|
Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt
(Post 9099624)
You shouldn't be buying blu-ray players on Black Friday... cause they're all crappy players!!
|
Jane you ignorant slut, you blew Ray?
|
Whoever wrote that, is a person that uses technological advances to discredit, you know, common sense.
You can take things out of context, such as, "Blu-ray players are cheaper now", and then make your own conclusion that maybe they're cheaper because they're really just part of a niche market. Then you can say, "Well you can get Netflix for half a year instead of a cheap player", or you can say "Downloadable HD movies are the future", and because these options sound either more financially feasible, or better for consumers to pick since there's no space taking physical media, that these things will win out in the future. It's just simply... not... true. And I'm tired or seeing these comments posted by anyone on the net. People like physical media. People like having a collection. Computer hard drives aren't reliable enough to make most feel comfortable buying an eventual, possible, ten grand worth of viewable content (large collection, I know), a wise investment. On top of the discussion that Blu-ray must not be doing as well right now, I never see anybody mentioning the changes that have taken place in stores over the last couple of years. We've gone from maybe a narrow shelf space or column from places like Wal-Mart, Target, and even Best Buy, and now there's a huge section devoted to them in these places. Not only that, but I'm seeing Blu-rays being put out every week with the 'new releases' sections in said stores, instead of ONLY providing DVD's in the widely accessible 'new releases' section, and that's a big change as well. The guy makes sense, but not in a logical manner consumers will follow. |
Originally Posted by mzupeman2
(Post 9100832)
On top of the discussion that Blu-ray must not be doing as well right now, I never see anybody mentioning the changes that have taken place in stores over the last couple of years. We've gone from maybe a narrow shelf space or column from places like Wal-Mart, Target, and even Best Buy, and now there's a huge section devoted to them in these places. Not only that, but I'm seeing Blu-rays being put out every week with the 'new releases' sections in said stores, instead of ONLY providing DVD's in the widely accessible 'new releases' section, and that's a big change as well.
The guy makes sense, but not in a logical manner consumers will follow. |
And my point still stands that Blu-ray isn't catching on as fast as DVD because it's not as accessible to people because many lack the hardware. If analysts predict downloading stuff is the future, they're again not taking into consideration the roadblocks that await joe six-pack when it comes to utilizing the technology in their home.
|
Originally Posted by mzupeman2
(Post 9100877)
And my point still stands that Blu-ray isn't catching on as fast as DVD because it's not as accessible to people because many lack the hardware. If analysts predict downloading stuff is the future, they're again not taking into consideration the roadblocks that await joe six-pack when it comes to utilizing the technology in their home.
As I posted yesterday, my sister called me and told me how much The Incredible Hulk sucked, but she thought it looked freaking fantastic on her Samsung 1500. She's now on her way over to borrow some films from me. Had I not told her to rent Inc Hulk on BD instead of DVD she would have continued to rent DVDs from Blockbuster instead. Sure, in her case it may not help BD sfotware sales, much but she already has a small Christmas list of movies she wants (Heathers, Nightmare Before Christmas, Narnia). Studios need to pack films inside! Even if its just a demo disc, pack something. |
Originally Posted by dsa_shea
(Post 9099514)
I guess this idiot doesn't know or bother to tell the readers that Blu-Ray players can also play SD dvds.
I waited for the format war to end and the prices to come under $200 for a decent player. Went ahead and bought the Panny BD35 for $150 + tax and the Memorex 2510 for $145. Sold the Memorex for a $5.00 loss after getting the deal on the BD35 but gained the Blu-ray versions of Nightmare Before Christmas & Ratatouille with the BD35. I've lost a lot of faith in humanity but if HD players don't eventually take over for standard digital then I will lose it completely. ;) Downloading may be the future but not the foreseeable one. |
I don't agree with having to pack in a film, I mean, it would be freakin' awesome if they did that, but a demo disc as you mentioned should definitely be standard. The only problem with that is that some of the companies making Blu-ray players don't have the rights to use some of that stuff for a demo disc, and they could probably secure some kind of rights to make a demo disc, but it would probably cost them a lot of money they don't have to spend.
