[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

For new DLP sets, this is crap. The black levels on most new sets are great, the one I pointed out earlier is one of the better units out there in it's price range.

Even when they first came out a few years ago DLP's main selling point was the great black levels in comparison to LCD. They still have the edge over LCD in that regard although my experience with one didn't work out well otherwise.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

LCD's are better, and Plasmas destroy DLP. It's pretty obvious why this is, given that DLP's work by shining a giant light at the screen...

You're a dork. One of the best looking sets on the market are the sony LCoS screens which is an LCD with " a giant light at the screen".

Even my LCD rear projector that is 2 years old looks better in every regard over 90% of the LCD's on the market today and that is because it has said giant light and an iris.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

If you guys were trying to sell us on the idea that a HD-DVD player has to be under $100 for the masses to take it on what makes you think are willing to pay $230 + High Speed internet for something that lets them do little more than rent movies?

The problem with an HD-DVD player is that it doesn't offer very many benefits a consumer can easily recognize over DVD. Yeah, it has better image quality, but that's an intangible to a consumer. They know that DVD's already look good on their TV with an upscaling DVD player, there isn't a pressing need to go HD-DVD or Bluray. Because the consumer doesn't see much benefit over DVD, you have to be price competitive with DVD players.

The AppleTV bring convenience to the table. A consumer doesn't have to leave the house to buy or rent a movie. They just sit down and pick what they want to watch. This is a clear upgrade over DVD that a consumer can understand. I think consumers will be willing to pay more of a premium for a more clear advantage over DVD. I think $230 is a pretty good price point for what Apple is offering, $200 will definitely be the sweet spot.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Many High speed packages also have unreasonable data caps that renting movies online isn't going to help. Also a year from now I bet the ISP's are going to want a slice of the pie for all the increased data.

I don't know of many major U.S. ISPs that have caps that would get in the way of HD movie downloads. Comcast certainly doesn't, Time Warner doesn't have an explicit one either.

I'm sure ISP's would like a slice of the pie, but increased competition from companies like Verizon might put a stop to that. Regardless, it's another reason why Net Neutrality is so important...

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Have you ever been in a real Magnolia Hifi store? You know... not one inside a Best Buy store? Best Buy's Magnolia is not a high end store in the least.

Where did I say "high end"?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Gotcha. I'll have to call my friend and let him know that his 37" TV does not qualify his setup as a home theater. Thanks for setting me and him straight.

No, it doesn't, not in the usual sense. Sure, he can get a nice 5.1 or 6.1 sound system and make quite a bit out of it, but I'd usually recommend a bigger set for HT.

Have you ever been in a real Magnolia Hifi store? You know... not one inside a Best Buy store? Best Buy's Magnolia is not a high end store in the least.

Seems they sell Pioneer Elite, Denon, Martin Logan, and Vienna Acoustics, seems pretty decent to me. You can build a very impressive HT from the gear they sell there. Hell, they sell THX Ultra certified stuff, not shabby at all.

Why do you keep talking about HT enthusiasts when other people are talking about the average consumer? I'm well aware that HD enthusiasts with their 180 inch screens and their glass 7.1 speakers and batcave themed home theaters will probably prefer HD-DVD/Bluray. I highly doubt my local 9 screen movie theater will be moving to the AppleTV either. But you simply don't get it. The average consumer does not have these things. To the average consumer, the AppleTV now represents very viable alternative to Bluray, HD-DVD, and the format wars in general.

There is a complete disconnect in what you are saying and what I am saying. Yes, for you and your fellow above 60" TV owners the AppleTV may not be the best option but for your average majority of the market consumer the AppleTV is a very good option.

Get it yet?

The people who will get into streaming HD aren't HT enthusiasts, home theater lovers are the people pushing HD media, and that group is growing by leaps and bounds.

Jump into streaming HD, but you have no idea who was pining for Blu-ray and HD-DVD in the first place, you never did. Thus, I can't understand why you were ever discussing matters in this thread to begin with.

Got a clue yet?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

The problem with an HD-DVD player is that it doesn't offer very many benefits a consumer can easily recognize over DVD. Yeah, it has better image quality, but that's an intangible to a consumer. They know that DVD's already look good on their TV with an upscaling DVD player, there isn't a pressing need to go HD-DVD or Bluray. Because the consumer doesn't see much benefit over DVD, you have to be price competitive with DVD players.

