I found this to be an interesting article. I'm inclined to agree with him. I think it's been discussed here ad nauseum about the too high prices on both software and hardware. Here's to hoping good things will start to happen come holiday time.

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscell...bluray_preview

Discs Meet the Internet in Next-Gen Blu-ray Players
By Jose Fermoso

Six years after its official launch, the consumer electronics industry's high-definition successor to DVD still hasn't taken off.

That's got manufacturers concerned enough to take action. Fortunately for consumers, the action will include lowering prices, adding features and integrating players into "connected ecosystems" that let users take advantage of increasingly popular online media as well as content that comes on shiny plastic discs.

Three main factors contribute to the perception that the now-dominant high-definition Blu-ray disc standard is stagnating: high overall prices, a general satisfaction with the current DVD format and buyer confusion in the midst of competing and multiplying technologies.

"The [Blu-ray format] is being adopted in a similar pattern as previous technologies, but it is not being adopted at the same [rate]," says Paul Erickson, Director of DVD and HD Market Research for DisplaySearch. While DVD also took years to become popular, he says, the adoption curve for Blu-ray is even longer and is fraught with bumpy obstacles, such as a few DRM security code and playback problems.

The two-and-a-half-year standards war with a competing high-def format, HD DVD, certainly didn't help. The battle ended in early 2008 when HD DVD's last major supporter, Toshiba, threw in the towel, but consumer confusion lingers. A tough economy has also slowed consumers' acceptance of the format.

At next week's CEDIA 2008 conference, an annual gathering of television and home theater manufacturers, retailers and installers, expect to see an orgy of competing Blu-ray players. Some will focus on low prices (like Philips and Netlogic), and others will highlight features that integrate their physical content with wireless systems to download content from the internet (such as BD Live).

Still, not everyone is convinced that these measures will help Blu-ray. Josh Martin of the Yankee Group says there are still too many "unclear messages" surrounding the format (such as unconventional BD spec profiles, which offer different versions of a player's capabilities) that throw that ecosystem out of whack.

There's also a value disconnect: Most people can't justify purchasing a Blu-ray player that costs five times as much as a DVD player -- especially if it's not five times better. "The opportunity lies in creating a simple, mass-market device," says Martin. So far, that device hasn't arrived, despite tries by everyone from Sony to Magnavox.

Until that device arrives, Martin says, a small price change (like Sony's recent 25 percent drop announcement), or even a cool spec upgrade won't make a difference. "Blu-ray will continue to struggle towards the end of [2008] because the format adoption is driven by price," Martin concludes.

Blu-ray didn't launch six years ago. Even the initial recordable-only decks in Japan -- which were a very different beast -- that launched in '03 shouldn't be considered part of its "official launch".

The format war lasted less than two years (June 2006 - February 2008 if you start when both formats had launched, or April 2006 - February 2008 if you count first format launch).

In comparison, wasn't DVD also similarly hampered with the format war with DivX? How long did that go on? Was it even a year?

DIVX was a complete joke and was only sold (IIRC) at Circuit City. There was no real "format" war like we had here with comparable formats.

Just getting the facts straight. What with this and what Adam pointed out, it's not a very well-researched article.

I don't know, sounds like you guys are just nitpicking dates.

Depends on how you look at it. From Wikipedia, "In February 2002, the project was officially announced as Blu-ray,[10] and the Blu-ray Disc Association was founded by the nine initial members."

That can be taken as an official launch, when the group was formed.

Again using Wikipedia, "On August 22, 2005, the Blu-ray Disc Association and DVD Forum announced that the negotiations to unify their standards had failed"

It can be reasoned that's when there officially became a format war.

I don't think it's too bad of an article otherwise, and wouldn't use those specifics to say that it's poorly written

Oh ok, Blu-ray launched a year after I got my PS2. Yeah. Ok.

And haven't we also seen many articles that have said Blu-ray is being adopted at a faster rate than DVD was? I think people are just writing articles to say what they want to say, rather than what the numbers are saying. And because of that, I don't know who is saying the truth.