It's not even so much the Blu-ray players that people lack, a lot of people still even lack HDTV's. Although DVD's are still cheaper, it's to be expected. I remember when Blu-ray was constantly selling at a fairly firm, more often than not, 34.99 price tag in stores. However, depending on the Blu-ray title and where you buy it, you can easily find titles from 14.99-24.99. I think I remembered picking up Hellboy on Blu-ray, and Dawn of the Dead, and Halloween at Wal-Mart for 14.98 each. That's not shabby. I know it's not day and date titles by any means, but it's not bad. |
The current Amazon promotion, $100 off 10 BDs plus an additional $5 off each pair of Bond titles, certainly seems like a sign that the BDA or certain studios (especially Sony) are pushing the format pretty hard. Six Blu-ray Bond flicks for $4.99 each strikes me as a good deal and may even sell a few players to those who find out about it but haven't taken the plunge yet. Several posters in the Amazon thread have said as much.
Add in player prices below $200 and I think the the format is being pushed pretty hard even without pack-ins and five free (mostly) crap titles via a mail-in rebate offer, as happened last year. I'd guess that most people buying a player also pick up some BDs, so a demo pack-in really isn't necessary. No complaints from me about the support for the BD format from the studios and equipment manufacturers. Six months ago I wouldn't have said that. |
This is the same dude that wrote the "letterschlock" FAQ! :rotfl:
Welcome to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) About Movie Letterboxing. The purpose of this page is to educate the public about the evils of "letterboxing," the process of censoring movies on broadcast and cable tv and on videotape and laserdisk by blocking the top and bottom of the tv screen with black bars that block portions of the screen and prevent the movie viewer from being able to watch and enjoy the movie. What IS "letterboxing"? Letterboxing is the vile and shoddy practice of censorship of movies by placing black bars to block the top and bottom of the tv screen, so that the viewer cannot watch or enjoy the movie. All true movie lovers abhore this practice, and demand full screen videos and cable and broadcast movies. Why is it wrong? The television screen is a different shape and size than a movie theater screen. Therefore, to correctly show a movie on a television screen so that you get a full screen image, it must be formatted to fit the tv screen. Letterboxing, instead, shrinks the movie image down tiny and places it in the center of the screen, placing black bars on the top and bottom. While no part of the "image" or "information" from the original movie is "lost" or "blocked," the movie becomes effectively unwatchable as the image is too small for anyone to watch, and the black bars on the top and bottom make it impossible for the viewer to get "drawn into" the movie. Rather than pretend that one can somehow "duplicate" the experience of seeing a movie in a theater by trying to present a movie image in a shape other than the shape of the tv screen, most broadcasters and most video companies today present movies in the full, original, uncensored, unletterboxed, full screen format, just like they have been broadcast on television for over 50 years now. The letterbox censors and their supporters want to take this right to view and enjoy movies in full screen image away from you. They argue that "letterboxing" is superior, when any reasonable person can see that this is a lie. They call it "widescreen," when actually it should be called "shrunk" screen or "small" screen (the width of a tv screen is physically fixed and is NOT expanded by showing a mangled letterbox image of a movie. They use pejorative terms like "pan-and-scan" to refer to the full, original, uncensored full screen format, trying to mislead people into thinking that this is something bad, rather than the way that most people prefer to view movies. Over 99.99% of the viewing public prefers the full screen format. Who is against "letterboxing"? Practically everybody, except a tiny handful of people--which unfortunately includes some film makers, film critics, and their followers. The public hates it, and won't watch it, buy it, rent it, etc. People who accidentally get "letterboxed" (better called "lettershlocked") versions of movies at video rental stores bring them back as "defective". And they are right! If some directors want their work presented in this format, isn't that up to them? The audience has rights too. We pay good money for cable access and video rentals, and certainly should speak up and let these directors know that we cannot enjoy their work when it is presented in this letterboxed/lettershlocked format. Directors need to know that we want a full screen image on our tv and will not settle for anything less. What other drawbacks are there to "letterbox"/lettershlock censorship of movies? Letterbox/lettershlock censorship is a violation of the letter and spirit of the Americans With Disabilities Act and similar state statutes and local ordinances against disability discrimination against persons with visual disabilities and impairments. The much smaller image makes it much tougher, in fact impossible, for persons with visual impairments, such as reduced vision or partial blindness, to view and enjoy movies on cable, broadcast, and videotape or laserdisk. Such persons are entitled, under the law, to reasonable accommodation from public accommodations and those who provide goods and services to the public, which includes the entertainment industry. As of yet, there is no concrete reported case law on this atrocious disability discrimination, but it is only a matter of time before someone takes legal action against this despicable discrimination. You can help move this process along, and help with the recognition of the wrong that letterbox censorship is by contacting the FCC to object to cable broadcasters or broadcast stations showing letterboxed censored movies. What can be done? The majority of the public has been silent too long. We must Educate! Organize! and Act! by writing and phoning cable channels, video stores, and movie companies, telling them we want full screen movies, not censored letterboxed ones! Tell them that we pay good money for access to cable television, especially premium movie channels, and that broadcasting letterboxed films which cannot be watched or enjoyed is a violation of their implicit agreement with us to provide us with watchable entertainment. Call your cable operator to object when letterboxed movies are shown. And be sure to give your video rental and purchase business to video stores that carry the full screen movies, not the letterboxed ones. |
Originally Posted by kenbuzz
(Post 9101059)
This is the same dude that wrote the "letterschlock" FAQ! :rotfl:
hahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. |
Wow. I think that's reason now to close this thread, lol. There's absolutely no legitimacy to discussing this any more :D
|
That almost reads like satire.