The AppleTV bring convenience to the table. A consumer doesn't have to leave the house to buy or rent a movie. They just sit down and pick what they want to watch. This is a clear upgrade over DVD that a consumer can understand.

Sorry I don't see such a major connivence over your cable TV's PPV, Netflix, or even online mail DVD rentals. I think Apple TV is a better product now but not must have by the consumer standpoint.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

New sets? Most manufacturers are discontinuing DLP's....

Contrast ratios may be good but the black levels in DLP's are subpar. LCD's are better, and Plasmas destroy DLP. It's pretty obvious why this is, given that DLP's work by shining a giant light at the screen...

*sigh* No, they aren't.

Please, go study this subject and get back to us.

<starts the Jeopardy timer>

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

Where did I say "high end"?

It's definitely mid-range, solid stuff.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

You're a dork. One of the best looking sets on the market are the sony LCoS screens which is an LCD with " a giant light at the screen".

Huh? LCoS tv's have very poor black levels compared to even FP LCD's.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Even my LCD rear projector that is 2 years old looks better in every regard over 90% of the LCD's on the market today and that is because it has said giant light and an iris.

I really doubt that... Again, any projection set is not going to have great black levels due to the nature of how it works. You can't project black light, that doesn't make any sense, and because of that projection tv's never have that great of black levels. You might have a 3000:1 contrast ratio, which is arguably good enough, but that isn't all that great if the black level on your tv is bad.

(And yes, FP LCD's have the same black level problems, but they don't have nearly as bright of a blacklight, so it's not nearly as noticeable.)

Contrast ratio != black level.

Not to mention projection TV's are less appealing to consumers because they are much larger units. I mean, their big advantage used to be that they were cheap, but LCD and plasma prices are falling far enough that it's really a non issue. I bet your average consumer would take a 720p plasma/LCD over a 1080p projection unit.

[starman]

goMac, you sound like Apple's brainwashed you.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Why do you keep talking about HT enthusiasts when other people are talking about the average consumer? I'm well aware that HD enthusiasts with their 180 inch screens and their glass 7.1 speakers and batcave themed home theaters will probably prefer HD-DVD/Bluray. I highly doubt my local 9 screen movie theater will be moving to the AppleTV either. But you simply don't get it. The average consumer does not have these things. To the average consumer, the AppleTV now represents very viable alternative to Bluray, HD-DVD, and the format wars in general.

There is a complete disconnect in what you are saying and what I am saying. Yes, for you and your fellow above 60" TV owners the AppleTV may not be the best option but for your average majority of the market consumer the AppleTV is a very good option.

Get it yet?

You're the one who doesn't "get it yet". We're talking about home theatre enthusiasts because those are the people HD-DVD and Blu-ray are targeted towards. This is a thread about HD-DVD and Blu-ray, not the AppleTV. AppleTV is not now and never will be (at least in the foreseeable future) a "viable alternative" to Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

And has been stated repeatedly in this thread, you don't need a 180" screen and 7.1 to be a HT enthusiast. This is where the disconnect comes from - you have a very narrow definition of who the "average consumer" is and somehow think the AppleTV is a viable alternative to Blu-ray and HD-DVD for them. Why? Because they can rent 720p movies?

[starman]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It's definitely mid-range, solid stuff.

The point I was making was that if BB is putting Mags in their stores, then the "average consumer" must actually care more than goMac thinks.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

The point I was making was that if BB is putting Mags in their stores, then the "average consumer" must actually care more than goMac thinks.

I totally agree, the mainstream is moving up. The days of the average shopper buying a HTiB (home theater in a box) are almost over. As more people become aware of higher quality offerings for their home, and the benefit of it, that segment will continue to expand.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Sorry I don't see such a major connivence over your cable TV's PPV, Netflix, or even online mail DVD rentals. I think Apple TV is a better product now but not must have by the consumer standpoint.

I recently canceled Netflix and can't get PPV with the cable company without some serious monthly upgrades (I'd have to spend about $50 extra each month just to be able to get PPV or On Demand). The AppleTV is definitely more convenient for me.

