Blu-ray's Field of Dreams
I wonder who is whispering in their ears?
There are two ways to get people to buy your product - offer something innovative and groundbreaking or sell cheap. According to TGDaily, the Blu-ray Disc Association missed that day in marketing school. According to Andy Parsons, the Chairman of the Blu-ray Disc Association, prices aren't going to decline any time soon. Who is to blame? YOU for not buying enough.
Gotta love that logic.
It seems that Parsons sees Blu-ray similar to DVD when it was first released. This suggests that he thinks it is a new tech and we should be happy to have it at any price.
Funny, that didn't seem to be the case last year when discs and players were being given away to convince people that Blu-ray was better than HD DVD.
Now that their main competition is dead, they've taken a big step back from the idea that they need to get market penetration. Parsons doesn't see downloadable content as a threat, citing that people like to hold something.
Funny how much a DVD feels like a Blu-ray disc in your hand.
Don't forget that even though Blu-ray isn't worried about downloadable
content, that doesn't mean it won't take shape. The Roku, Xbox 360,
and LG are all bringing Netflix into your living room. Who knows what other technology is in the works? The thing is that I'm not the one that Blu-ray needs to convince. I have a nice display to take advantage of the higher resolution. I have nice speakers with which to enjoy the higher fidelity audio. They don't have to sell me on the advantages of Blu-ray over DVD.
Which reminds me, when was the last time you saw a commercial for Blu-ray?
The Blu-ray Disc Association must be headed by Kevin Costner if it thinks this is going to work. Technology, unless it is revolutionary or lifesaving, is not a "build it and they will come" proposition. John Q. Public needs to be convinced that their DVD player isn't good enough. Even if they think it isn't, you've got to convince him to shell out the money. That's not going to happen with discs 1.5-2x's the price and entry level players 2x+'s more.
Something is going to have to give. If manufacturers want to sell $600 players with minimal features than disc prices have to come down. If studios want to sell the discs at $20-$30, than the players are going to have to come down. Regardless, you're going to have a pretty pissed off public when they find out that that $600-$1000 player isn't decoding all the high def audio formats internally, is only Profile 1.1, and needs to be upgraded in a year.
Blu-ray may want to compare itself to early DVD but it just doesn't hold water. DVD was revolutionary - a new type of format (even though it looked like a CD) with new feature sets and abilities that VHS just didn't have. Blu-ray is an upgrade pure and simple. A nice upgrade, no doubt, but an upgrade nonetheless. This is part of why Clint DeBoer claimed that the new high definition formats were dead before they were released. Most people don't get excited about upgrades. Enthusiasts do, but again, Blu-ray didn't have to convince them anyway.
If this new and improved Blu-ray attitude sticks, we may be in for a long haul before most people make the jump to Blu. The longer that takes, the more likely it is that someone else will release something that will actually excite the public and get them to skip Blu-ray altogether. This "hurry up and wait for people to adopt" attitude might end up being "hurry up and wait to die."
wnmnkh, post: 460168This is where the arguement falls flat though, and it is consistent with what many arguements do.
vinyl has always outsold both SACD and DVD-A combined btw, and there is no guarantee blu-ray will not go same path as SACD/DVD-A went.
The BDA has presented sales predictions, and BD is running ahead of those numbers. CE manufacturers build products to match predictions, and they are actually running behind on manufacturing due to demand.
SACD & DVD-A never touched what Blu-ray has already done. Blu-ray regularly captures 6-7% of the total weekly optical disc revenue. It doubles the intake of digital downloads, and who knows how much more than HD digital downloads.
There is no guarantee we will live through tomorrow, but to pretend that exceeding expected sales levels isn't a strong showing for a new format would be a pretty big error. Making claims that it likely won't succeed, in the face of sales outpacing expectations just doesn't make any sense.
That's it - it just doesn't make sense to predict gloom and doom when the market has already said “We want more!” - not the market… consumers. People. In the last year, the commerical company I work for has seen no less than a dozen Blu-ray players go in compared to the prior year where we saw about two go in. My anecdote means diddly, but it is just the reality that Blu-ray is moving forward, whether you believe it is or not is irrelevant. Whether you think it will be a success or not is also irrelevant.
What matters is actual sales, and those figures are ahead of expectations right now, and are on track the beat year end expectations.
So, what is it that's suddenly going to make the format fail in the face of all this non-failure?
People don't buy HDTV's to watch upconverted DVD's, sorry. You could ask 100 purhasers at the counter why they are buying an HDTV and you wouldn't get that answer once. The only answer you'll get is “I want HD”
Yeah, I am pretty sure the answer for getting HDTV is “I want HD”. But the problem is, people have all kinds of different opinions about the definition of “HD”.
So is 1080P 24fps is HD? 720p? upconverted? HD channels from cables and satellite? xbox 360 online video shop? or just a high quality viewing from youtube? (I am not kidding; some people really think so)
You know, most people are just utterly confusing about HD, and their only reliable indication about HD is the word, “HD”.
With so many products other than Blu-ray claim themselves “HD.” Do you really think people buy HDTV for blu-ray?
