Blu-Ray vs. DVD: The New Format War?

[No6PackJoe]

By Patrick Biz
Contributing Writer, [GAS]

With HD DVD now buried six feet under and all major Hollywood studios onboard in the Blu-ray camp, the stars are aligned for next-generation format sales to finally take off. Surprisingly, prices aren’t falling, and customers still aren’t buying.

The War Has Just Begun

Don’t laugh, Blu-ray vs. DVD is really THE new format war. When comparing specs from Blu-ray and DVD players, on paper, Blu-ray has a clear advantage. But on the field, it’s a different story. Truth is, there are many reasons why consumers are happy with the traditional DVD format:

* They barely see the audio/video improvement
* They already own a DVD player
* DVD Players are much cheaper to buy
* DVDs are 30% to 40% cheaper than Blu-ray disks
* Video stores have considerably more DVDs for rental
* While this one may seem odd, the fact that DVDs are easier to copy also plays in favor of the old poorly protected format

Upconverting DVD Players: Simply Too Good?

If you want to take your DVD collection to the next level on your sexy high-definition television, get yourself an upscalling DVD player, also known as an up-converter, such as the Sony DVP-NS700H/B, the OPPO DV-980H or the Panasonic DVD-S54K. Equipped with an HDMI cable, these players upscale the 480p signal to 1080i/1080p by using complex maths to improve color ratios, contrasts and the overall picture quality. Of course, with a native signal of 480p, they cannot beat the native resolution of a Blu-ray disk that’s 1080p. But the wow effect is not significant enough to make people drop 400 bucks (and up) on a Blu-ray player.

Not Enough Bang For The Buck

This is where DVDs overtake Blu-ray by a mile. Looking at the concept of bang for the buck from a mathematical and graphical perspective, we understand that when prices go up, devices usually provide more features. At a certain price though, quality cannot sustain value as cost increases substantially, while the product itself has less and less to offer. DVDs and up-converting DVD players are comfortably sitting in the bang for the buck area of the graph, while Blu-ray has not yet fallen from the overpriced zone.

Christmas 2008

While many of you may be tempted to wait for the holiday season before taking the next-generation format highway, experts are expecting no significant decrease in price in the upcoming months. Surprisingly, Blu-ray prices have gone up since the death of HD-DVD. Also, the rising price of oil increases transportation costs, and directly impacts the production of plastic.

The format war is far from being over, and the economical situation resulting may restrain the Blu-ray group from making it to your living room. All things considered, DVD may end up being a stronger contender than HD DVD ever was.

Blog Posts powered by BlogBurst | Reuters.com

I think this echoes what some of us have been saying.

[Wilson]

Yup, I think that is accurate and it really sucks.

[limacharliewhiskey]

As many of us have stated, there has always been a fear of Blu-Ray becoming the new version of laserdisc in the old days of laserdisc vs. VHS. That format battle proved that video and audio quality is not enough to lure consumers to a new format if the pricepoint for both hardware and software is too high for J6P.

The stalling economy is also a major factor, as people are dealing with higher gas and food prices, so disposable income for fun stuff is way down for a lot of people. That's just bad timing for Blu-Ray, although the same thing happened with the economy in the early 1990s when laserdisc had its best shot at going mainstream, although it was probably worse back then.

[MJZ]

I've been saying this to friends all along. The average consumer isn't going to get into Blu-ray until you can get cheap players in places like Wal-Mart and even then they have to upgrade at least their TV to take advantage of it, and that's if they can get past the fact that to this audience the jump from DVD isn't that noticeable, especially with the cost involved.

[esc]

I have to agree with a lot of that at this point.

Blu Ray is a lot like Laser Disc. At this point, I think it is just for the video/audiophiles with dedicated home theater systems.

As for the people not being able to see the difference in picture quality between Blu and an upconverted DVD, I'll agree with that ... to a certain point.

The difference on a properly calibrated system is not like going from VHS to high def, but it is there and it is very noticeable. Unfortunately, I'm only talking about a finely tuned, calibrated screen. For most HDTV owners, they will not spend days tweaking their brightness, color and contrast settings. They will plug their new TV in, get skin tones looking half assed OK, set it to stretch the aspect ratio and be done with it.

