Blu-ray a joke?

[boxinghris]

How small is your TV? How old is your TV? What have you tested as far as Live Action?



Sure.



I was absolutely cognizant of the fact that you did not specifically speak of FW when I created my post. What you were more specifically speaking of seemed to be "issues of compatibility". These "issues" are often solved by way of firmware, in case you were ignorant to that fact. For instance, both Sony and Samsung have had players recently updated to be able to handle the dual-bitstream codec of DTS-MA.

Of course, I could predict that you would counter such a statement with disparaging remarks regarding FW. It would be rather possible for someone like you to mention, no? Almost expected, if one wanted to argue against bluray, no? Neverthess, in regards to such possibility did I offer my experiences of extraordinarily smooth playback.

Do you now see the pertinence of firmware in light of your post? Or am I just being silly? Do you really suspect that it might be me who is saying silly words, and not yourself?


edit: split stupid hairs with me at your own risk*

So, these issues which are 'often' solved by the updates (which I'm more aware of than it appeasr you realise); what happens with the issues which aren't solved huh?

Doesn't matter - next profile's comin' out next month!

The cost of my player was around £600 on the used market, and for that price you couldn't even buy a CD/SACD player to compare so your argument's a little limp, if not Bobbit-like to be exact, and my screen is a LX-5090 Pioneer Kuro which you might agree is capable of giving half-decent video performance?

In answer to your final observation, yes, I am now even more convinced than I was before that it might be you saying the silly words, and splitting stupid hairs with you is no risk to me whatsoever.

I'll make it clear again. I'm not attacking Blu-Ray, I'm attacking the implementation of the technology so far, the marketing and the prices of the software which isn't quite so silly as attacking a format with great potential.

 

[jostenmeat]

You are stupid.

 

[Gov]

Just finished watching "Iron Man" on Blu-ray again and I must say, it looked incredible on my Panasonic BD-30 player with the lastest firmware, and on my outdated Sony CRT RPTV!! And it of course sounded great on the SC-05 with the "DRC" off

 

[BMXTRIX]

A silly post because you disagree and have bought into Blu-Ray?

I disagree, not because I bought into Blu-ray, but because I did research and DID buy a PS3 and have had flawless performance and movies since the day the PS3 was released. So, while you are saying things like...
"it was released half-cocked" - the reality was that certain companies released inferior products which consumers should not have bought. Yet, much like Ferraris, Runco projectors, and Bose products, people make overpriced purchases with poor reliabilty or quality every day.

No, sorry to disappoint but I didn't buy into HD-DVD and so can give a detached view, unlike yourself who has nailed himself to the Blu-Ray flag, and in doing so you're now trying to distinguish yourself as being more discerning than anyone who hasn't yet bought a Blu-Ray player and who doesn't support the manufacturers of such machines.

I don't support machines which don't do what they say they are going to do. I think any player which can't play the basic Blu-ray Disc movie has failed. If a player is Profile 1.0, that is what should be expected by any consumer. I would agree whole-heartedly that those are insurmountable issues, but I'm not aware of players which fall into this category except maybe an early Samsung (?).

I'm not rooting against the format

Then don't say...
"Blu-Ray doesn't deserve to succeed"
...because that sure screams "Hey everyone! I'm rooting against the format!"

I'm simply saying that it was launched way too early because of HD-DVD

Absolutely - from a straightforward point of view, that's all that needs to be said. You could have said "I wish HD DVD hadn't pushed Blu-ray players onto the market early", but you chose not to. Blu-ray, according to all early reports was about 6 months behind for basic players and 18 months behind for fully featured players, and this information was known to those who did some homework BEFORE either format was released. But, HD DVD (Toshiba) forced the BDA to respond, and it was several half arsed players which were put out. Very unfortunate.

...wasn't ready for market and has been playing catch up ever since with decent players only now starting to appear even though a games consol showed there was no excuse for the gliches and lack of functionality early adopters were expected to put up with.