No.
Why have you lumped in two massive differences between Blu-ray and DVD in your first point for Blu-ray? The interactivity and internet connectivity and two separate entities. The menu structure is much greater and once people are used to being able to select menus with no delays and no interruptions, going back to DVD seems archaic, sort of like watching a VHS when you're used to DVD. Much like DVD the potential was slowly utilized over the first few years. Blu-ray's interactivity allows for a few things to happen with PIP - first off all the window can move to wherever the least amount of action is, with DVD it's static. It's static because PIP on DVD requires a separate encode of the scene with the PIP window on top. With Blu-ray it's encoded on the fly and as such can be moved around. If a studio chooses to make the PIP window a 1080p source they can swap the window around to enhance the interactivity for scenes where the PIP is more important to showcase how a scene was shot, rather than just a guy in a chair. The internet connectivity is a complete different facet of Blu-ray, yet you manage to wring every possible point about DVD into a different number. That seems VERY skewed.
So what? I don't use all the strange menus and interactive features; heck I rarely watch even some extra features on DVDs these days. I prefer to watch the movie only. Well, it is very subjective and different from people, but you need to recognize there are people who are already satisfied with basic features DVD provides.
However, again, DVD is just completely different. The magnitude of difference is just different (completely new and reliable profile, physical properties, introducing ‘new’ features, convenience, etc) And it still took more than 5~7 years to become mainstream. Now, for Blu-ray, I'd say only ‘new’ feature they are bringing to is internet connection as you pointed out, but the question is, are people going to use that?
Heck as I said some people, like myself even feel the menu of DVD is annoying, and just skip to main movie. I wonder if these people change their minds when they see Blu-ray. There will be people who enjoy the improved features, but not all (and again, will these improved interactivity and internet connection are enough for people to buy the whole movies and player again?)
All the arguments you've made were all the exact same arguments people were making AGAINST DVD in 1996.
You can't make back-ups of it like VHS
It's too expensive,
J6P won't notice a difference
Have a read - https://www.robertsdvd.com/failure.html
No no no no….. my main argument is that Blu-ray is merely an upgrade from DVD, thus not strong enough to attract most J6P. The price will go down (as we are already seeing 167 bucks players) and we can make a backup of Blu-ray already a long time ago (well, did I say “I cannot make backup of Blu-ray” as an argument anyway? :S ) And J6P may (or will) notice the difference in quality, but this does not guarantee the format will succeed.
Hey, this is similar to DVD-A and SACD; now I can get dual players for less than 100 bucks (usually with excellent DVD video capability and extra stuffs,) for DVD-A case I can make backups with a computer, and finally they have nice multi-channel support which brings some significant difference between CD and SACD/DVD-A. Now, are these formats alive now?
vinyl has always outsold both SACD and DVD-A combined btw, and there is no guarantee blu-ray will not go same path as SACD/DVD-A went.
jliedeka, post: 459318
DVD had Dolby Digital. Regardless of how may bits were used, there were 6 channels of discrete audio as opposed to two channels with Dolby surround encoded into VHS tapes.
I bought my first DVD player in either late 1997 or early 1998. I don't remember how far that was into the life cycle but I know I didn't stop buying VHS tapes after I had the DVD player. Some things were only available on VHS or the tape was way cheaper than the disc.
It was extremely early in the lifecycle. The average player was still $700 and the majority of titles did NOT have discrete multi-channel audio on them, but rather Dolby stereo.
wnmnkh, post: 459468
Big no…. guys…. DVD was not a upgrade from VHS; it was simply different animal.
It is not just more resolution, DVD…..
1.) Smaller, easy to maintain.
2.) Does not degrade due to many playbacks (well, eventually DVD may fail, but it is much durable than VHS)
3.) interactive menu, choice of subtitles, can choose the specific scene easily while you have to re,fastwind on VHS.
4.) Multi-channel audio
5.) Can be easily stored, and used on other media like computers, portable players.
6.) last but not least, better video and audio quality, of course.
Now, Blu Ray has…
1.) More interactive menu via internet connection.
2.) More channels with lossless audio.
3.) of course better video/audio quality.
And…. what?
Do you see a problem? There is really few new innovative features I could gain from Blu-ray other than better video/audio quality. All I really see is a just new optical media with some improvement.
Don't get me wrong; I like my Blu-ray discs and really enjoy to watch, but I really don't see J6P will be interested. Not to mention most people seem satisified with upconverted players, and they actually think it is HD. Sadly but true.
They buy HD TVs to see some HD channels and upconverted DVDs, I see really few people intend to buy HD TV for blu ray.