I've spend a year tweaking the video settings on my projector to get everything just perfect and the results show. There have been a couple of movie nights here where we have watched a Blu Ray movie and then, still wanting to watch something else, gone to the DVD collection and thrown something in. I and everyone else have been amazed at the difference. For example the level of grain on DVD is so much higher than Blu Ray or HD, and the definition of the picture just isn't there.

If JSP is watching a Blu Ray over component on his barely calibrated TV and then puts in a DVD which he watches upconverted, of course he is going to see little difference. I was totally unimpressed with Blu Ray until I was forced to go Blu and do the set up myself because all I had ever seen was in store demos (and we all know how well set up Best Buy/box store TVs are). When I was working at The Brick, all I ever heard from the manager of electronics was "I want those TVs turned up BRIGHTER! Adjust those brightness and contrast settings! Those TVs have to blow people away when they come in the store!". I tried to explain about black levels... maybe thats why I was fired.

[ganthc]

*sigh* Yet another thread signaling the end of blu-ray?

How about a thread that starts analyzing HDTV ownership. Because after all, blu-ray doesn't even matter unless the consumers have hdtvs. If they aren't interested in getting into HD, then logically, blu-ray is not on their radar.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by ganthc

*sigh* Yet another thread signaling the end of blu-ray?

How about a thread that starts analyzing HDTV ownership. Because after all, blu-ray doesn't even matter unless the consumers have hdtvs. If they aren't interested in getting into HD, then logically, blu-ray is not on their radar.

Not the best argument considering how well HD upscaling DVD players sell.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Not the best argument considering how well HD upscaling DVD players sell.

Perhaps, but what is the writer using as his sample of consumers? Is it all consumers, even those that don't own hdtvs? If that is the case, then this article is just a rehash of all the other writers out there, and you have to wonder if HD has a future with the American public. After all, HDTVs are really expensive if you want to get a large enough screen to see the difference in PQ.

To me, all these threads that keep pushing the doom aspect for blu-ray are repetitive and mundane. Blu-ray is in no position or even remotely capable of challenging dvd for supremacy. To say that there is no hope for the format right now because of that just seems silly.

[Derb]

The title of this thread is like Laserdisc vs. VHS

Tell me which one of those formats died first?

[plissken99]

Actually upscaling players sell well because their most all of whats out there. In Best Buy, even if they don't have HDTVs, customers rarly buy the 2 non upcon players we have, because they plan to upgrade to HD in the near future. It's actually hard to buy a non HD set these days, the few tube TVs BB has left are just left over inventory. Plus the clever wording of the digital change over next year, has 90% of the people sure that they'll need an HDTV to keep watching TV.

At this point, those who don't have HDTVs are people with still functioning tubes, and when those fail, their gonna upgrade. I'd fully expect 90% of households to be HDTV owners by 2012. All that said, I think Blu Ray has a steeper hill to climb than DVD did, and it will be quite some time before we see BD sales overtake DVD. It really can't be very accuratly compared to laserdisc however, the sales on players have brought them cheaper than any laserdisc player ever was new, and we're not paying $50+ for every single title.

DVD overtook VHS as fast as it did, not because of the resolution per se, but because DVD was a digital format, thus little to no noise. VHS had a LOT of video noise, and is what actually made it look so bad. Add to that, movies on a compact disc attracted alot of people. Blu Ray doesn't have "the completley different" thing going for it. Whats sad to me, is that the audio is every bit as much an upgrade if not more so than the PQ, but most people have HTIB's and won't notice that. Expensive audio systems are a hard sell to Americans, as their typically so short sighted.

[Chromy]

Originally Posted by ganthc

How about a thread that starts analyzing HDTV ownership. Because after all, blu-ray doesn't even matter unless the consumers have hdtvs. If they aren't interested in getting into HD, then logically, blu-ray is not on their radar.

I don't agree with this. I think that it's the SIZE of the HDTV that makes the difference as well as how far away people sit. Generally, people have smaller sets in non-dedicated rooms and sit pretty far away. At these sizes and distances the difference between HD and DVD isn't that great. Granted, I've got an older HD set downstairs, but at 42" and at 15' away the difference between 480p and 1080i is negligible.