Yes, very unfortunate that some early players had significant issues. Lets kill the format for it! As far as 'catch up' - Blu-ray has always been a technologically superior product compared to the (only) competitor in HD DVD. It also had to deal with dozens of involved companies and new technologies which made it far more difficult to fully organize. But, for those who were not early adopters, or bought a PS3, or are happy with Profile 1.0, there are far fewer complaints then you seem to believe.

For the record I will support any format which offers superior quality to the very best upscaling DVD players, but certainly NOT when such a format is not finalised, is not the full spec, the backwards compatibility with DVD is dire and the actual discs cost twice as much as DVDs.

Then you certainly should focus on the specific failings of the product, and certain manufacturers, not blame the format itself. Early studio releases were not properly mastered, which should have led to movies not being released. Early players should have allowed for proper firmware updates to handle all discs - which hasn't seemed to happen for a player or two (or more?). Recent discs still are authored by studios to do some stupid things... no idea why, but at least there is a way to resolve the issue. Most of all, the players seem to be getting better and better while pricing continues to fall.

In fact, show me a professional review of a Blu-Ray player where there weren't any compatibility or operational issues, at least before the current Panasonic BD55 and BD35 although I note that the latest review of the BD35 in homecinemachoice demonstrates that the BD-Live function didn't work.

I'm sure I could find some, but I've also seen my A2 lock up, and heard of firmware bricking the unit. So, exactly what company doesn't have issues? There is no 'perfect' player yet, but there were many claims of the same for DVD players for years. Seems you want a perfect player, at a reasonable price, without any possible issues at all and full support of everything you can possibly dream up.

Great, let me know when you find it.

Saying "Blu-Ray has had issues" is the biggest understatement since "Houston, we have a problem" in my humble opinion, and until these issues are fully resolved I certainly won't be investing in a player just yet.

That's your choice, but as I said, I've been enjoying my player for about 2 years now and all the HD quality that is has delivered along with it. Seems that sitting on the sidelines you may be so busy talking and complaining that you are missing the game. From the nosebleeds where I have no perspective at all, the game has been really enjoyable.

I'd disagree with this statement because in all other manufacturing industries, corrective action is taken to deal with flaws BEFORE the product is marketed.

Such as the iPod which always supported video and all current functionality in first generation players? How about Windows (in general)? Or cars which have parts constantly fail? How about satellite boxes which now needs MPEG4 compatibility? How about etc., etc., etc.?

Saying "this is profile 1.0, then there will be profile 1.3, then profile 2.0" etc is a joke - they should call a spade a spade and say "the product isn't ready yet but for now here's one that's half finished, then there's one that's a bit more finished and finally here's one that's nearly finished....but it's a bit slow".

Once again - your statements are silly. The profiles were released early on. The capabilities were as well. Each player has specifications which are available. There are reviews of products available. You can choose to buy in and enjoy, or choose not to. Clearly, you've made your choice, but don't pretend that a roadmap to future products is a 'joke', when it is likely that half the products you own are incapable of the features which are now standard (why not simply use HDMI 1.3 to your Integra - was it outdated?). I think you want to hold one format to a higher standard than you hold anything else in your life.

Pretty silly to me.

No doubt in the next few months I will own a Blu-Ray player and I am excited about higher-rez audio/video, but please give me a player which doesn't insult my intelligence and which does what Blu-Ray promised it would many moons ago; Denon or Marantz are looking favourites so far, shame about the lack of delay adjustment on the Pioneer.[/QUOTE]

 

[Cpt.America]

I bought into Blu-Ray pretty early, long before it really had an obvious edge over HD-DVD. I did my homework, found it to be the better technology with better support, and dove in head first. I went with PS3 because it was the best (almost the only) blu-ray player at the time. My Blu collection is around 25 titles so far, and I have gotten most of them for around $19 bucks. I keep seeing people here say "oohh.. they cost TWICE as much as DVDs!!". Well, I dont think so. You just need to know where to look. Heck, remember when DVDs were first coming out back in 99ish? They were well over $20 a pop too, and they slowly came down. You may also not recall, that there were also a handfull of compatibility problems with different players in the early days of DVD too.

