×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Why Has Blu-ray Failed To Catch Hold?

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the paying-for-plastic dept.

Movies 1162

Velcroman1 writes "My VCR is stashed in a closet, right next to a couple of CD-ROM players, a laser disc player, and other forgotten electronics. Is my Blu-ray player about to join them? Blu-ray really hasn't caught on — and probably never will. 'I'm surprised DVDs have continued to hang on,' said King, referring to the fact that player sales of over 20 million units in the US last year were pretty much evenly split between DVD and Blu-ray models. Blu-ray discs and players are clearly superior to DVDs, offering more features and a better picture overall. So why haven't shoppers been impressed?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not bothered (5, Insightful)

aedan (196243) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868896)

I suspect most people aren't that bothered by picture quality.

DVDs are handier than tapes, you don't need to rewind.

Re:Not bothered (5, Insightful)

DataDiddler (1994180) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868956)

Hole in one. Past a certain point, most people just won't care. This is why most people listen to music on cheap, crappy speakers; the gains in paying an extra $X aren't worth it to them. Plus, people are naturally conservative by nature and won't change anything unless they're forced to or see enough of a benefit in doing so.

Re:Not bothered (1)

joeytmann (664434) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868980)

That and the idea of buying a new player right now with most people pinching their pennies in this down economy.

Re:Not bothered (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869028)

I suspect most people aren't that bothered by picture quality.

DVDs are handier than tapes, you don't need to rewind.

We are going to get Blue Ray player for Netflix and whatever other apps will be included. Since we are willing to stream from Netflix, the extra resolution we would get from a Blue Ray disk doesn't really matter to us. DVD is good enough.

Re:Not bothered (1)

jaymz666 (34050) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869042)

That and the total improvement of blu-ray vs DVD just is nowhere near the huge difference between DVD and VHS in other areas aside from rewind

Blu-Ray is also more expensive than DVD counterparts.

Remember when DVDs were first released the VHS market had a rental price policy for months after release and then consumer prices would come later. You could buy the Matrix on DVD for under $20 or pay $90ish for the VHS, or rent it.

Re:Not bothered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869084)

I've gotta say. I'm hugely into movies and love a good blu-ray over a DVD, but for most of my collection, DVDs are just fine, and they're cheaper. If I find a movie that I really love, and want to squeeze the most out of the experience, i'll pick up a blu ray, but honestly I don't feel the need to have every movie in my collection be in HD.

and most of the people I know are pretty much the same. BluRay is great, but not required for just any old movie.

Re:Not bothered (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869160)

There is a large span of time and a lot of material from TV that either will never benefit from being released in BluRay or publishers won't bother.

There are also BluRay cinematic releases that don't benefit too much from BluRay.

A number of things have to align (including how you set up your viewing space) before BluRay delivers an improvement.

Re:Not bothered (2)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869138)

Exactly. I have only owned HDTVs (and 55" or larger) since 2000. I know people in 2011 who still have 32" CRTs and say that they can't see any reason they'd need anything else. These are even people who are heavy film and pop culture buffs. And not old, either. In their 30s. They're content with regular DVDs and with streaming netflix on standard def. They even play their XBOX 360 on them. It's kind of baffling, but I guess there must have been holdouts when color television came out, who insisted their black and white was more than anyone would need for a couple decades afterward.

Then, you also have the fact that a Bluray is still $20 to $30 and it's not worth that much for a movie that I'm only going to ever watch once (twice, maybe, for the extremely amazing greatest movies of all time). Especially when I can get access to like 9,000,000 songs from a streaming service like MOG for $5/mo and more movies and television than I could ever watch in a life time from a streaming service like Netflix for $8/mo.

Even when you push aside the people who are satisfied with 1980s technology and the people like myself who don't want to "collect" videos, the remaining people simply don't see a point in the investment in a format that is being replaced by streaming/downloads over time. They figure they can just skip this generation's media format and jump back in when we've settled on digital downloads as the ultimate option.

Re:Not bothered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869166)

DVDs are cheaper all around. Orders of magnitude more stuff is available in DVD. No DRM. Quality is good enough.

People don't need to upgrade, and the cost-to-benefit ratio is too high.

This shouldn't surprise anyone.

