What is Digg?358 Comments
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -22/+103Why buy blu-ray when you can DL a HD x264 rip??
- Beylan, on 06/22/2009, -28/+103Why should I pay a premium for a format that doesn't really work any better than the older format? There is still a lot of life left in DVD.
- inyearstocome, on 06/22/2009, -12/+69If i own the license to watch a movie (ie, a digital copy on a DVD) I should have the right to the same movie in high definition. At the very least, there should be a trade up program in place where you get a discount for showing proof you own a copy of the movie.
Besides... Blu-Ray will be short lived, replaced by digital copies that are more portable and less physical. - burrgrinder, on 06/22/2009, -7/+63I'm unconvinced that the price difference is universally worth it. Some movies are about graphics and detail, and those are worth the Blu-Ray price difference, others are about dialog and story telling, and the visuals don't matter much. If they ever become equally priced, then yeah, there's no reason to not buy the better format.
As for rebuying, I bought it, got my enjoyment from it, and am unlikely to get another $15 worth out of it. - inactive, on 06/22/2009, -25/+80It is a scam to try to make you replace your entire DVD collection with Blu-ray so they can make more money for very little benefit to the customer.
- dvsbastard, on 06/22/2009, -4/+43It's a simple case of Cost Vs Benefit... and most consumers fail to justify the jump in cost for slightly better sound / video.
And with good reason... A side by side comparison really does show just how much better blu-ray looks on a decent set... But how many people watch their movies side by side? Without the direct comparison, DVD's are still perfectly watchable, without reducing the entertainment factor... - tomato1324, on 06/22/2009, -19/+58because the quality of blu ray is incredible, there's no comparison to regular DVDs.
- gamabunta, on 06/22/2009, -2/+37The price point is still a major factor and will continue to be the main barrier until we start seeing $50 players and new releases at around $15.
- tomato1324, on 06/22/2009, -2/+33maybe if the movies werent so ***** expensive in a failing economy.....
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -10/+41My eyesight isn't good enough to justify a jump to Blu-Ray
- tofslie, on 06/22/2009, -4/+33I am not spending the extra money for 95% of movies out there such as the Wrester that do not really need to be seen in bluray. I would consider buying a bluray movie such as IRONMAN for extra, but 29.99 is just too much.
They need to price new releases as
14.99 for a DVD and 19.99 for a BluRay disc.
Then they will see their sales skyrocket and I believe profits will rise also. - tomato1324, on 06/22/2009, -13/+40no, physical media is not dead. who wants to have a nice big collection of movies at 50 gigs each on hard drives? unless you're gonna shell out an assload of money for a media server, physical media, in this case, blu ray, is the way to go. it doesnt pay until the cost for storage and technology for easy to use media servers comes down significantly.
and i know what digital media is. blu ray is not just more ones and zeroes, blu ray is a ***** of ones and zeroes. - HappyScrappy, on 06/22/2009, -4/+30This is some of the worst junk I've ever read. First, there's no way HD-DVD penetration is at 11%, I'm guessing that the pollsters didn't communicate clearly the difference between and HD-DVD and a DVD player. And I say this having taken a 26 minute poll today where the pollster couldn't even pronounce "methamphetamine". There were only about 1 million HD-DVD players sold in the world. And some number of HD-DVD add-ons for 360, let's say there were a million of those. Then let's say all 2 million of those players were sold in the US. That's would mean no more than 1% of US households have an HD-DVD player. There simply were not nearly enough HD-DVD players sold for 11% of US households (22M of them) to have an HD-DVD player.
Second, saying 1/3rd of Blu-ray buyers are just buying new stuff on Blu-ray and not replacing their DVD library? I'm shocked it isn't more! The library of back catalog Blu-ray titles is poor right now and buyers of catalog titles know that if they wait a little longer, the price will go down. This is very true with Blu-ray where only in the last 3 months have a noticeable number of titles (catalog titles) been available at $10 or less. As the number of these titles grow, you will finally see people start to replace their catalog titles, well, at least the ones they like. If you bought something on DVD and never watched it more than once, why replace it at all? - Mouse13, on 06/22/2009, -17/+41Because blu-ray looks better.
Get a PS3 or a $200 player and a Netflix account and blu-ray will warm up to you. - Hraes, on 06/22/2009, -4/+27Why in god's name is this man being buried?
- Myztry, on 06/22/2009, -5/+28BluRay discs are still optical discs. They still need to be returned when hiring (one of my biggest annoyances) which is a waste of fuel and time that gains me nothing. I'm carting bit patterns...