All I have to say... is while your sitting back with your 480 low def picture, complaining about the occasional compatibitly issue with some disk on some player... I am enjoying a bruttally good picture in 1080p and loving every minute of it.

What to do... what to do... complain about blu-ray... or sit back and enjoy blu-ray... which sounds better... hhhhmmm.

 

[boxinghris]

You are stupid.

Another who can give it but can't take it - plenty like you about on forums LOL!

 

[boxinghris]

I disagree, not because I bought into Blu-ray, but because I did research and DID buy a PS3 and have had flawless performance and movies since the day the PS3 was released. So, while you are saying things like...
"it was released half-cocked" - the reality was that certain companies released inferior products which consumers should not have bought. Yet, much like Ferraris, Runco projectors, and Bose products, people make overpriced purchases with poor reliabilty or quality every day.


I don't support machines which don't do what they say they are going to do. I think any player which can't play the basic Blu-ray Disc movie has failed. If a player is Profile 1.0, that is what should be expected by any consumer. I would agree whole-heartedly that those are insurmountable issues, but I'm not aware of players which fall into this category except maybe an early Samsung (?).


Then don't say...
"Blu-Ray doesn't deserve to succeed"
...because that sure screams "Hey everyone! I'm rooting against the format!"


Absolutely - from a straightforward point of view, that's all that needs to be said. You could have said "I wish HD DVD hadn't pushed Blu-ray players onto the market early", but you chose not to. Blu-ray, according to all early reports was about 6 months behind for basic players and 18 months behind for fully featured players, and this information was known to those who did some homework BEFORE either format was released. But, HD DVD (Toshiba) forced the BDA to respond, and it was several half arsed players which were put out. Very unfortunate.


Yes, very unfortunate that some early players had significant issues. Lets kill the format for it! As far as 'catch up' - Blu-ray has always been a technologically superior product compared to the (only) competitor in HD DVD. It also had to deal with dozens of involved companies and new technologies which made it far more difficult to fully organize. But, for those who were not early adopters, or bought a PS3, or are happy with Profile 1.0, there are far fewer complaints then you seem to believe.


Then you certainly should focus on the specific failings of the product, and certain manufacturers, not blame the format itself. Early studio releases were not properly mastered, which should have led to movies not being released. Early players should have allowed for proper firmware updates to handle all discs - which hasn't seemed to happen for a player or two (or more?). Recent discs still are authored by studios to do some stupid things... no idea why, but at least there is a way to resolve the issue. Most of all, the players seem to be getting better and better while pricing continues to fall.


I'm sure I could find some, but I've also seen my A2 lock up, and heard of firmware bricking the unit. So, exactly what company doesn't have issues? There is no 'perfect' player yet, but there were many claims of the same for DVD players for years. Seems you want a perfect player, at a reasonable price, without any possible issues at all and full support of everything you can possibly dream up.

Great, let me know when you find it.


That's your choice, but as I said, I've been enjoying my player for about 2 years now and all the HD quality that is has delivered along with it. Seems that sitting on the sidelines you may be so busy talking and complaining that you are missing the game. From the nosebleeds where I have no perspective at all, the game has been really enjoyable.


Such as the iPod which always supported video and all current functionality in first generation players? How about Windows (in general)? Or cars which have parts constantly fail? How about satellite boxes which now needs MPEG4 compatibility? How about etc., etc., etc.?


Once again - your statements are silly. The profiles were released early on. The capabilities were as well. Each player has specifications which are available. There are reviews of products available. You can choose to buy in and enjoy, or choose not to. Clearly, you've made your choice, but don't pretend that a roadmap to future products is a 'joke', when it is likely that half the products you own are incapable of the features which are now standard (why not simply use HDMI 1.3 to your Integra - was it outdated?). I think you want to hold one format to a higher standard than you hold anything else in your life.

Pretty silly to me.