Re:Not bothered (3, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869190)

Exactly. I don't even bother to put on my glasses for SD TV. Why would I spend money on a TV with a better picture I can't even see without the glasses I don't want to wear?

Re:Not bothered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869192)

I like Blu-ray very much and find its picture quality to be significantly better than ordinary DVDs and ordinary DVD players. The challenge to Blu-ray seems to me to be movies streamed in high definition over cable, satellite, or other media.

It's simple (5, Insightful)

Deathnerd (1734374) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868916)

DVDs still work just fine.

Re:It's simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35868944)

mkvs still work just fine.

What movie distributor uses MKV? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869020)

But which distributor of movies desired by the general public provides lawfully made copies of its works in MKV format, apart from WebM trailers?

Re:What movie distributor uses MKV? (1)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869088)

Duh.

Re:What movie distributor uses MKV? (1, Redundant)

fastest fascist (1086001) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869094)

How is this relevant?

Re:It's simple (5, Insightful)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869022)

That's exactly it. CDs were a major improvement over cassette tapes and DVDs were a major improvement over VHS, no more rewinding and they took up way less space, so there was a compelling reason to switch. Now the motivation is gone; the form factor is the same, the picture isn't that much better, and Bluray players and discs are still relatively expensive compared to DVDs.

"Good Enough" is the enemy of "Better" (4, Insightful)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868922)

For 99+% of what I or my wife watches on DVD we couldn't care less about a better resolution or extra features. That really eliminates motivation to get a Blu-ray player.

Re:"Good Enough" is the enemy of "Better" (1)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869226)

Agreed. And between me and my fiancee we probably have a collection of over 100 DVD's. As long as you take even the most basic care of them they'll last a very long time. If/when the time comes that our DVD player dies and we need a replacement, we MIGHT consider a Blu-Ray player as a replacement, but at this point we hardly even buy DVD's any more. Now it's all either video on demand, Netflix, or something similar. And with their increased rates for Blu-Ray we likely wouldn't get them from Netflix anyway. Even if we did get a Blu-Ray player we probably wouldn't buy many (if any) disks - we just can't justify the additional cost when a Blu-Ray disk costs in the neighborhood of 2x what a regular DVD costs. Bottom line - there's simply zero incentive to go with something that costs more and doesn't offer anything we really care about.

Price! (5, Interesting)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868928)

Because "regular price" for many blu-ray movie is $29.99 compaired to $17.99 for a DVD. The only times I buy blu-ray over DVD are for action movies that I really enjoyed (and that the improved picture quality is actually noticeable) or deep discount sales when I can get them for under $15.

Re:Price! (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869124)

I haven't bought one partly because of it being a Sony controlled standard, and partly because of the price. I was expecting the price to drop to about the same as a DVD, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I almost bought a PS3 slim, but they dropped 'other OS' support, and things seemed to go downhill from there.

Re:Price! (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869178)

It's amusing that people are concerned about the price of a Bluray, yet they still are willing to pay $20 for a DVD. Either way, you're paying a lot for something that there's no point to watching more than once. When you realize how much you're paying *either way* for a bunch of stuff that will just take up shelf space and never be used, it's still a rip off.

I used to collect DVDs (4, Insightful)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868940)

Until my DVDs started to give me disc read errors. I'm tired of wasting money on planned obsolescence, I'm not replacing that collection with BluRays just to have them crap out on me in 5 years. Anyway, a better format will be out by then... I'm skipping this cycle.

Because Blu-ray disks are too expensive (1)

necdeus (680552) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868946)

Way too expensive for a movie. I just buy Blu-ray for action flicks or movies with great cinematography.

This just in... (2, Insightful)

boristdog (133725) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868952)

Many people don't want to spend thousands to re-buy their entire movie collection at a higher price.

Especially when DVD looks almost as good as BR from across the living room on the 40 inch HDTV.

Re:This just in... (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869170)

They look absolutely identical on a 48" standard def TV.

When my TV dies, I might be slightly interested. But at this point, I have a hard drive and a DVD drive in a media PC that can stream Netflix and Hulu. I have no reason to buy a blue ray player and I would only find motivation to buy a blue-ray drive if Netflix stopped shipping DVDs.

