Blu-ray's Fatal Flaw?

Computerworld thinks that Blu-ray technology will tank, even though it has vanquished its chief competitor, HD DVD.

The magazine is probably onto something, and it has to do with the trade-offs people make between fidelity and convenience. In that model, the problem with Blu-ray is that its fidelity isn't so much better than DVDs that consumers will feel compelled to make the switch. And its convenience factor -- how easy it is to get and how cheap it is -- doesn't come close to comparing with DVDs. So Blu-ray is neither high enough fidelity or high enough convenience to win over a mass market.

And then, by the time the cost/convenience of Blu-ray gets to an interesting point, HD downloads and on-demand movies should come around and make discs obsolete.

Comments

[vboring]

according to computerworld's approach, everybody would move to stealing movies via p2p software, because it is more convenient, less expensive, and the same quality as DVD.

seems to me blu-ray is already dead in the water. the vast majority of the units sold were playstations, not dedicated players. so there is little evidence that there is any interest in blu-ray at all.

[ballsschweaty]

You dudes are morons. If you like to watch HD movies, you have no choice but to buy Blu-Ray. If you can't tell the difference between a Blu-Ray HD movie and standard DVD, you're a moron.

Why buy a dedicated Blu-Ray player when you can buy a Playstation for the same price? That's the reason why most Blu-Ray players are Playstations and that is genius for Sony to do that. Once Playstation is in the home, people will buy games.

[Tech Junkie]

Flawed analysis. We are at least 5 years away from mass-market acceptance of downloads - legal or otherwise. Blu-Ray will succeed now because of the vast improvement in picture quality compared to standard DVD's. As large-screen, hi-def TV's penetrate into more homes, people are becoming critical of signal quality. The general public will see the difference that Blu-Ray offers. This will only continue as the hardware prices continue to drop.

[chadillac]

While I understand that Blu-ray has both low convenience and low fidelity at the moment, I think that price is the greatest detriment to the technology. Sony, it seems, is famous for giving technological advancements that tank (i.e. Beta etc.). However, I think that given some time, Blu-ray will show itself to be a good and long-lasting technology once studios really learn how to utilize it. Few movies need the incredible detail and color of High Definition right now, but as the studios learn how to manipulate the picture to really take advantage of the technology (as was done with VHS), then we will see a rise in Blu-ray's fidelity and convenience.

[Malkiel]

Enough already with the nonsense about the death of dvd discs. There will always be product sold on some kind of physical medium--in case you haven't noticed a substantial portion of the public still doesn't have or use the internet. If they did, the downloading activity would shut down our miserably inadequate infrastructure, which nobody is investing in improving. So no, some kind of disc or stick or whatever has to be used for retail sale of the goods and will be for a long time to come. The music CD has been around for 26 years and I would expect standard DVD to dominate its niche for at least that; right now we're on year 13.

The primary objection to Bluray as described on CNET a while back is that it can't be manufactured on current equipment and it wasn't clear how any of the usual sources were going to set up manufacturing. That may still be an issue; and resolution versus price is still a consideration for older people who, believe me, can't tell the difference when the eyes reach a certain age. Unless Bluray is priced to compete with ordinary discs it will fail as spectacularly as SACD and its audio competitors...

[lonewolf]

I love how many naysayers have been predicting Blu-Rays demise right from the beginning. The HD-DVD crowd predicted it at their own peril, buying into a format with not enough studio support. The naysayers have underestimated the PS3's popularity and it's great ability at playing Blu-Rays. The naysayers claimed it was too expensive, (even though any new technology is expensive at first. I paid 400 bucks for my first standard def DVD! And like Blu-Ray, very few people had them at the time!) the naysayers thought everyone would rush to the cheaper, (Of course it was cheaper, Toshiba GAVE away the players at a loss, to try and sell the format!) format of HD-DVD.
Now the naysayers are claiming people will not want a High Def format, and this new one posted on here about how the audio is not much better than SD DVD?
Are you kidding me?
Have you listened to High Definition DVD?
Have you watched one on a good Hih definition set?
The picture and the audio is phenomenal!
Of course, it depends on what disc you are listening to.
Just as on SD DVD's, there are some terrible transfers, and on any HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, it depends on the mastering of a film, the type of film, etc...
There are plenty of fantastic transfers with incredible video and audio.
And comparing any of them to a standard DVD, is laughable!
Try watching one of these on a set-up where the sound and the high-def TV/monitor measures up to the source. Y
You'll be amazed.
Again, if you are listening on a sub-par system, maybe you cannot hear and see the difference.
I bought a Sony XBR4 46" set and an Onkyo 805 receiver. I have Cambridge Soundworks Newton series speakers, and I can tell you, no one watching or listening to my set-up would compare them to any standard DVD.
When a cell phone rings in a move, visitors to my place will often look around to see if their cell phone is ringing.
I've had people whirl their head in the direction of my back door when watching a horror movie and someone pounds on a door...
And as for music, try listening to some of the music Blu-Rays... truly amazing!
No, SD DVD does not measure up.
And it is completely ignorant to suggest it does...

[lakeside]

This article failed to mention the capacity on Blu-Ray discs. Standard DVD's hold 10 GB of memory or less. HD DVD generally run 45 GB or less. Blu-Ray are now approaching 100 GB of memory. Folks can download movies, but many folks buy DVDs for the "extras," generally something one does not get by just downloading the movie. Obviously, that can be done, also -- downloading the extras, if available -- but capacity of these DVDs is probably a bigger selling point than clarity at this time. And yes, the majority of movie watching is not yet on the computer screen.

[Tom B]

So.... buy Sony for Blu-Ray but also AAPL, if you think downloadable will prevail?

[JimmyGoodwin]

If Sony could go back in time, they wouldn't have wasted money in Blu-ray. Not only has it caused them massive debt to date, they had to sell off any would be profits to recruit supporters for the Blu-ray camp vs HD-DVD, supporters which now hold direct rights of Blu-ray and are in direct competition of Sony. Needless to add piracy and digital media to the equation.

[Donzer]

Absolutely the most moronic observation i
I have ever read.

The author is obviously a person of poor taste and knowledge of what the public wants and needs. Blu ray will be a great success and in case you didn't notice, Sony has regained it's leadership in video innovation with the 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio OLED TV. Betamax was a marketing error, not a technology error.

Wake up and learn about your profession. We can do without your innane observations.