No doubt in the next few months I will own a Blu-Ray player and I am excited about higher-rez audio/video, but please give me a player which doesn't insult my intelligence and which does what Blu-Ray promised it would many moons ago; Denon or Marantz are looking favourites so far, shame about the lack of delay adjustment on the Pioneer.

[/QUOTE]

Oh dear - we're just going around in circles here and our responses are going to get longer and longer as we include quotes from each other, but unlike 'jostenmeat' you make points which although I have already considered and am aware of, are good points and you don't just spit your dummy out the pram and call me 'stupid'.

Silly is OK as I'd level the same accusation at yourself, but I appreciate you're not stupid.

To keep it short then and sign off (I won't be able to access the internet until next weekend), when I say the format doesn't deserve to succeed it's an attack on the way it's been handled/launched - Blu-Ray being an unmitigated success on launch would have meant studios being rewarded for a half-baked format with half-baked players with even a half-baked HDMI connection.

I've attacked SONY on audio forums when SACD was launched but at least the players were over-engineered, fantastic machines which still exist today doing great service.

You did your research and bought a PS3 which was a great choice, and I'd argue the only intelligent choice at the time and possibly still the best choice.
During your research you probably realised that none of the other players available were as quick to load, were as future proof or gave a better picture.
Ever since the start of the format war I've kept up to date like most enthusiasts and really am looking forward to full HD images which is why I invested in a Full HD KURO screen, currently providing excellent upscaled imagery which although great will be bested by excellent 'real' 1080p images and HD audio codecs.

The PS3 showed what COULD be manufactured and should have been the starting point for players which were improvements, but it didn't happen which is why enthusiasts who had no intention of ever playing a video game decided to buy PS3s for Blu-Ray playback; great machine - solid, reliable, upgradable, it's a shame SONY thinks gamers have higher expectations than video enthusiasts.

As you say yourself, "the players seem to be getting better and better while pricing continues to fall" which is the same for all technologies and was for DVD, but with Blu-Ray it's way more pronounced in respect of the 'better and better' bit.

I don't want a 'perfect player' (now that really is silly) but I do want one which can load as quickly as a PS3, can play every Blu-Ray disc, has high quality 7.1 analogue outputs (with delay adjustment!) and is capable of being multi-region (don't get me started).

The products I now own certainly ARE capable of handling the features which are now available, or at least those I want, and the higher rez codecs can be passed to the processor via analogue no problem so I have both full rez video and audio.

I'm not remotely interested in BD-Live by the way and it wouldn't be a sale stopper if a player had everything I wanted but no BD-live, although it probably will have.

Finally then, Blu-Ray has matured over the last couple of years and I will be one of the most vocal supporters when the hardware and software deliver the goods as they should at a decent price, and they're almost there.
Insiders in the industry I've spoken to confirm that once the studios have made some money, prices of software will come down significantly but of course I'd argue that if prices came down now they'd sell way more discs and entice way more fence-sitters to buy players - it's not rocket science.

Catch you next week then so it looks like you're getting the last word for now which is fine by me - you can even call me silly again as it's water off a duck's back, and in fact you can even call me stupid but I think you're above that.

 

[boxinghris]

I bought into Blu-Ray pretty early, long before it really had an obvious edge over HD-DVD. I did my homework, found it to be the better technology with better support, and dove in head first. I went with PS3 because it was the best (almost the only) blu-ray player at the time. My Blu collection is around 25 titles so far, and I have gotten most of them for around $19 bucks. I keep seeing people here say "oohh.. they cost TWICE as much as DVDs!!". Well, I dont think so. You just need to know where to look. Heck, remember when DVDs were first coming out back in 99ish? They were well over $20 a pop too, and they slowly came down. You may also not recall, that there were also a handfull of compatibility problems with different players in the early days of DVD too.

All I have to say... is while your sitting back with your 480 low def picture, complaining about the occasional compatibitly issue with some disk on some player... I am enjoying a bruttally good picture in 1080p and loving every minute of it.

What to do... what to do... complain about blu-ray... or sit back and enjoy blu-ray... which sounds better... hhhhmmm.

