" thing. But I'm sure Paris Hilton will be seen in public with a Blu-Ray player shortly.

[Royal Fool]

Sony stands to make significantly more money off of Blu-ray licensing than they ever could off the PS3. Being that Sony owns all the tech there is no reason for them to even consider leaving out the Blu-ray drive, the difference in cost is noting compared to what they have to gain.

This is true. Sony intend to rake in the money through Blu-ray, and therefore they will push the format aggressively. Leaving out the BR drives would greatly limit the marketshare, which means less profits from licensing and less individual BR players to brag about.

[Schnoogs]

$1000! Samsung is suppossed to be selling a blu-ray burner for around $500 (http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/26/samsung-sh-b022-blu-ray-burner-reviewer/) in a few months, how does just a player cost twice that? How do they come up with these prices, a dart board?


ITs probably a burner for a PC meaning it doesnt need to include video processing software and inputs and audio hardware, etc

[Wyrm]

Remember though, that the first few generations of PS2s were proned to break downs, and even crappy performance after awhile. So, even if it seemed like they were able to throw in a DVD player for cheaper, the DVD player also helped screw the console up, most likely because it was cheaply implimented. Just a thought.

I cannot, in my right mind, even pay for HD right now. There just isnt enough going for it except for the 360, which does look quite good in HD, but I cannot justify 400 bucks for a system, another 60-120 for a couple games, 40 for an additional controller, and a 2000 dollar TV to enjoy my set up. Even if I had a job, that is a rediculous amount of money for something that just isnt mainstream yet. Just like everything else, when it becomes more mainstream, I'll be able to get at it.

[kraemer]

You have to ask yourself, "What’s the plan"? I say this because I can’t imagine this HD battle is good for anybody except maybe one company that is betting the farm on the technology and it just may be Sony's last bet. First of all, who is going to buy into this new tech? Once the early adopters buy into the early units, then who’s left? The average Joe is going to be a VERY hard sell. DVD was a no-brainer over VHS "Its just like CD and you aint gotta rewind it" and of course the picture quality was a big step up. Now with HD disks how is Joe six-pack going to see the difference over DVD? "Them disks looks the same to me, bubba". The improved picture quality isn’t going to be immediately obvious until you get to the sixty inch or larger screen sizes. Does anybody EVEN KNOW when screens that big will trickle down to the mass market level?


Well as it turns out, none of that matters. What really matters is that is that a high definition system has to come along sooner or later and whoever owns the blueprints to that new technology is going to make some money. A LOT OF MONEY. This is because the royalties collected from high def disks and systems will be coming in for at least the next 10 years. So getting it into the hands of consumers and convincing them that "those old DVD systems are yesterday’s news" is a big priority. I really don’t think this is doable just by offering existing content in Hi def. Really, if you've seen King Kong is it going to be that much better in high def?


The problem is their still shooting movies at 24 frames per second when 720p high def is capable of SIXTY frames per second. If they want to blow people away with high def they should start shooting some of their higher profile movies in HD at sixty frames per second. This way they have some incredible content exclusive to HD that will melt the viewer’s eyes out. The problem is, I haven’t heard any talk about this. So really, whats the plan?

[Yeti2005]

The max output of blu-ray/HD-DVD (1080p) is about 6x that of a standard DVD (480p) not to mention the improved sound. With the proper hardware the jump will be quite noticable.

"The proper hardware" are the key words here. It's going to take at least a couple of years for Blu-Ray and HDTVs that can produce 1080p to come down in price. I thought the first gen Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players wouldn't even output 1080p (although the movies are mastered in 1080p).

The jump from VHS to DVD offered a lot more than the jump from DVD to next-gen DVD.

- Improved video and sound
- No more rewinding
- Jump from scene to scene
- More compact media
- Tape snags eliminated
- Extras, commentary

[Wyrm]

Yeah but shooting a commercial in HD is 300% more expensive than a regular commercial, so just imagine shooting an entire movie that way. Yikes. That gets pretty pricey. Not that they dont do it anyway because they can, but that's why they dont shoot it at an even higher quality. It already costs so damned much.

[nobody99]

A few months back I purchased one of the few TVs capable of 1080p, an HP MD6580. I spent the extra money to have the future-proof (hopefully!) technology. I'm Sony's target market here, an early-adopter - but there's no way in hell I'm going to buy one of these Blu-Ray players any time soon.

Maybe I'm not comprehending things, but go and check out www.wmvhd.com. This is a format that's been out for awhile, and you can go buy movies on it now. It's a standard DVD, and it can push 1080p, now. Sure, you've got to have a computer to run them - but with the HTPC market expanding as fast as it is, why is this format getting overlooked? Most of the people who would be in the market for the new format already have the hardware needed to play a WMVHD disk. I'm sure there's some financial (read: DRM) reason why it's being overlooked, while Blu-ray and HD-DVD are getting all the press. I've played some of their downloadable demos of the 1080p stuff and it's gorgeous.

Heck, I can put together a cheap HTPC capable of running WMVHD for a lot less than the cost of one of these Blu-Ray players, and can do things like record TV and play games on it too!