-Rick

Simple (1)

PoopJuggler (688445) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868954)

Blu-ray discs and players are clearly superior to DVDs, offering more features and a better picture overall. So why haven't shoppers been impressed?

Because there is a limit as to how much quality normal people need in their life. It's like why we still eat rectangular loaves of wheat bread that people have been eating for the past 200 years. It's just "good enough".. I'm sure with lots of technology we could make really impressive bread, but for most people it just doesn't matter. Sure the bread connoisseurs might appreciate the fancy BluRay Bread but there are not enough connoisseurs out there to really justify a mass market for that kind of bread... Now I'm hungry.

Re:Simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869098)

That, and not enough people want HD porn.

interwebs (4, Insightful)

Goalie_Ca (584234) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868958)

Sony finally won the standards war but is almost irrelevant because people now watch stuff on-demand via streaming.

Why have CD's held on so long (4, Insightful)

DaveInAustin (549058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868962)

and are being replaced with lower-quality .mp3's? Because most folks care about content more then they care about sound or picture quality.

Do they have HDTVs? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35868964)

I just got my HDTV this year and I'm surprised as to how many movies in my DVD collection have only been recently released on bluray (or are still waiting).

The fact is hi-def is just coming out of the early adopter phase.

Time will tell, but I bet a lot of those DVDs are being purchased by people on standard def.

DRM (0)

mbone (558574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868966)

Why has BlueRay failed to catch on ? DRM.

It was not made to satisfy needs and desires of the customer, it was made to satisfy the desires of content-owning corporations.

Re:DRM (2)

geek (5680) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869014)

DVD's have DRM also. Your argument doesn't hold any water.

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869082)

But DVD:s are easy to rip anyway. Not so with Blu-ray.

Re:DRM (4, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869180)

unless the DRM is a lot worse

all DRM is eventually defeated (region free playing, sharpie on the inner ring, etc), but if BluRay makes you jump through more hoops, and spend more money, for less rights, it's a turn off

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869202)

DVD's DRM is practically non-existent.

Re:DRM (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869060)

Why has BlueRay failed to catch on ? DRM.

Sure, for nerds maybe. Almost none of the average consumers know or care.

Re:DRM (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869224)

Actually, you probably have to be pretty nerdy to be able to rip a BluRay disk.

For a DVD, it's pretty trivial and probably on par with ripping a CD. There are a number of automated solutions.

Now of course I realize that a certain class of people think that ripping our own CD's is "too geeky".

Re:DRM (1)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869142)

Why has BlueRay failed to catch on ? DRM.

Go ask average consumers about DRM, see how many of them actually know what it is. DRM might have pushed some of the early adopters away but right now, the biggest hurdle for Bluray to overcome is that there's no motivation to drop DVD.

Because... (4, Insightful)

the_one_wesp (1785252) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868972)

...the economy is in the toilet, and people aren't rushing out to improve their video quality when they don't have the money to do so (or maybe they just don't care to do so).

Not worth it (4, Insightful)

Fulminata (999320) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868976)

Because it's a substantial price increase for an incremental upgrade in quality and often a downgrade in convenience.

Price? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35868982)

When I saw the price of the movies and the players I laughed and kept walking. And to this day I still do. I will never buy anything Blue Ray until they get the price right.

It's caught on with me (4, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868984)

My biggest problem with blu-ray early on was that the first generation of players was awful. They were slow as Christmas (WAY slower than the first generation of DVD players) for one thing. Newer players are considerably faster and come with a lot more features. Unfortunately, it doesn't help that blu-ray discs still come with forced trailers (way more common with blu-rays than with DVD's) from most studios (Universal and a few others being notable exceptions).

umm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35868988)

Maybe it's because blue-ray's are not exactly as clearly better to the average person as compared to a videophile such as yourself?

because (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35868992)

1. Blu-Ray has higher quality than DVD in technical terms, but not practical terms for most people
2. #1 is all the more true because people are viewing more on laptops and mobile devices
3. #2 is easier with DVDs since they are easy to rip and transcode even for non geeks nowadays
4. iTunes, Torrents, etc.
5. The combination of #1 and the fact that DVDs are cheaper than Blu-Ray and the players are cheaper as well.

There's just no compelling reason to pay more for Blu Ray, and for people who like to put stuff on their iPhone/whatever, it's easier with DVDs as well.