I'm in the UK mate, and believe me, we get a LOT worse deal than you with Blu-Rays - it's not called 'RIP OFF BRITAIN for nothing

Also, I'm not sat here watching low def 480, I'm sat back enjoying broadcast quality upscaled DVD and 1080i SKY HD, and my flirtation with a Panasonic BD30 demonstrated I'm not exactly being short changed either.

 

[fmw]

I'm a BD early adopter and, frankly, I've pretty much lost interest in it. I just record HD movies from satellite now and skip the overpriced discs.

But I do want to put in a word of support for the studios. Digital copying is theft and, I should add, a pretty easy theft to engage in and a very difficult one to protect against.

The music industry is trying to kill the CD just so they can have a dowload that is encoded to be harder to copy. The software industry has to go through gyrations to keep their software from showing up in a hundred other places with no revenue. DRM is the same thing. It protects the studios from theft - or at least some theft. If it all worked perfectly, the cost of the software might likely come down. Evey time the studios incorporate something to protect against digital copying, someone cracks it and the studios are forced to get even more extreme.

You can call it greed if you like. I view it as a company protecting its revenue stream, without which there would be no movies at all.

 

[BMXTRIX]

...when I say the format doesn't deserve to succeed it's an attack on the way it's been handled/launched - Blu-Ray being an unmitigated success on launch would have meant studios being rewarded for a half-baked format with half-baked players with even a half-baked HDMI connection.

I think if Toshiba hadn't stirred the pot with HD DVD, we likely wouldn't have seen Blu-ray for another 12-24 months, and we likely would have seen a far more polished product than what we ended up with. But, it was a bunch of very slow, and oftentimes buggy players out there, which I think sucks for those who bought them.

I've attacked SONY on audio forums when SACD was launched but at least the players were over-engineered, fantastic machines which still exist today doing great service.

But, it's important to remember that Panasonic is the majority patent holder in the Blu-ray technology, while Sony is the most vocal supporter. Just something to remember, since so many people like to think the product is entirely Sony driven. It's why I think Panasonic has some of the best players out there.

You did your research and bought a PS3 which was a great choice, and I'd argue the only intelligent choice at the time and possibly still the best choice.

It was actually a fairly random guess since I knew I wanted a PS3 and would wait and see if I also would need to invest in a decent BD player. I pre-ordered well before launch so I could have one on launch day. The reality that it has worked flawlessly for me over the past 2 years is dumb luck. But, it's hard to not be excited about it when it has been just that: flawless for two years.

The PS3 showed what COULD be manufactured and should have been the starting point for players which were improvements, but it didn't happen which is why enthusiasts who had no intention of ever playing a video game decided to buy PS3s for Blu-Ray playback; great machine - solid, reliable, upgradable, it's a shame SONY thinks gamers have higher expectations than video enthusiasts.

I agree, and I've said that I think Sony should release the PS3 in a more traditional black-case design with premium fans and quieter components, and sell it as a PS3es with IR built in and sell it at a profit ($1,000+ I would guess). It might cost more, but I think with the quality of the product, it would sell.

I don't want a 'perfect player' (now that really is silly) but I do want one which can load as quickly as a PS3, can play every Blu-Ray disc, has high quality 7.1 analogue outputs (with delay adjustment!) and is capable of being multi-region (don't get me started).

I think the multi-region may be the toughie, but Oppo may be the player with your name on it.

The products I now own certainly ARE capable of handling the features which are now available, or at least those I want, and the higher rez codecs can be passed to the processor via analogue no problem so I have both full rez video and audio.

I was just making a point - that's all. Just because they didn't have final spec (2.0) players on launch date didn't mean that they weren't allowed to have them later. As long as 1.0 players play discs, a lot of owners will still be happy, even if you wouldn't be.

I'm not remotely interested in BD-Live by the way and it wouldn't be a sale stopper if a player had everything I wanted but no BD-live, although it probably will have.