Is it going to compete against Blu-Ray right now? Probably not. Is it a must have? Definitely not. But it's definitely going to be a cool option for HD in addition to what I already have.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Huh? LCoS tv's have very poor black levels compared to even FP LCD's.

No, they don't. *sigh*

/shakes head

I really doubt that... Again, any projection set is not going to have great black levels due to the nature of how it works. You can't project black light, that doesn't make any sense, and because of that projection tv's never have that great of black levels. You might have a 3000:1 contrast ratio, which is arguably good enough, but that isn't all that great if the black level on your tv is bad.

(And yes, FP LCD's have the same black level problems, but they don't have nearly as bright of a blacklight, so it's not nearly as noticeable.)

Contrast ratio != black level.

Not to mention projection TV's are less appealing to consumers because they are much larger units. I mean, their big advantage used to be that they were cheap, but LCD and plasma prices are falling far enough that it's really a non issue. I bet your average consumer would take a 720p plasma/LCD over a 1080p projection unit.

Oh brother, this just keeps getting worse.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

The point I was making was that if BB is putting Mags in their stores, then the "average consumer" must actually care more than goMac thinks.

Again, have you ever been in a real Magnolia Hifi or just the fake Best Buy ones? The Best Buy ones are hardly high end stores. The only reason Best Buy bought them is because Best Buy was horrible at actually installing hifi systems and providing service... It had nothing to do with the products Best Buy sells. Seriously, go into a real Magnolia Hifi store (if you even have one where you live). It becomes very obvious Best Buy didn't buy Magnolia Hifi for their product selection.

(For the record, I bought my TV at a real Magnolia Hifi store that has existed before the Best Buy buyout.)

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

You're the one who doesn't "get it yet". We're talking about home theatre enthusiasts because those are the people HD-DVD and Blu-ray are targeted towards. This is a thread about HD-DVD and Blu-ray, not the AppleTV.

This has been a consumer oriented thread. Why is this suddenly now a prosumer thread?

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

AppleTV is not now and never will be (at least in the foreseeable future) a "viable alternative" to Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

Again, you're making a blanket statement for every consumer that isn't true.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

And has been stated repeatedly in this thread, you don't need a 180" screen and 7.1 to be a HT enthusiast.

Actually quite the opposite has been stated in this thread.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

This is where the disconnect comes from - you have a very narrow definition of who the "average consumer" is and somehow think the AppleTV is a viable alternative to Blu-ray and HD-DVD for them.

Really? Now I'm the one with a narrow view of what the average consumer is? You're the one trying to pigeonhole the discussion and limit it only to certain kinds of consumers.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

Why? Because they can rent 720p movies?

Because it's convenient.

[starman]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Again, have you ever been in a real Magnolia Hifi or just the fake Best Buy ones? The Best Buy ones are hardly high end stores. The only reason Best Buy bought them is because Best Buy was horrible at actually installing hifi systems and providing service... It had nothing to do with the products Best Buy sells. Seriously, go into a real Magnolia Hifi store (if you even have one where you live). It becomes very obvious Best Buy didn't buy Magnolia Hifi for their product selection.

(For the record, I bought my TV at a real Magnolia Hifi store that has existed before the Best Buy buyout.)

Ok, dude, seriously, you're just not getting it. I NEVER said Mag was high end. Why would BB put a Mag in a store WHERE THEY ALREADY SELL EQUIPMENT?

[Eug]

So has ANYONE here ever been able to burn a Blu-ray disc that works in standalone Blu-ray players? Just wondering.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

This has been a consumer oriented thread. Why is this suddenly now a prosumer thread?

Again, you're making a blanket statement for every consumer that isn't true.

Actually quite the opposite has been stated in this thread.

Really? Now I'm the one with a narrow view of what the average consumer is? You're the one trying to pigeonhole the discussion and limit it only to certain kinds of consumers.

Because it's convenient.

"prosumer"? WTF? BD and HD-DVD were targeted at HT lovers, get it through your thick skull. I've setup 5.1 and 6.1 systems for retired grandmas and blue collar types, normal Joes.

Where did I say 180" screens and 7.1 were required for HT? Show me? I do it because it's my hobby, I have large amounts of available $$$, and I can share my HT with family and friends. Why are you guys so bloody clueless?