If they're going to DRM the hell out of movies then I'd rather just load the rental movies onto a USB key and have it expire in a week. That way I don't have to be paranoid of damage by kids, overdue fees and pointless trips.
I've never understood why people buy movies. After the first viewing 75% (arbitrary number) of the viewing please and suspense is gone. Since I can rent movies for $3 a pop at my local service station (which I visit at least once a week anyway) it takes 7 viewing just to equal the purchase price.
Purchasing just isn't worth it. There are much more worthwhile things to horde. - MacSuxWindozSux, on 06/22/2009, -1/+20"less physical"
And even less ours. - HurricaneDC, on 06/22/2009, -4/+22That's because buying a blu-ray is $30. Too expensive. I'll stick to rentals and downloads.
- hsbsitez, on 06/22/2009, -1/+19Kinda hard for some people to buy blu-ray when they are having hard time paying their mortgage.
- MScrip, on 06/22/2009, -4/+22More portable how?
Like ejecting a Blu-Ray disc from your player and taking it over to your buddy's house?
Or copying a 30GB file to a flash drive quickly, on your way out the door? - mockupscaledown, on 06/22/2009, -2/+19A well preserved 35mm print will easily have enough detail to justify a 2k full frame transfer (2048x1556), depending on the speed of film used, and other factors. For visual effects work on film plates, the film is typically scanned in at 4k (4096x3072) these days. "High def" isn't a new frontier in resolution, it's only now catching up to film, which is one reason why most directors choose film over digital.
- HappyScrappy, on 06/22/2009, -2/+18Digital copies are not portable, they are DRM locked to your machine. You can't take them to your friend's or parent's house to watch them, or even watch them in a car player.
- qwertydvorak, on 06/22/2009, -10/+26@FervinsUlterius: "1080p is 1080p dude"
highly compressed 1080p is different from a lossless 1080p. same as mp3 is different from FLAC. - phoomp, on 06/22/2009, -1/+17I think it was just the inevitable next step in trying to get me to rebuy a bunch of movies that I already have on DVD>
- enantiodromia, on 06/22/2009, -8/+24If their business model includes everyone re-buying movies they already paid for once, maybe they deserve to go extinct.
- paradigmx, on 06/22/2009, -6/+22DVD quality looks good enough for me, why blow my money on blu-ray when i own the movies on dvd?
Especially when i firmly believe that completely digital mediums will replace disc based in the next 5 years(ie. movies on an SD card) - MSP1, on 06/22/2009, -9/+25I don't need "incredible". Adequate is fine. DVD is adequate. Anyone who thinks otherwise should try watching the content and not the presentation.
- Hraes, on 06/22/2009, -2/+17@AusJP that's a valid argument if and only if you begin with the ridiculous assumption that the industry will still exist in ten years
- fastsix, on 06/22/2009, -0/+14VHS to DVD was about a lot more than just picture and audio quality. The media itself was far superior. More durable, more compact, no more rewinding, ability to jump anywhere in the movie almost instantly, clear pause and slo-mo, better special features etc.
Aside from a better picture and slightly better audio, Blu-Ray doesn't offer much else. It has the storage space to do some pretty amazing things, but for most releases it's not much more than a high def DVD. - richiewrt, on 06/22/2009, -4/+18I have downloaded HD content (mostly from Netflix) but also from other places, and I can confidently say that the HD content that I have found online cannot touch the Blu-Ray in terms of video or audio quality.
- drifter, on 06/22/2009, -6/+20Everyone is questioning Blu-ray just like they did last month, last year and so on. Yet there have been plenty of articles stating how Blu-ray movie sales are skyrocketing. The fact of the matter is many individuals do not own TV's/systems that will allow them to see the difference between a dvd and a blu-ray disc. Therefore they say its not needed. I'm sure thats what the VHS crowd said when dvd's first came out.
- Spire3660, on 06/22/2009, -2/+16What i MEANT was that with a DVD I have full control over it. I can rip it, stream it, convert it ,whatever i want. A DVD has the potential to be seen on at least 4 screens in my house, streamed from one central location easily. A blu-ray disc is consigned to the living room with the PS3.
And to get pedantic, even If I had a BR drive in my media server, I still wouldnt be able to broadcast it like i can a DVD. If you will notice i said media server drive, you ASSUMED it was a DVD drive.