Lastly, I want to know what crack all these people who say "I've got hdtv and it's not much better than standard def - I think my progressive scan dvd is better!" are smoking. Maybe they got sold an EDTV and the Best Buy salesguy without a clue told them it was high-definition.

[Zolf]

Don't forget that video compatibility is only half the equation. Both new disc formats are using new audio formats -- Dolby Digital Plus and DTS-HD -- which means a new receiver/decoder to get the most out of your new $1000 Blu-Ray player. These systems are both going the way of the laserdisc. DVD took almost ten years to really take off, and it had the advent of 5.1 audio going for it. By the time either of these new formats gets a strong foothold, HD movie-on-demand service should be up and swinging iTunes style via Direct TV, Time Warner and Comcast.

[Royal Fool]

- Improved video and sound
- No more rewinding
- Jump from scene to scene
- More compact media
- Tape snags eliminated
- Extras, commentary

For the record, Laserdiscs were around way before DVDs and had chapters, better quality and extra audio/video tracks. But they never managed to become really mass-market like the DVD format has. They also weren't really digital and had rather crappy storage capacities.

The PS2 is one of the reasons DVD has become so popular. It was destined to do that anyway, but Sony managed to hurry up the process.

[Cubfan]

These are the same arguments that were around when people were saying VHS was all we would ever need. At the time there were very few Televisions that could do a DVD justice. So the mainstream stayed away from the expensive media/players until the price came down and they had a TV that you could see the differeence on, the same will happen with the next-gen formats (or atl east the one that survived)


I had been watching VHS movies on the same 32 inch TV in college for years, bought a DVD player, and immediately noticed the difference in picture quality. Same old TV. I also noticed that the media was a disk, not a videotape. I no longer needed to rewind, I could easily fast forward to different scenes in the movie. I could pause and get a very clear image (boobies), there was extra content that wasn't available with VHS, and I was able to watch most movies in their original widescreen format. In my opinion the jump from DVD to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray isn't nearly as big as the jump from VHS to DVD.

[fitbabits]

I had been watching VHS movies on the same 32 inch TV in college for years, bought a DVD player, and immediately noticed the difference in picture quality. Same old TV. I also noticed that the media was a disk, not a videotape. I no longer needed to rewind, I could easily fast forward to different scenes in the movie. I could pause and get a very clear image (boobies), there was extra content that wasn't available with VHS, and I was able to watch most movies in their original widescreen format. In my opinion the jump from DVD to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray isn't nearly as big as the jump from VHS to DVD.
You know, I'd been avoiding jumping in on this, but you pretty much hit the nail on the head as far as my line of thinking goes (especially boobies). :o

[51|RandoM]

These prices are fairly typical when you see entirely new tech added. There is a market that won't have any problem whatsoever paying these prices. That market already has $15k+ dumped into their home theater. Adding $1000 is trivial at that point, especially if it puts you a significant step ahead of your neighbor's setup.

[thegameguru]

For the record, Laserdiscs were around way before DVDs and had chapters, better quality and extra audio/video tracks. But they never managed to become really mass-market like the DVD format has. They also weren't really digital and had rather crappy storage capacities.

The PS2 is one of the reasons DVD has become so popular. It was destined to do that anyway, but Sony managed to hurry up the process.

PS2 had little or no impact on DVD popularity.

[fitbabits]

PS2 had little or no impact on DVD popularity.
You either left out the sarcasm smiley or you're being totally serious - I'm not sure which. :confused:

[Schnoogs]

PS2 had little or no impact on DVD popularity.

Everyone that I know had a DVD player before they ever got their PS2 so you maybe right.

[NACIONAL]

PS2 had little or no impact on DVD popularity.

Totally correct, DVD stands for its own benefits... here in Colombia, the DVD market is huge... almost everyone i know has a DVD player... and I still can count the number of friends with PS2, with the fingers of one hand.

well maybe is just this country....

[xanthome]

PS2 had little or no impact on DVD popularity.

Maybe not in the US, but in Japan the impact was huge! Prices on regular DVD players there dropped quickly after the PS2 came out.

[Shifteh]

So I can buy this thing for 999, or a fairly decent gaming computer.

Wow, that's a real hard one.

[DarkEternal]

The thing about this is if I wanted to enhance my movie-watching experience, I wouldn't go buy a 1000 dollar player. I would spend that on a new TV and be much more satisfied.

[overdrivechao]

I can't help but think that this format is doomed from the start. The general consumer has no concept of what HDMI is, and the overall investment in the required technology is massive.

People said the same thing about Color TVs, HDTV, handheld games, VHS, DVD. and PC's. Don't remember how much DVD players were when the format launched do ya?

[Sl1pstream]

So I can buy this thing for 999, or a fairly decent gaming computer.

Wow, that's a real hard one.

That isn't even the same thing. You can't compare a gaming computer to a movie player.

[Crabby]

That isn't even the same thing. You can't compare a gaming computer to a movie player.

What about the standard gaming computer that comes with a DVD drive?