Why are you here in this thread? It's about Blu-ray, HD-DVD, and who won. The winners were HT fans, but since you have no idea who those people are, I can't see why you stick around.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So has ANYONE here ever been able to burn a Blu-ray disc that works in standalone Blu-ray players? Just wondering.

I've not bought a burner yet, but I'm interested in seeing how that pans out once 2.0 players hit the market.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Actually quite the opposite has been stated in this thread.

No, it hasn't.

I give up but I'll leave you with one final thought. This thread started as a poll. Take a look at the results. Only 38% of those who responded said they had neither Blu-ray or HD-DVD. So I think the "average consumer" is more interested in HT and high-def video than you might think if this thread is any indication.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

This thread started as a poll. Take a look at the results. Only 38% of those who responded said they had neither Blu-ray or HD-DVD. So I think the "average consumer" is more interested in HT and high-def video than you might think if this thread is any indication.

I don't think this thread is a very good indication. It's a thread on a geek forum, specifically about hi-def. There is going to be some selection bias here.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

No, it hasn't.

I give up but I'll leave you with one final thought. This thread started as a poll. Take a look at the results. Only 38% of those who responded said they had neither Blu-ray or HD-DVD. So I think the "average consumer" is more interested in HT and high-def video than you might think if this thread is any indication.

Actually it didn't. The poll was recently added. And people in this thread are hardly an indication of what the average consumer is doing.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, they don't. *sigh*

Look. Here's the problem. LCD and projection tv's work by shining a giant light at the screen. Projection TV's shine a much bigger light at the screen than an LCD does, so in general they are much brighter than LCD's.

Now you might say "But my $2000 projection TV has excellent black levels!" And yeah, your $2000 projection TV is probably going to have better black levels than this, but in general, if you take your average mid end projection tv, and pair it against your average LCD, the LCD is going to have the edge in black levels. If you take your average projection tv, and pair it against a plasma, the plasma is going to look far better. Plasmas have individual cells of gas they can light and unlight separately. Because of this, plasmas can actually turn off the light to a specific pixel, creating a true black, which is something an LCD or projection cannot do. (In practice, a plasma has to keep a pixel charged to make it more responsive, resulting from a very small amount of light coming from a black pixel, not enough to be noticeable however.)

I don't care how good you think your projection is. A pixel that has no light going through it at all is going to look blacker then a pixel that has light shining through it. If you'd like to argue with that, you need to take a high school physics course and learn what true black actually is.

(This is all of course putting aside that projection tv's have absolutely horrible viewing angles, which is again because of how they're designed.)

LED FP LCD's similarly destroy projection tv's, because again, they can actually replicate true black because an LED LCD can again individually turn off the light source to an individual pixel.

(And please don't bring up LED projection tv's. That is different and will only clue me in further that you have no clue what you're talking about.)

A high contrast ratio does not mean the TV can reliably recreate a dark black. The contrast ratio doesn't define an upper or lower bounds for the white and black levels. One could increase the contrast ratio in theory by increasing the white levels, but not the black levels. The only way to really guarantee a good black level is by choosing a better backlighting technology, and as far as it goes, projection and FP LCD have some of the worst backlighting, while Plasma and LED are at the high end. Yes, a TV with better black levels will typically have a better contrast ratio. But a TV with a better contrast ratio may not have better black levels. (That's called a false converse, you can look it up if you want...)

[Shaddim]

Blah, blah, blah. That DLP 56" Panasonic is still one of the best TVs you can get for $1000, and that was my point. However, it has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

Jump into streaming HD, but you have no idea who was pining for Blu-ray and HD-DVD in the first place, you never did. Thus, I can't understand why you were ever discussing matters in this thread to begin with.

and good night to all, I'm heading back to my "Batcave Home Theater" with "glass 7.1 speakers" to watch some more Blu-ray love.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

"prosumer"? WTF? BD and HD-DVD were targeted at HT lovers, get it through your thick skull. I've setup 5.1 and 6.1 systems for retired grandmas and blue collar types, normal Joes.

Yes, I'm sure the HT lovers were all over that budget 720p/1080i HD-DVD player Toshiba has.

The entire point of Warner going Bluray was so that high def discs became more attractive to the average consumer. Maybe you should email them and tell them it's wasted effort.