Lets see (3, Insightful)

rossdee (243626) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868994)

The viewing experience is only marginally different unless you are watching on a big hi-def screen.
The movies cost more
the players cost more
and what is the point of rereleasing old movies on Blu-Ray - like theres gonna be more shades of black and white?

Honestly (1)

justmike2000 (2023602) | more than 3 years ago | (#35868996)

There is such a large collection of VHS movies (good & bad) and I think my local video store has pretty much every VHS movie ever produced so I see no reason why I would put my VCR in the closet. Between that and Netflix I am set, I rarely watch DVDs, let along a 'High Quality' Blue Ray copy of 'Weekend at Bernies.'

There isn't the same advantage. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869000)

VCR -> DVD
No rewind, Digital picture so consistent quality. Menus, Bonus features. Worked immediately on any TV.
Smaller media footprint. (Seriously, anyone with a huge VCR collection had a spare room to put it in. The same DVD's fit in a quarter of the space in their cases, and a 100th in a CD book)

DVD -> Blu-Ray
High Def pictures. 7.1 Sound? Interactive menus?

Whats the draw here? Only a tiny fraction of the world gives a shit about HD video. Most people don't even have the display that can handle HD.

Clearly superior? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869002)

Blu-ray discs and players are clearly superior to DVDs,

No doubt they are technically superior, but I put in my first Blu-ray movie to watch last week and was horrified at discovering that it had UNSKIPPABLE PREVIEWS. Of course, DVDs can do this as well, but I've fortunately never seen it done with a DVD so it must be rare. I guess the movie studios must believe that those who are upgrading to the latest fancy movie player must also be gullible enough to watch every preview they think you should be seeing.

It just isn't that much better (1)

jovialwoodchuck (1983856) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869004)

I have a 47" HD TV. Watching a VHS, it looks like crap, so the VCR is long gone. While watching a blu-ray is superior to DVD, it's such a slim margin that it just doesn't make much difference to me. This, combined with the price difference, means I will continue to purchase DVDs rather than blu-ray discs for the most part. Also, most stuff I watch was never even recorded in HD, so it really makes no difference.

Blu-Ray isn't mainstream? (3, Insightful)

0x15e (961860) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869006)

This is the first I've heard of it.

Seems to me that someone at Fox just decided Blu-Ray was failing and wanted to write an article about it.

SVHS vs. VHS again (2)

jandrese (485) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869008)

Basically, quality is not a big enough selling point for most people as long as the old stuff was adequate. DVDs advantages over VHS went well beyond just the quality, with instant seeking, no degradation over time, extra features on the discs, and lower price points. They were compelling. Blu-Ray is just more quality for more money, there aren't really any new features, and it requires you to upgrade your screen to use it. Most people are still on SD screens, because they work and HD is just more expensive. Maybe when their old TVs break they'll upgrade to HD, but there is certainly no hurry.

One-word answer: (5, Insightful)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869012)

Netflix

Re:One-word answer: (4, Informative)

BagOBones (574735) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869228)

I purchased a BlureRay player specifically because it was cheap and had Netflix built in..
Months later the ONLY BlureRay I have is the one that came with it, the content I watch with the device is all Netflix and my own media streamed via a DLNA server.

Depends a lot on the movie (2)

thepike (1781582) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869016)

I have a blu-ray player, but I still buy a lot of movies on DVD (because they're cheaper). The main reason is just that a lot of the movies I buy don't really benefit from having better graphics. Sure, if I'm watching the new Tron, I want good graphics, but if I'm watching some random comedy film, do I really need that boost?

Because of that, I rarely stream action movies from Netflix, because I do want the bump in graphics. Mostly on Netflix I watch TV shows, since the quality isn't going to be great anyway and it doesn't matter, and go out and buy my favorite movies.

Featuritis (5, Insightful)

PvtVoid (1252388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869018)

From TFA:

Blu-ray players connected to the Web can offer games, extra movie features, and additional bonus materials online that DVD players generally can't. And the latest Blu-ray players can handle 3D discs, something no DVD player can do.

I don't want any of that shit, especially if I have to pay extra for it. I just want to watch a movie.