I said over two years ago that a few years into the life of BD that every player that hit the market would feature the capabilities of handling everything that anyone wanted, so for people to ditch the format one day one was stupid (not directed at you). Instead, people either needed to suck up that the technology had its shortcomings, or simply not buy in for a while.

Choosing not to buy in is fine. Complaining is fine. But, the studios and CEs are working to make it better all the time, so if you love HD it seems like BD must be in your future at some point. Granted these last couple of posts read a fair bit different from your first.

...you can even call me silly again as it's water off a duck's back, and in fact you can even call me stupid but I think you're above that.

Not at all! If you were stupid, I would call you stupid. And I think the first post you made was kind of silly (not you silly, but the post), but I don't think this one was at all. It was far more level headed and addressed more specifically what you were looking for from the format, which I totally respect, and pretty much agree with.

 

[allargon]

I think if Toshiba hadn't stirred the pot with HD DVD, we likely wouldn't have seen Blu-ray for another 12-24 months, and we likely would have seen a far more polished product than what we ended up with. But, it was a bunch of very slow, and oftentimes buggy players out there, which I think sucks for those who bought them.


But, it's important to remember that Panasonic is the majority patent holder in the Blu-ray technology, while Sony is the most vocal supporter. Just something to remember, since so many people like to think the product is entirely Sony driven. It's why I think Panasonic has some of the best players out there.


It was actually a fairly random guess since I knew I wanted a PS3 and would wait and see if I also would need to invest in a decent BD player. I pre-ordered well before launch so I could have one on launch day. The reality that it has worked flawlessly for me over the past 2 years is dumb luck. But, it's hard to not be excited about it when it has been just that: flawless for two years.


I agree, and I've said that I think Sony should release the PS3 in a more traditional black-case design with premium fans and quieter components, and sell it as a PS3es with IR built in and sell it at a profit ($1,000+ I would guess). It might cost more, but I think with the quality of the product, it would sell.


I think the multi-region may be the toughie, but Oppo may be the player with your name on it.


I was just making a point - that's all. Just because they didn't have final spec (2.0) players on launch date didn't mean that they weren't allowed to have them later. As long as 1.0 players play discs, a lot of owners will still be happy, even if you wouldn't be.


I said over two years ago that a few years into the life of BD that every player that hit the market would feature the capabilities of handling everything that anyone wanted, so for people to ditch the format one day one was stupid (not directed at you). Instead, people either needed to suck up that the technology had its shortcomings, or simply not buy in for a while.

Choosing not to buy in is fine. Complaining is fine. But, the studios and CEs are working to make it better all the time, so if you love HD it seems like BD must be in your future at some point. Granted these last couple of posts read a fair bit different from your first.

Do you work for a CE company? You aren't related to Dobyblue by any chance are you?

Blaming HD DVD for Blu-Ray's screwups is way too much. If HD DVD weren't around to compete pretty much all discs would look like the original Fifth Element or Full Metal Jacket, MPEG2 and PCM (or 640 kbit DD) would be the norm rather than AVC/VC-1 and Dolby TrueHD/DTS-HD MA. Players would be $1500 at launch and still wouldn't play CD's in the first generation (*cough* Sony *cough* Pioneer).

Studios and CE's working to make it better? CE's are working to compete. Studios are releasing barely enough to keep the format alive. If studios wanted to make it better they would release the best releases possible for the lowest prices possible.

BTW, there's still a lack of 50GB replication capacity with Blu-Ray. The death of HD DVD has only exacerbated that.

The BH200 is multi-region Blu-Ray (for the most part) but not profile 2.0. LG is giving its owners $75 back as a result.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Do you work for a CE company? You aren't related to Dobyblue by any chance are you?

Only if you are a Toshiba employee. Though, I think making such an accusation and then ignoring the economics of a competitive market aren't exactly what I would consider any attempt at a rational arguement.

Blaming HD DVD for Blu-Ray's screwups is way too much.