|
I think the author of the article obviously has not studied the history of sales of the DVD format. I mean, until players started to appear priced under US$200 in circa fall 2001, the DVD format was still in a somewhat "niche" status in terms of popularity.
With huge sales of rear-projection TV's and now flat-screen panels that sport HDMI inputs in the past 3-4 years, there is a built-in customer base to buy a disc format that finally takes full advantage of these new TV's. While upconverting players have made conventional DVD's look reasonably presentable on the newer TV's, you still can't deny that true HD playback from a Blu-ray player looks better--look at any of the recent Disney/Pixar releases on Blu-ray (especially Cars and Ratatouille) and the sharpness of detail is nothing short of BREATHTAKING. :up: |
Originally Posted by Maxflier
(Post 9100448)
Sorry to take this off-topic, but this reminds me of something that still has me scratching my head. I have a friend who just bought a PS3 recently and she comes to work one day and says "I thought you told me the PS3 could play PS2 games?". My reply to that was well yeah of course it can. I don't own one but that's what I get for assuming things. I figured maybe it just needed a firmware update or something so I checked the PS3 website only to find that the early PS3's were BC, but the ones in production now are not. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
Does anyone know why they (Sony) would take a step backwards like that? sorry if it seems like I am overreacting but this really does blow my mind. Personally, I can't imagine why Sony (or whoever the software company is) would release a game that a good chunk of the audience can't play. |
Originally Posted by kenbuzz
(Post 9101059)
This is the same dude that wrote the "letterschlock" FAQ! :rotfl:
|
The FAQ is real. The creator would regularly spam usenet boards way back in the way with it.
However, I do not think the writer of the Wired article is the person that wrote the FAQ. |
Originally Posted by Pizza
(Post 9103119)
Here's a funnier one: Some of the newer ps2 games don't play on "older" ps2 machines. My wife recently ran out and bought the lastest Guitar Hero game for the ps2 only to find it didn't work. She returned it to Gamestop who told her it was a dual layered game and that a good chunk of the ps2s can't play it. I went out and bought the WII version for her. It looks a thousand times better anyway. (And my wife is happy!)
Personally, I can't imagine why Sony (or whoever the software company is) would release a game that a good chunk of the audience can't play. |
Originally Posted by kaze0
(Post 9103865)
All of the PS2's can play dual layer games. It's just that most of the old PS2's, by now, have crappy lasers that are basically half crapped out(read defective). So they'll only work with single layer games.
|
Originally Posted by mzupeman2
(Post 9100877)
And my point still stands that Blu-ray isn't catching on as fast as DVD because it's not as accessible to people because many lack the hardware. If analysts predict downloading stuff is the future, they're again not taking into consideration the roadblocks that await joe six-pack when it comes to utilizing the technology in their home.
Regarding hardware, a budget (~$200) Magnavox player (available at Wal-Mart) has component outputs, and will work with the old-fashioned analog HD sets from the pre-HDCP era (providing Hollywood continues to hold off on implementing the Image Constraint Token). |
Originally Posted by DivxGuy
(Post 9111320)
Judging by the steadily-improving selection in mainstream stores, Blu-ray is catching on.
I think it's clear Blu-ray is expanding, I think it's just a matter of contention as to how much and the rate of growth. Not to mention the lower ceiling of adoption versus DVD due to hardware needs. |
Originally Posted by GizmoDVD
(Post 9099531)
Atleast its not "blue-ray", "blue ray or "blu-rays".
|
Originally Posted by fumanstan
(Post 9111343)
Although on that note, with more and more movies coming out it would make sense that stores expand their sections to have enough room to stock titles.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:52 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.