...but DVDs fit in that category of "good enough" for me to watch most things. In fact, when shopping, I find myself thinking that Blu-ray is only worth it for certain videos, like documentaries, or movies that provide a lot of visuals.
Indeed, and that's the big issue that everyone else has pointed out: Blu-rays lack of momentum had nothing to do with HD-DVD, and everything to do with regular DVD. Modern DVDs tend to have beautiful encoding, great colour, and on a good DVD player that up-samples to 1080p, they look pretty darn good! I own about five Blu-ray DVDs, and all are big-action blockbusters where I feel the added cost is worth it. I watched Speed Racer (got it free with the Blu-ray player) and it was jaw-dropping in 1080p...but for 95% of the movies out there, DVD is more than sufficient.
The movie studios are run by delusional idiots and they deserve all the lackluster sales they're getting. Blu-ray will replace DVD, slowly, but only by attrition as the players get cheaper and the discs get less expensive.
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
Its a shame HD DVD did not win this battle. I think the COMBO format (DVD and HD DVD on the same disc) had great potential for people not ready to fully give up DVD.
Yeah, that was one of the things that was really great about HD-DVD! Blu-ray brings nothing but technical misery to the table with all of it's ridiculous Java, non-finished-spec junk. I still can't watch Dexter Season 2 on my Samsung Blu-ray player, even after the latest firmware update.
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
Well, now they know better.
...
They get no sympathy from me.
I doubt they understand anything of the sort.
It's not just the DRM -- It's broken players, TVs and audio. I've spent a lot on my home theater gear and am not going to "invest" in a player that only works part time. I'm still waiting to see BD that is the same price as DVD - as promised. Extra content; my *$$.
It's not just the DRM -- It's broken players, TVs and audio. I've spent a lot on my home theater gear and am not going to "invest" in a player that only works part time.
Or not at all.
At least not as advertised.
The AV receiver manufacturers are second only to Sony in the woe they inflict on the unwary.
You don't realize just how crappy a spec HDMI is until you take a stroll through adult gaming forums (yes, they do exist--one or two) and see the tales of woe of people trying to get their PS3s and XBOXes working at full spec on their home theater setups; stuff that works fine when direct-connected fails miserably when connected through supposedly state-of-the-art AV receivers. You get downgraded audio, dropped connections, handshakes that don't work, improper EDID codes, pretty much every conceivable sin.
Even stuff from the same vendor (Sony, I'm looking at you!) doesn't get along...
Makes you wonder if they're *all* using Java in their firmware...
As for the studios knowing better now: I do think that sinking feeling they're getting (in their bottom lines) is clueing them in if they're not up to speed by now.
Blu-ray brings nothing but technical misery to the table with all of it's ridiculous Java, non-finished-spec junk. I still can't watch Dexter Season 2 on my Samsung Blu-ray player, even after the latest firmware update.
Picky-picky!
You shoulda known better; after all, the spec is only up to version 2.1.
We've all known the real BD won't really show up until version 2.5.
(Although, judging by the PS3, it may take until 2.7 or even 3.5 for them to get where HD-DVD was at version 1.0. Maybe longer if they stick with Java. "Write once, debug forever" isn't a joke, you know... Not with Java.)
Because nothing says "quality firmware" as the name Sony.
(Hey, its friday! And I have a whole weekend of snow to look forward to.)
Okay, I agree with you guys but there is still the issue of price. There is no way I'm spending $40 on a Blu-ray movie. I have the money but that's extravagant.
Yeah, I agree - I think that's the #1 reason, with a bullet, as to why Blu-ray has been so slow to take off. People look at new releases, they see the Blu-ray version next to the DVD version and the Blu-ray version is $10 more...and it creates a negative impression in their mind regarding Blu-ray, that it's more expensive. I think Blu-ray discs should be priced no more than $5 more than regular DVDs, and $3 would be even better. I don't mind paying a SMALL premium to get 1080p video, but not $10-$15 more. The studios are insane.
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
The AV receiver manufacturers are second only to Sony in the woe they inflict on the unwary. You don't realize just how crappy a spec HDMI is until you take a stroll through adult gaming forums (yes, they do exist--one or two) and see the tales of woe of people trying to get their PS3s and XBOXes working at full spec on their home theater setups; stuff that works fine when direct-connected fails miserably when connected through supposedly state-of-the-art AV receivers.
I'm working on a post, probably to go live next week, called "Harmon Kardon: We Hate Our Customers". I'm in AV receiver HELL right now, and it's all because of HDMI...
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
I'm in AV receiver HELL right now, and it's all because of HDMI...
You poor soul!
My heart goes out to you.
Right now the best advice I can give anybody that asks me is to use the TV as the HDMI switching device, not the receiver. In other words, get a TV that has multiple HDMI and HD Component inputs *and* properly forwards surround sound through optical out (not all do--another pet peeve!) and let the TV send out the selected audio stream out to the receiver. Doesn't always work but the percentage of success is higher than trying to navigate AV Receiver hell.
Failing that, go the old fashioned way (that's how I'm connected--I gave up after the first two HDMI-capable receivers I tried failed to work properly) and use the tv to switch video and the receiver to switch audio via optical.
Trying to get a contemporary AV receiver to properly process and route all the different signals and protocols HDMI can carry is kinda like playing the lottery.
You *could* get lucky.
But you shouldn't expect it.
Right now the best advice I can give anybody that asks me is to use the TV as the HDMI switching device, not the receiver.
Yeah, that's what I'm going back to doing. HDMI works great with the DVD player, but it's my Shaw Cable box, a Motorola POC (Piece of Crap) that gives the receiver fits. Grr. So frustrating that I paid $700 for this amp, with the purpose of running all HDMI video into and out of it, and it doesn't work!
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
After looking at the innerworkings of the spec and listening to all the grief from early adopters I've left HDMI looking for a purpose. So, there's another reason for no BD in my house (BD - sounds like a fancy washroom fixture).
I still get better sound than many of the theaters. The video isn't eye-popping gorgeous but I don't have the headaches either. Until I get a 1080p projector, I don't care.
And one last thing - since Sony attacked their audio CD customers with a root kit, I'm leary of anything they offer including BlueRay discs.
Linear Mode