I don't blame Toshiba, I recognize that the early players were cruddy and I think it sucks for consumers who bought them. I do acknowledge though that when HD DVD came to market that the BDA's hand was forced and they could have ignored the market for 18 months - but I think a kid in high school would realize how stupid that would be. I'm sure you can see how that would have made no sense at all for the BDA to sit idly by while Toshiba stuck it out as the only product on the market.

If HD DVD weren't around to compete pretty much all discs would look like the original Fifth Element or Full Metal Jacket, MPEG2 and PCM (or 640 kbit DD) would be the norm rather than AVC/VC-1 and Dolby TrueHD/DTS-HD MA. Players would be $1500 at launch and still wouldn't play CD's in the first generation (*cough* Sony *cough* Pioneer).

By that logic, if it wasn't for DivX, DVD players would never have come out with anamorphic discs, DL discs, DD or DTS products, and we would never have seen upconverting players. Of course, those first generation players at $1,500 would never have dropped in price either.

Come on, in the world of silly statements, you just followed the HD DVD fanboy party line. That is, instead of recognizing that consumers already have DVD and HDTV as a yard stick, and Blu-ray needed to best that yard stick - which they didn't with those first titles, that it was because of HD DVD only for why they improved.

Blu-ray improved because consumers had the expectation of superior HD, and regardless of HD DVD's quality, it was clear on the first few discs that they were rushed to market and not nearly at the quality levels which HD afficinados had come to expect. Remember, HD Tivos are out there as well as D-VHS for HD content delivery. People know what to expect.

Studios and CE's working to make it better? CE's are working to compete. Studios are releasing barely enough to keep the format alive. If studios wanted to make it better they would release the best releases possible for the lowest prices possible.

Back to high school business for you then.

Studios and CEs aren't working to compete - they are working to make money. You don't make the most money by selling a $10 product to a million people at $25 - or to 2 million people at $15. You make the most money by selling a $5 product for $14 to ten million people or more. This is where DVD is at right now, but it is losing steam. Blu-ray is releasing over a dozen movies a week, every week, from now until around mid-Februrary according to the current schedule...

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html

For Nov. 18, it's over 30 releases. Frankly, that's more movies than I typically want to buy in a year. At 12 a week, minimum, it's over 600 titles a year. Over a movie a day for people to enjoy. But, at a movie a day, most people are going to be watching the dregs of what movies have to offer.

I don't know what magic number is acceptable to you, but it looks like the release schedule has more than doubled compared to a year ago.

That's positive growth during a national, if not world-wide recession. Perhaps you could redefine 'barely enough' for me so that it applies to this situation?

BTW, there's still a lack of 50GB replication capacity with Blu-Ray. The death of HD DVD has only exacerbated that.

So, on the one hand, they aren't releasing enough movies, but on the other hand, they can't keep up with demand? Seems to me that it's only one simple thing - they can't keep up with demand. They need more replicators, they need more players, they need to bring prices down, they need to improve quality...

All of which is exactly what we have seen the BDA do up to this point, so I'm not sure why anyone would believe that they would stop doing so.

The BH200 is multi-region Blu-Ray (for the most part) but not profile 2.0. LG is giving its owners $75 back as a result.

Any player which is claimed to meet 2.0 spec and never does should entitle owners to a 100% refund IMO. CEs still have work to do, and I think that they are doing it. Fortunately, I have had my perfectly functioning BD player for over 2 years now, so I'm not really worried about what LG is doing - that is their own company policy to decide.

 

[dobyblue]

Just think what the average consumer is doing

That's an easy one, they're watching DVD's still.

Do you work for a CE company? You aren't related to Dobyblue by any chance are you?

No he isn't related to me.

BTW, there's still a lack of 50GB replication capacity with Blu-Ray. The death of HD DVD has only exacerbated that.

That is incorrect. If you saw how quickly Paramount re-pressed close to one million copies of Iron Man while Sony had to re-run a few million copies of LBP you'd know that wasn't the case.

All BD50 runs scheduled still made their marks. Some orders that were left to the last minute were handled by smaller replication centres, but I didn't see any miss their marks or not have enough for retail.