DVD is still going strong after 34 years, Blu-ray doesnt stand a chance...

...but come on, in context, that sentence doesn't make any sense.

"Six years after its official launch, the consumer electronics industry's high-definition successor to DVD still hasn't taken off."

How can a successor to DVD take off if it's only a concept being bandied about by a group? If a physical product doesn't exist, it's not an official launch. That's like saying the grand opening for a grocery store is when the bulldozers first tear across a completely barren stretch of land.

I actually would agree with that, though. I'd either put the dates for the format war more tightly (as Grubert suggested) or larger (when the competition started behind the scenes).

I still think the biggest hurdle Blu-ray faces is disinterest...much more than price.

Maybe Jose Fermoso used Wikipedia for his information?

No, it really can't. There are certain accepted definitions of terms as they relate to new product introductions. "Launch" is generally accepted to mean the date when the product is available for order and/or sale.

Taking the word to its NASA history, Apollo 11 did not "launch" when the Saturn V rocket was developed, or even when the crew was selected and trained. It launched when the craft left the launchpad, headed toward the moon.

Everybody that I know who has yet to adopt Blu-ray has refused to do so because of price.

It's just too dang expensive.

Actually, I would disagree with even that interpretation, at least from a "purist" perspective. Sure, there was a lot of debate, arguing, and choosing of sides before there were any products available, but the reality is that the only statement that truly mattered in the format war was where one put one's money. Someone could argue all day that one format is better or more deserving of support than the other, but if that person ends up deciding to support the other format with their purchase, their earlier words are no longer relevant.

The article doesn't even discuss the PS3, and on top of that it doesn't mention the US's intention to go 100% digital on Feb 7/09. That will surely help adoption of the format more than anything else up to this point.

But that's referring to the actual launching of the ship. The Apollo 11 project was launched many years earlier.

Why would going 100% digital make a difference where bluray is concerned? Most people with cable and dish won't even realize the change has taken place because they are already digital. Those that don't have cable/dish can simply get a converter if they choose not to get cable or dish as a result of the switch over.

It doesn't surprise me at all that it hasn't caught on. I don't know many people...actually I don't know ANY who are going to shell out 30 bucks for a movie.

I can see where there coming from, since personally, while my dvd-buying habits have slowed way down, I still buy more SD-dvds than Blu-rays - part of it is that a lot of titles still don't come out on Blu-ray, and the ones that do just don't benefit from the format enough to justify double the price as in most cases. And it's not like I'm poor, I just feel it's not a smart thing to, say, spend $30 on Lonesome Dove when I can get the SDdvd for half that.

FYI: Many Blu-Rays are $19.99 and under. MSRP and actual sale price are two totally different animals.

I think I'll wait and see how the BDA does with a Christmas all to themselves before I begin weeping about BD's future.

From what I've read from insiders on blu-ray.com, the BDA will make a big push next year when the digital switch happens. There will be lots and lots of HDTVs sold and I'm sure we'll see some player bundles, like we probably will this year.

Blu-ray.com just reported that at least 1 manufacturer will be offering up a sub $200 player later this year, probably on Black Friday. Hopefully next year the $200 or less price point will be common.

Sales were alarmingly low first quarter!

Why?

My mother only wants to watch tv, not whatever the latest disc format is. Same with my mother-in-law and several friends.

Probably Insignia with the Best Buy BD Player (or Wal-Marts Magnavox etc.). 90k (estimated) $99 HD DVD players certainly didn't help Toshiba last year (granted it was a few weeks before Black Friday), so I don't see how a $199 BD player will help much either. Just because they buy the player does not mean they will buy the discs. Just like with the $99 HD DVD Player, many will probably buy it as a spare for another room.

$199 is a great deal for someone to start out with, but with so many studios pushing BD-Live around this time you're going to get a lot of people stuck without the ability to use these heavily advertised features. And in Universal's case, the BD-Live features include features already present on the comparable (and cheaper) DVD (Sarah Marshall) version.

Now if its a $199 Sony S350...well then...