QFT!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869154)

parent knows what he is talking about

For me, Blu-Ray isn't that impressive (1)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869026)

One, because to be honest up-sampled DVDs look pretty good.

Two, most movies are now shot in a style that looks like someone let a cat piss on the celluloid. Seriously, who the fuck wants to pop in the Battlestar Galactica Blu-Ray and see film grain and shitty lighting in hi-def!?

Three, for the price point, Blu-Ray doesn't deliver enough value except for the rare really well-shot movie.

Four, digital downloads. All things being equal, anything on disc is slightly antiquated. I rarely buy a disc of anything anymore.

because (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869030)

Sony has been BlueRay's primary advocate... Sony is Evil, therefore BlueRay must be as Evil.

Superior, but not clearly so. (1)

residieu (577863) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869034)

The picture IS better, but the problem is that pictures on DVD are already really good. I'd bet a lot of people can't immediately see the difference, especially if they don't have a side-by-side comparison to look at. As for the features? Does anyone really watch those anyway? I bought several of the multi-disc box sets of different movies I've liked, but I realize that most of them I only watch the movie itself. The special features stay in the box (Though I love the commentary on my Futurama discs, those I listen to all the time).

I have a Blu-ray player (since we needed to replace our DVD player and it wasn't much more to upgrade to Blu-Ray), so I'll buy Blu-Ray discs if it's not much more, but my Net-Flix queue is still DVD only. One advantage that DVDs still have is that our laptops (and now our minivan) still don't have blu-ray players, so if we want to travel and watch movies, we need the DVD.

It's not different enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869038)

The improvement of DVDs over VHS is much higher than Blu-ray over DVD, since the disc and tape are a fundamentally different technology. Blu-ray is just better DVD, for the most part, but not that drastic an improvement. For many, it doesn't offer a compelling reason to upgrade a player and TV for. Plus, it's still a physical medium, which increasing broadband availability and services that use it are chipping away at.

DVDs are better. (5, Informative)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869046)

DVDs don't crash because some jag-off decided to run Java code between frames of my movie. DVDs don't make me worry about version numbers, patching my player, or any of that jazz. And that's just technical.

I have a DVD player in every computer, and connected to each TV - meaning portability. All my friends have DVD players. It's easier to find movies on DVD.

DVDs are cheaper.

I have a huge collection of DVD's. I'm not going to repurchase everything.

Next will be going back to solid state non-spinning media. People don't change formats for picture quality (see: Betamax). They change for convenience/durability.

Too good (5, Interesting)

Gorkamecha (948294) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869052)

Honestly, the quality is too good - You can see the wizard behind the curtain. Real life example: My geeks friends and I were all standing around watching Iron man 2 on a super huge LCD screen at best buy. It was the scene where Tony escapes his captors in the clunky MKI armor. We all noted that the suit looked like plastic, not metal. That you could see where the joints didn't quite connect. In short, the illusion was shattered. I haven't bought a blue ray video since. (I have a PS3, I own a few blueray films that I got for the extra features - But I prefer to watch plain old DVDs.)

I liked HD-DVD better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869056)

Competition was a good thing after all. Exclusive contracts with studios for unlimited number of years were not.
And, I still have HD-DVDs that work fine for the movies I care about seeing in HD.

Then again, I borrow DVDs from our library now to save money.

Worse does not mean better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869062)

When a technology cost more, takes more time to play your movie, requires updates over the internet before playing the latest movie and only gives a better picture if you baught a higher-priced television to play it. Also the normal DVDs still work damned fine enough to not need an upgrade.

Sponsored Microsoft Shills (1)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869064)

and idiotic Americans that believe them...

Everywhere else Blu-Ray is going bigguns.....

This isn't news (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869072)

Blu-ray really hasn't caught on — and probably never will.

Says some random guy on the internet and... Fox News (sigh).

Same old thing, brand new drag.. (1)

ttimes (534696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869076)

I have little interest in Blu-Ray. Not because it can hold more or that the picture is better, but because the movie companies are trying to sell me the same thing again at a higher price. Their larger capacity is irrelevant- if a movie only needs a portion of it, I care little for directors and actors talking over the movie, and while extra scenes can be fun, they are not worth the extra dost. Take a look at the media ecosystem; they fianlly get on board with an 'approved' means of delivery then gradually abandon all others. This forces people to buy the same things at increasingly higher prices. Look at VHS, laserdiscs and cassettes. Blu-Ray? Maybe for Avatar, but never for "To Have And Have Not".