Up in the HT room, with a 92" screen, 720p, and sitting 7 feet away the difference between DVD (upsampled or not) and HD formats is amazing.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Chromy

I don't agree with this. I think that it's the SIZE of the HDTV that makes the difference as well as how far away people sit. Generally, people have smaller sets in non-dedicated rooms and sit pretty far away. At these sizes and distances the difference between HD and DVD isn't that great. Granted, I've got an older HD set downstairs, but at 42" and at 15' away the difference between 480p and 1080i is negligible.

Great point. My dad has a 42" LCD 1080p HDTV and sits about 20+' away from it. I'm not sure he would be able to detect any difference between 480p, upconverted 1080i from this upconverting DVD player, or upconverted 1080p from cable TV sources (as upconverted by the TV itself). He DOES notice picture quality differences when watching cable TV but that's because the SD picture is sometimes snowy and noisy vs native HD cable shows being crystal clear. Other than that, I doubt he could really notice a difference.

Once again, I'll raise the point of the audio side of this war. The differences between DVD and Blu-Ray, as mentioned above, focus on the video side. An upconverting DVD player can't handle ANY of the new audio formats which all would agree are SIGNIFICANT improvements over the 5.1 audio that is standard on DVD. I think the consumer wanting the truly BEST HT experience will go with Blu-Ray over DVD, provided they can afford to do so. Those not wanting to switch to Blu-Ray, if they could afford it, are simply not interested in or not wanting the best HT experience they can have and are happy with what they've got now.

Peace...

[chlngr1970]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Those not wanting to switch to Blu-Ray, if they could afford it, are simply not interested in or not wanting the best HT experience they can have and are happy with what they've got now.

This is, IMHO the second biggest hurdle for Blu Ray now. The biggest is DVD. To most people, DVD is good enough, and HDM does not offer enough of a bump to overcome the prices.

j

[DakotaDave]

Originally Posted by chlngr1970

This is, IMHO the second biggest hurdle for Blu Ray now. The biggest is DVD. To most people, DVD is good enough, and HDM does not offer enough of a bump to overcome the prices.

j

I'm one of those people. I have an HDtv, and I an up-converter player/HT 5.1 combo, and Im very satisfied. Yeah, blugay does have a nice pic, and sound, but its doesnt have that GOTTA HAVE IT factor.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by DakotaDave

I'm one of those people. I have an HDtv, and I an up-converter player/HT 5.1 combo, and Im very satisfied. Yeah, blugay does have a nice pic, and sound, but its doesnt have that GOTTA HAVE IT factor.

Considering your post here, I think for you it's more that you don't want to have to upgrade your technology, and things are moving too fast.

[DakotaDave]

Yes, but I like I said; I'm happy with what I have. I am really impressed with the picture and sound with the upconverter dvd player. If Sony or Toshiba were smart; they should have worked their way up to their new format using the upconverter dvd players. This would have given the length of time they needed to work out kinks, and perfect their technology. It would have also given time to let DVD live and die at a better time. DVD is still too new.

[Astrakan]

As a lover of technology I don't get the "DVD is too new" mentality at all.

How are you being negatively impacted by the advent of Blu-ray, compared to if it hadn't come around at all?

New movies will continue to be released on DVD for a long while to come, so you don't have to join the upgrade bandwagon in order to enjoy new releases. And since Blu-ray players are backwards compatible with existing DVDs, even if you do upgrade you still don't have to get rid of your existing collection or even buy every new release in Blu-ray if you don't want to.

So where's the downside?

KM

[plissken99]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

As a lover of technology I don't get the "DVD is too new" mentality at all.

How are you being negatively impacted by the advent of Blu-ray, compared to if it hadn't come around at all?

New movies will continue to be released on DVD for a long while to come, so you don't have to join the upgrade bandwagon in order to enjoy new releases. And since Blu-ray players are backwards compatible with existing DVDs, even if you do upgrade you still don't have to get rid of your existing collection or even buy every new release in Blu-ray if you don't want to.