People don't buy HDTV's to watch upconverted DVD's, sorry. You could ask 100 purhasers at the counter why they are buying an HDTV and you wouldn't get that answer once. The only answer you'll get is “I want HD”
Why have you lumped in two massive differences between Blu-ray and DVD in your first point for Blu-ray? The interactivity and internet connectivity and two separate entities. The menu structure is much greater and once people are used to being able to select menus with no delays and no interruptions, going back to DVD seems archaic, sort of like watching a VHS when you're used to DVD. Much like DVD the potential was slowly utilized over the first few years. Blu-ray's interactivity allows for a few things to happen with PIP - first off all the window can move to wherever the least amount of action is, with DVD it's static. It's static because PIP on DVD requires a separate encode of the scene with the PIP window on top. With Blu-ray it's encoded on the fly and as such can be moved around. If a studio chooses to make the PIP window a 1080p source they can swap the window around to enhance the interactivity for scenes where the PIP is more important to showcase how a scene was shot, rather than just a guy in a chair. The internet connectivity is a complete different facet of Blu-ray, yet you manage to wring every possible point about DVD into a different number. That seems VERY skewed.
All the arguments you've made were all the exact same arguments people were making AGAINST DVD in 1996.
You can't make back-ups of it like VHS
It's too expensive,
J6P won't notice a difference
Have a read - https://www.robertsdvd.com/failure.html
Here are a few snippets:
Consumers will look at DVD and see that it doesn't record. That will instantly arouse suspicions in their mind that if the movies they want to watch are not available on the DVD discs, then the machine will be useless to them and a waste of money. Just because DVD will have a (supposedly) better picture quality than VHS will play no part in their decision. it doesn't record, therefore, it is crippled and worth less than VHS, which DOES record anytime they want.
There have been Blu-ray recorders in Japan for years
Another question is, how many consumers actually WANT and USE all the special features that DVD *might* offer? CD players offer all kinds of special programming and playback options, yet most people never touch these features. A cheap VCR is seen as too intimidating to most Americans. They just want to watch the movie, not select different versions, languages and such. The LD market has proven that these extra features are desired, but only by a small segment of the population. The special edition LDs don't even sell to most LD owner/collectors. They are a small segment of an already small market. Are the studios going to spend money on DVD to make discs that only a select few will buy and care to view? NO!
Availablitly of titles for rental is another area of concern. How many stores are going to stock DVD and take up selling space that could be better stocked with something else? Why should they even get into it in the first place? They will have a few titles, that, because of low ownership of players, will sit on the shelves doing no rentals. I seriously doubt that most stores will offer DVD for rent for longer than 2 months after the launch.
DVD is just a bad idea. It is being forced upon a uncaring and unwanted public and is an inferior product that simply isn't needed or desired. DVD exists only for one reason. Greed. Motion picture studios are always looking for a way to sell the same stuff over and over again and they think DVD is the answer. Electronics giants are always looking for the hot new gadget that will make consumers junk their existing products and they feel that DVD is the answer. Its not. Actually, it is an answer to a non existent question. A question that has never been and never will be asked.
wnmnkh, post: 459468That's all you actually need to say to understand why the general consumer can be convinced to buy Blu-ray in a couple of years when pricing hits $100(ish) levels.
They buy HD TVs to see some HD….
People buy HDTVs to watch HD - they don't own DVDs, the average consumer has less than a dozen. They don't care about upconversion, they buy upconverting players because they say “HD” on the side, but ten seconds with an untrained Best Buy/CC employee and J6P will be convinced they need to spend the extra $20 to get a true HD player for their HDTV.
These are the same stores that have little issue selling Monster Cable to everyone, and make top dollar on Bose equipment.
The only difference here is that the consumer actually gets quality for their purchase, so the sale should be that much better.
Keep in mind, almost anyone who owns Blu-ray and watches titles regularly does rave about the quality, so the “Word of mouth” level for Blu-ray is mostly positive.
It is not just more resolution, DVD…..
1.) Smaller, easy to maintain.
2.) Does not degrade due to many playbacks (well, eventually DVD may fail, but it is much durable than VHS)
3.) interactive menu, choice of subtitles, can choose the specific scene easily while you have to re,fastwind on VHS.
4.) Multi-channel audio
5.) Can be easily stored, and used on other media like computers, portable players.
6.) last but not least, better video and audio quality, of course.
Now, Blu Ray has…
1.) More interactive menu via internet connection.
2.) More channels with lossless audio.
3.) of course better video/audio quality.
And…. what?
Do you see a problem? There is really few new innovative features I could gain from Blu-ray other than better video/audio quality. All I really see is a just new optical media with some improvement.
Don't get me wrong; I like my Blu-ray discs and really enjoy to watch, but I really don't see J6P will be interested. Not to mention most people seem satisified with upconverted players, and they actually think it is HD. Sadly but true.
They buy HD TVs to see some HD channels and upconverted DVDs, I see really few people intend to buy HD TV for blu ray.
As Associate Editor at Audioholics, Tom promises to the best of his ability to give each review the same amount of attention, consideration, and thoughtfulness as possible and keep his writings free from undue bias and preconceptions. Any indication, either internally or from another, that bias has entered into his review will be immediately investigated. Substantiation of mistakes or bias will be immediately corrected regardless of personal stake, feelings, or ego.
View full profileConfused about what AV Gear to buy or how to set it up? Join our Exclusive Audioholics E-Book Membership Program!
Subscribe to our newsletter