I seriously doubt Toshiba and Sony sat down and designed their formats with absolutely no intention of ever trying to get their formats adopted by your average consumer.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Where did I say 180" screens and 7.1 were required for HT? Show me? I do it because it's my hobby, I have large amounts of available $$$, and I can share my HT with family and friends. Why are you guys so bloody clueless?

Why do you make the definition of home theater so complicated? I would have never even bothered to use the term if I thought it would lead to some asinine debate about how big a tv has to be or how many speakers you have to have before you have a home theater system. I know plenty of people who have little 32" tv's and stereo speakers and they consider that their home theater system, and as far as I'm concerned that's fine by me.

You want to stop derailed threads? Stop making a fuss when someone with, god forbid, a 37" tv refers to his system as a home theater system. I really am not interested in arguing what the definition of a home theater is. If you don't want me to use the term, fine, it didn't even have anything to do with my point anyway.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Why are you here in this thread? It's about Blu-ray, HD-DVD, and who won. The winners were HT fans, but since you have no idea who those people are, I can't see why you stick around.

This thread has always talked about alternative formats. Should we cease all discussion of VHS, DVD, VMD, and SACD also in since they technically are not Bluray or HD-DVD?

God forbid we even mention HD-DVD or Bluray in the context of computers or managed copy on a Macintosh site...

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Blah, blah, blah. That DLP 56" Panasonic is still one of the best TVs you can get for $1000, and that was my point. However, it has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

I'm curious now... what kind of engineering degree do you have? Perhaps you're working on one?

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So has ANYONE here ever been able to burn a Blu-ray disc that works in standalone Blu-ray players? Just wondering.

This was tried and worked on the PS3, they haven't tried it on a standalone Blu-ray player though, so not sure if it works there or not. It should.

How To: HD DVD Exclusive Transformers Running on PS3

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I'm curious now... what kind of engineering degree do you have? Perhaps you're working on one?

Look at the price, look at the size, read the reviews.

It's rather plain to see, no engineering degree required.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Yes, I'm sure the HT lovers were all over that budget 720p/1080i HD-DVD player Toshiba has.

The entire point of Warner going Bluray was so that high def discs became more attractive to the average consumer. Maybe you should email them and tell them it's wasted effort.

I seriously doubt Toshiba and Sony sat down and designed their formats with absolutely no intention of ever trying to get their formats adopted by your average consumer.

It was cheap, I know a few HT people who bought them, if for no other reason than to get a cheap HD-DVD player to go with their PS3. DVD isn't evaporating overnight and Blu-ray will be a niche product for a while longer, but as more consumers become educated and buy better gear they'll buy more Blu-ray movies, it's inevitable.

Why do you make the definition of home theater so complicated? I would have never even bothered to use the term if I thought it would lead to some asinine debate about how big a tv has to be or how many speakers you have to have before you have a home theater system. I know plenty of people who have little 32" tv's and stereo speakers and they consider that their home theater system, and as far as I'm concerned that's fine by me.

The definition is simple, you're the one without a clue as to what HT is. Once you get one you can come share with us.

You want to stop derailed threads? Stop making a fuss when someone with, god forbid, a 37" tv refers to his system as a home theater system. I really am not interested in arguing what the definition of a home theater is. If you don't want me to use the term, fine, it didn't even have anything to do with my point anyway.

He can call it a duck for all I care, doesn't mean ****-all to me. I'm fine with the term, you're still confused who was pushing for HD discs to begin with.

This thread has always talked about alternative formats. Should we cease all discussion of VHS, DVD, VMD, and SACD also in since they technically are not Bluray or HD-DVD?

God forbid we even mention HD-DVD or Bluray in the context of computers or managed copy on a Macintosh site...

Waah. See a shrink, why anyone would be so bitter over losing a format war is beyond me.

Blu-ray won, HD-DVD lost, and HD streaming content isn't going to dethrone it any time in the near future.

[starman]

I love how goMac throws around his engineering degree like he's the only one on the planet that has one.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It was cheap, I know a few HT people who bought them, if for no other reason than to get a cheap HD-DVD player to go with their PS3. DVD isn't evaporating overnight and Blu-ray will be a niche product for a while longer, but as more consumers become educated and buy better gear they'll buy more Blu-ray movies, it's inevitable.