So where's the downside?

KM

Exactamundo.

[Miggy]

I hadn't even thought about this, and it's kind of depressing now that I have. I haven't even been able to get into BluRay, yet and I won't until the right 2.0 player comes out later this year. But I don't like to think that it might end up going the way of LD and that all the BDs I do get will end up just being collectors items.

If this does happen, what will be the successor to DVD? Will it at that point just jump directly to downloaded content? I hope not, because I kind of like having movies sitting on my shelf.

Miggy, the Thief

[Astrakan]

Originally Posted by Miggy

But I don't like to think that it might end up going the way of LD and that all the BDs I do get will end up just being collectors items.

I've been saying for years that HD on disc is destined to be a niche product, and I still stand by that.

However, I don't see why that's a problem. As long as players and media are being made, who cares if BD never reached mass market status? Well, other than for pricing and selection reasons I mean.

Point is, there's a big difference between being a failed format (HD DVD) and a niche format. I can see Blu-ray existing happily alongside DVD for many years to come and never becoming its successor.

If this does happen, what will be the successor to DVD? Will it at that point just jump directly to downloaded content?

That is what some people are predicting and what some companies are working towards. I wouldn't be surprised to see that happen, but time will tell.

KM

[limacharliewhiskey]

Originally Posted by Miggy

If this does happen, what will be the successor to DVD? Will it at that point just jump directly to downloaded content? I hope not, because I kind of like having movies sitting on my shelf.

Miggy, the Thief

Hard to say, but looking at the music industry, CDs are still the main medium which music is sold, even though downloads become more popular each year. Wherever the majority of money is being made, that format will remain around for quite awhile. There may not be another designated successor to DVD.

If Blu-Ray does not become mainstream, then it depends on whether Blu-Ray becomes a profitable business for Sony as to whether they can sustain the format. Does Sony make money on their players, or are they selling them at a loss the same way Microsoft did for the XBox 360 when it first came out?

Does Sony make enough from Blu-Ray royalties to offset any losses? Probably not at this point, but I'm sure they hope to as the format gains more acceptance.

[skywalking_sith]

Blu-Ray has a LOOOONG way to go before it surpasses DVD

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Miggy

If this does happen, what will be the successor to DVD? Will it at that point just jump directly to downloaded content?

Most likely. The content providers (i.e. studios) seem to have a DRM'd download rental model as the ultimate end goal. Fox has come out and even stated that they'd prefer this be the next format, period. It makes them the most cash and gives the consumers the least control over the media. Then again, at $5 a shot its a lot lighter on the wallet than the $20-$30 Blu-rays.

[DakotaDave]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

As a lover of technology I don't get the "DVD is too new" mentality at all.

How are you being negatively impacted by the advent of Blu-ray, compared to if it hadn't come around at all?

New movies will continue to be released on DVD for a long while to come, so you don't have to join the upgrade bandwagon in order to enjoy new releases. And since Blu-ray players are backwards compatible with existing DVDs, even if you do upgrade you still don't have to get rid of your existing collection or even buy every new release in Blu-ray if you don't want to.

So where's the downside?

KM

It's this simple...DVD is only at most a full 7-8 year old technology. It's too new to be considered old technology. Like Limacharleywhiskey said; look at the music industry and CD's. CD's are still a high demand format; even with downloading technology, and CD's have been out for almost 20 years. It's rediculous to have tech move so fast when it doesn't need too.

[plissken99]

Originally Posted by DakotaDave

It's this simple...DVD is only at most a full 7-8 year old technology. It's too new to be considered old technology. Like Limacharleywhiskey said; look at the music industry and CD's. CD's are still a high demand format; even with downloading technology, and CD's have been out for almost 20 years. It's rediculous to have tech move so fast when it doesn't need too.

Well to correct the age, DVD is more like 11 years old now(late 97). VHS was around 18 at the time, and laserdisc had been around before that format was 10 years old(VHS was long overdue to be replaced imo). I do get where your coming from, but technological advances have fast forwarded quite a bit in all areas these days. And as good as the PQ and SQ get, I imagine BD surviving for quite a bit longer than DVD.