Now piss off. - lanemik, on 06/22/2009, -4/+18Enjoy wasting your money on blu-ray and then whatever is required to get 2K and then whatever is required to get 4K etc. and so on and so forth.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -1/+15Where do you think those x264 HD rips come from? Somebody has to buy them to make those rips.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+13Have some more Monster energy drinks, kid.
- xexx, on 06/22/2009, -1/+14@AusJP
Yes, but that assumes consumers buy your proprietary disc format - it doesn't appear to be happening here. - lanemik, on 06/22/2009, -0/+13For my father-in-law, upsampled DVD quality is perfectly good enough for him. He recognizes that HD is better, but it's not so much better as to require him to spend massive amounts of money on a blu ray player and blu ray discs to replace his entire (massive) DVD collection.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -5/+17It's not a scam to make you replace anything. I didn't replace my entire VHS library when DVD came out. People who have HD displays and appreciate the quality of Blu-Ray are going to buy Blu-Ray. People who are content with DVD are going to buy DVD.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -5/+17"unless you av a TV thats over 50" in size blu-ray is pointless."
I have a 42" 1080p TV. Blu-Ray looks far superior than any regular DVD could hope to be. - Gareth321, on 06/22/2009, -0/+11That depends on your method of procurement. My digital copies work everywhere...
- Myztry, on 06/22/2009, -2/+13Hotplug eSATA and USB3 will ease that inconvenience.
- MasteRR, on 06/22/2009, -6/+17$30-$40 for a movie? No thanks.
Every bluray I have purchased has been in the bargain bin or used for less than $15, and I still think that is too high.
Bring the prices down and more people might buy it. - uberduger, on 06/22/2009, -5/+16@MSP1: Agreed. A polished turd is still a turd.
(And there's been a lot of crap coming out recently.) - pigfister, on 06/22/2009, -7/+18Blu-Ray and HDCP on HDMI ports is about locking down content for the fecktards & has few benefits over current dvd's especially when you own a dvd upscaler.
unless you av a TV thats over 50" in size blu-ray is pointless.
lets not for get who is actually behind the MPAA - RIAA, these are the companies that need to be targeted and boycotted into changing their ways, purchase only 2nd hand media and do not purchase anything branded sony, why allow the fecktards to dictate hardware DRM anymore.
Name and shame the companies as all the **AA trade group name is for is to protect the ***** capitalist corporate globalist wankers from bad press.
MPAA, MPA, FACT, AFACT, Ect:
# Sony Pictures
# Warner Bros. (Time Warner)
# Universal Studios (NBC Universal)
# The Walt Disney Company
# 20th Century Fox (News Corporation)
# Paramount Pictures Viacom—(DreamWorks owners since February 2006)
RIAA, CRIA, SOUNDEXCHANGE, BPI, IFPI, Ect:
# Sony BMG Music Entertainment
# Warner Music Group
# Universal Music Group
# EMI - superkendall, on 06/22/2009, -6/+17Totally false, it's very easy to tell the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD.
780p to 1024p, that's not so easy. But DVD looks horrible in comparison. - ceredron, on 06/22/2009, -1/+11there was a very clear jump in quality from VHS to DVD, which was my point. Blu-Ray, while yes, is slightly better looking, is not worth the price tag associated.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -3/+13That is kind of a dumb survey really. Most people probably wouldn't care if they lost their current DVD collection at this point. Or at least a lot of them. Do people REALLY care about seeing some DVD they bought in 2003 again? Enough that they are going to buy it on Blu-Ray? Nope. Not most people. Very few movies are really worth owning. But people buy them when they come out because hey are like $15 and then they sit there on the shelf gathering dust. It is like when George Constanza mad eJerry get his books from his ex-girlfriend. When you rewatch Titanic on DVD, Jack still dies.
A better question would be how many people are going to buy movies on Blu-Ray from now on. - kesam, on 06/22/2009, -5/+15The difference from VHS->DVD was miles larger than from DVD->Blu-Ray. You have to remember that the shift away from VHS was about much more than just image quality. It was also about durability, size (the disc covers take much less shelf space), practical handling, special features, ability to forward/skip instantaneously, ability to set language, subtitles, sound quality (something I doubt Blu-Ray improves much) and so on.
- Step1Mark, on 06/22/2009, -1/+11"highly compressed 1080p is different from a lossless 1080p. same as mp3 is different from FLAC."
Blu Ray video is not lossless. Sure it looks great and may look lossless when comparing to DVD or HD Rips but do not confuse loss less and high quality. - dvsbastard, on 06/22/2009, -0/+10Uhhh... and why wouldn't a side by side comparison be in full-motion?!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 365 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is