People don't buy better gears because they become more educated. They buy better gears when they become affordable and are suitable for their homes. If their living space is small, they can't have a 50" DLP projection TV. They'll probably have to settle for a 32" LCD or something.

There are many people living in the city that can't have a super awesome 7.1 channel sound system in their condos and apartments. A 5.1 surround sound system or even a 2.1 sound system is not suitable. Try cranking up the subwoofer when you live in a condo or apartment complex. A big no no. Also, many people hate wires that is required for a surround sound setup. They don't like having to hang wires on the ceiling or lay them in the middle of the living room. I'm looking at those wireless surround sound systems, so I can get rid of the wires.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Waah. See a shrink, why anyone would be so bitter over losing a format war is beyond me.

Blu-ray won, HD-DVD lost, and HD streaming content isn't going to dethrone it any time in the near future.

Blu-ray hasn't won. Far from it. HD content available on VOD and IPTV will probably be more popular than Blu-ray. You have AT&T, Microsoft, and Apple are behind some sort of HD downloadable content. Apple has all the major studios' support behind its HD downloadable content. Neither Blu-ray or HDDVD currently has all the major studios' support.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

People don't buy better gears because they become more educated. They buy better gears when they become affordable and are suitable for their homes. If their living space is small, they can't have a 50" DLP projection TV. They'll probably have to settle for a 32" LCD or something.

There are many people living in the city that can't have a super awesome 7.1 channel sound system in their condos and apartments. A 5.1 surround sound system or even a 2.1 sound system is not suitable. Try cranking up the subwoofer when you live in a condo or apartment complex. A big no no. Also, many people hate wires that is required for a surround sound setup. They don't like having to hang wires on the ceiling or lay them in the middle of the living room. I'm looking at those wireless surround sound systems, so I can get rid of the wires.

Not so fast, affordable 5.1 HT has been around for a very long time, in fact one can put together something that doesn't suck for $500. As people become more informed they realize that they really CAN buy such a thing. Now, whether it's suitable for their living space is another matter. When my sister lived in an apartment she had a decent rig, but instead of a sub she went with bass-shakers mounted under her couch. It was a decent compromise. Also, she ran flat speaker wire that matched her wall color, and used ceiling mounts for her surrounds.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Blu-ray hasn't won. Far from it. HD content available on VOD and IPTV will probably be more popular than Blu-ray. You have AT&T, Microsoft, and Apple are behind some sort of HD downloadable content. Apple has all the major studios' support behind its HD downloadable content. Neither Blu-ray or HDDVD currently has all the major studios' support.

Yes, Blu-ray won. Now it's simply a matter of time.

I still buy some movies through VoD, but I prefer to actually own the physical disc, like most other hobbyists.

[starman]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Blu-ray hasn't won. Far from it. HD content available on VOD and IPTV will probably be more popular than Blu-ray. You have AT&T, Microsoft, and Apple are behind some sort of HD downloadable content. Apple has all the major studios' support behind its HD downloadable content. Neither Blu-ray or HDDVD currently has all the major studios' support.

Whoa. Back up, Snappy.

Apple has all the major studios for HD RENTALS. Big difference.

And even IF they had them for HD downloads, already you'll see that The Aristocats (Disney) is NOT available to buy, rental only.

Just as I predicted. Oh, do I get the goMac "See Into The Future" award now?

Sorry, but digital rentals still have some digital management issues to iron out.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Not so fast, affordable 5.1 HT has been around for a very long time, in fact one can put together something that doesn't suck for $500. As people become more informed they realize that they really CAN buy such a thing. Now, whether it's suitable for their living space is another matter. When my sister lived in an apartment she had a decent rig, but instead of a sub she went with bass-shakers mounted under her couch. It was a decent compromise. Also, she ran flat speaker wire that matched her wall color, and used ceiling mounts for her surrounds.

Most consumers know what a surround sound system is and know that they can get it under $500. Probably is most consumer don't care that much around surround sound to go through the hassle of setting up a surround sound system and fork out the $500 for such a system.

Affordable surround sound systems have been available for over 10 years. I can get a surround sound system for under $500 10 years ago, although it was basic Dolby Surround. It just hasn't caught on. Too much of a hassle for most people. Most people watch DVDs without a proper surround sound system setup.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by starman 

Whoa. Back up, Snappy.

Apple has all the major studios for HD RENTALS. Big difference.

And even IF they had them for HD downloads, already you'll see that The Aristocats (Disney) is NOT available to buy, rental only.

Just as I predicted. Oh, do I get the goMac "See Into The Future" award now?

Sorry, but digital rentals still have some digital management issues to iron out.

Sorry to burst your bubble. With the attachment rate of 1 for Blu-ray, not many Blu-ray owners are buying Blu-ray movies.

I don't see many consumers dumping their vast DVD collections and start buying the same movies on Blu-ray.

I only see Hidef enthusiast with expensive audio and video systems doing it, which by the way is a very small market.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

In all honesty the thing that surprises me the most is how much time GoMac has on his hands and how little of it he actually uses to watch HD-DVD's and rent online movies online. It is he is nearing Kevin levels in this thread alone!

[icruise]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

In all honesty the thing that surprises me the most is how much time GoMac has on his hands and how little of it he actually uses to watch HD-DVD's and rent online movies online. It is he is nearing Kevin levels in this thread alone!

Well, to be fair, you've also been posting a heck of lot in this thread. You're third after Eug and gomac, and if you add in your other nicks, I think you'd be in second.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Sorry to burst your bubble. With the attachment rate of 1 for Blu-ray, not many Blu-ray owners are buying Blu-ray movies.

Quoting statistics about attach rate really doesn't make much sense since the PS3 is such a wildcard. There are a lot of people who buy many BR movies, but the large numbers of people who don't buy any (yet) skew the averages.

I don't see many consumers dumping their vast DVD collections and start buying the same movies on Blu-ray.

I only see Hidef enthusiast with expensive audio and video systems doing it, which by the way is a very small market.

Where do you see these people, if I may ask?

[aristotles]

How do get the cheap internet access without caps hyteckit? What about Hard disc space? What do I use to "backup" the hard disc content?

Downloads are for HD-lite rentals and will never be viable for people who want to collect movies especially the classics.

Attach rates? Is that directly from the Toshiba handbook for HD DVD fanboys or from the paid shills posting script? Let's see, I have an attached rate of 144 BBD titles (136 collection items) to one PS3 and 19 HD DVD titles to one HD-A2. Which one has a higher attach rate hyteckit? What happens to the attach rates when HD DVD fanboys on AVS buy their 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th Toshiba player?

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Quoting statistics about attach rate really doesn't make much sense since the PS3 is such a wildcard. There are a lot of people who buy many BR movies, but the large numbers of people who don't buy any (yet) skew the averages.

Where do you see these people, if I may ask?

You are just making my point. The hidef enthusiast are the ones buying over 100 Blu-ray movies, which skews the adoption rate. In reality, most Blu-ray owners aren't even buying any Blu-ray movies. It's mostly hidef enthusiast. The biggest seller on Blu-ray is 300 right? How many copies sold? Around 300,000?

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

How do get the cheap internet access without caps hyteckit? What about Hard disc space? What do I use to "backup" the hard disc content?

Downloads are for HD-lite rentals and will never be viable for people who want to collect movies especially the classics.

Did I say physical media is dead? No. Did I say HD download are viable for people who want to collect movies? No. I say physical media will become less important. I only plan to own a few movies. I could care less about backing up the movie if I only want to rent it and watch it once. If I want to own it, I'll buy the physical media.

HD downloads are perfect for those who want to watch HD content, but don't want to buy it and don't care about Blu-ray or HDDVD.

I pay $19/mo for 3Mb/s. I don't think that is expensive at all. If that is expensive, why the hell are you buying so many Blu-ray disc.

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Attach rates? Is that directly from the Toshiba handbook for HD DVD fanboys or from the paid shills posting script? Let's see, I have an attached rate of 144 BBD titles (136 collection items) to one PS3 and 19 HD DVD titles to one HD-A2. Which one has a higher attach rate hyteckit? What happens to the attach rates when HD DVD fanboys on AVS buy their 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th Toshiba player?

So you alone are indicative of the whole Blu-ray market? If you were, the attachment rate would be 144, not 1. Silly PS3 fanboy.

What are you going to do when a new physical media format comes out in 6 years? Replace all your 200+ Blu-ray movies?

I'll be enjoying HD content on HDDVD and from companies like AT&T and Apple, while you profess your love for your PS3 till you are Blu.

[hyteckit]

For those who want to listen to adults talk about Blu-ray vs HDDVD without the PS3 fanboyism, listen to the latest TWIT ep. 127 podcast.

The TWiT Netcast Network with Leo Laporte

[starman]

I listen to TWiT religiously, but there are a LOT of points they missed on their last show.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Quoting statistics about attach rate really doesn't make much sense since the PS3 is such a wildcard. There are a lot of people who buy many BR movies, but the large numbers of people who don't buy any (yet) skew the averages.

Of course, that's the whole point of discussing attach rates. They're going to be lower with the PS3 on average. And by the way, as analogue SPRINKLES is so fond of saying, probably a majority of PS3 owners buy Blu-ray movies. However, given that the overall Blu-ray software sales numbers are comparatively low, that means that PS3 attach rates are low, and it's probably true that a lot of those just buy a couple of titles to test the water, and then decide it ain't worth it. Yes, this skews the numbers way down, but that's the point.

Originally Posted by icruise 

Well, to be fair, you've also been posting a heck of lot in this thread. You're third after Eug and gomac, and if you add in your other nicks, I think you'd be in second.

w00t! I'm number one!

Kinda sad though that I may hit 1000 posts in this thread alone in a couple of months.

[Dakar the Fourth]

I've got to say, this new direction the thread took was an interesting read.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

You are just making my point. The hidef enthusiast are the ones buying over 100 Blu-ray movies, which skews the adoption rate. In reality, most Blu-ray owners aren't even buying any Blu-ray movies. It's mostly hidef enthusiast. The biggest seller on Blu-ray is 300 right? How many copies sold? Around 300,000?

I think maybe we agree and don't realize it. I admit that it's mostly HD enthusiasts on both sides who are buying movies, but it sounded like you were saying that there were only HD enthusiasts on the HD-DVD side.

I'm just saying that people bring up attach rates as if they prove that HD-DVD owners care more about buying movies. But there are so many PS3 owners that (up until this point) haven't really used Blu-ray, that it skews the numbers. I don't think it's the case a majority of PS3 owners are buying one movie apiece. From my own experience and what I've been reading, it's much more likely that a lot of people are buying none at all, while a core group of enthusiasts are buying multiple movies, just as with HD-DVD. Sure, you'll get a fair number of "I'll try it and see" type of buyers, but it's a mistake IMHO to say that they are the typical Blu-ray buyer.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by icruise 

I'm just saying that people bring up attach rates as if they prove that HD-DVD owners care more about buying movies. But there are so many PS3 owners that (up until this point) haven't really used Blu-ray, that it skews the numbers. I don't think it's the case a majority of PS3 owners are buying one movie apiece. From my own experience and what I've been reading, it's much more likely that a lot of people are buying none at all, while a core group of enthusiasts are buying multiple movies, just as with HD-DVD. Sure, you'll get a fair number of "I'll try it and see" type of buyers, but it's a mistake IMHO to say that they are the typical Blu-ray buyer.

We've all speculated who is buying what, but in the end, we just don't know for sure. What we DO know though is what the ballpark sales numbers are, and that is how we arrive at attach rate.

The fact that the numbers are skewed is not that relevant in this context, because that's accounted for already in this attach rate concept.

Where it matters is when standalone Blu-ray player sales numbers pick up in relation to PS3 sales numbers, since PS3 movie attach rates are going to be lower. We'll see if that happens this year. Maybe yes, maybe no. It depends on where PS3 prices sit, if the standalone manufacturers can get their hardware up to speed, and if the standalone manufacturers can lower prices.

PS. An aside. My nephew & niece got an Xbox 360 from their parents the other day. It really pains me to tell you that they don't have an HDTV. In fact, they don't even have an EDTV. It's 480i my friends. And they're not poor or anything. That family is actually quite wealthy. They just don't see the point of replacing their 32" CRT before it breaks. I suspect there is a sizeable minority of PS3 owners in that category too, which probably accounts for a portion of the group of PS3 owners who don't buy Blu-ray movies.