Media price (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869078)

Joe consumer walks into Generi-Mart and sees a DVD of a movie for ~$15 and the same movie on Blu-Ray for ~$25...picks DVD. He knows Blu-Ray is supposed to be better but for ten bucks less DVD is good enough. He doesn't even consider DLC or digital copy in the equation. He'll just get his "techie" buddy to RIP it for him.

Simple answer (2)

kenrblan (1388237) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869086)

Netflix HD streaming video and similar features with Cable and Satellite. Most people watch a movie once and aren't concerned with building libraries. The DVD was established well before on-demand and streaming were as viable as they currently are. People concerned with building collections will buy the BluRay player. One other factor was a general wait-and-see attitude while the BluRay vs HD-DVD format war was still ongoing. People waited and better options presented themselves.

Fox News? Really? (0)

Kelbear (870538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869090)

Maybe because we're still pulling out of a recession. Maybe because Netflix charges extra for blu-ray rentals. Maybe they're happy with Netflix streaming.

Most likely it just takes time. But I have a hard time buying that it's just because the consumer is too stupid to recognize that Blu-ray is just sooo awesome, and that they'd all go running out to chase one down if only they knew how awesome it was. Sheesh.

Cost (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869096)

You need a HDTV for blu-ray to make any sense, if you don't already have one, thats a cost. Even if you do have a HDTV, DVD looks good enough so you have to justify the cost of getting a Blu-ray player. Then there is the fact that since DVD looks good enough you have to justify getting x release on Blu-ray instead of DVD. There is still a recession going on, the cheaper alternative is going to either win or have a very good showing.

I have a HDTV, and I do like the PBS broadcasts in HD, but I don't feel the need to replace the DVD player with Blu-ray.

Lots of reasons (2)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869100)

First of all, the pricing is all wrong... why are these things so expensive? I understand that they were initially gouging the early adopters, but we should be more in-line with DVDs by now.

Second, they are delicate. You get rentals (if you can find them) and they seem more prone to scratches than DVDs.

Third, picture quality is awesome, but you often don't really notice from 25 feet away. Sometimes I have to really pay attention to whether it is Blu-Ray or DVD if the upsampling is decent.

Fourth, selection. Finding pre-2005-ish movies seems to be almost impossible. There have been some things worth buying since then, but not a whole lot. They need at least release the "watch over and over again" classics.

Fifth, player cost. I still haven't seen any for $20 at Walgreens.

Sixth, online. People watch "TV" more and more on their computers. Leisure time isn't what it was in the 90s.

Finally, replacement. VHS wore out, so re-purchasing an old movie on DVD was reasonable. It is much harder to chuck away a perfectly good DVD.

For me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869102)

Price. Individual discs are still way more expensive than DVDs.

DRM. I cannot trivially break the DRM on Blu-Ray like I can on DVDs. Yeah, the hackers are ahead for the moment, but Blu-Ray's DRM isn't utterly and completely broken yet.

I have many BluRay Discs since... (4, Interesting)

Assmasher (456699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869108)

...I have a home theater but there are several reasons why people aren't interested.

(1)If you don't have a home theater and a giant screen to display movies on, you probably couldn't care less about the difference in quality between DVD and BluRay (plus, I've seen some crap BluRay transfers that were no improvement over DVD.)

(2)Until mini-vans start coming with BluRay players by default, my wife will continue to buy DVDs to zombify the kids on car trips.

(3)My personal hatred of BluRay - Taking several minutes to startup due to the DRM and HDCP handshaking, key updating, communication, et cetera.

It is utterly ridiculous that putting a DVD in my Sony BluRay player versus a BluRay means a playback difference of 3 minutes (and I have a fast BluRay player.) Note that some BluRay Discs do not exhibit this behavior but all are still sloooooow compared to DVD.

Sharper video but inferrior in more important ways (2)

Script Cat (832717) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869122)

Bluray stops working for grandma. Then the player gets tossed aside. Or it must be sent to the repair shop. Or grand son must install the new DRM keys.
Bluray is trash and that is where the player belongs.

One word: streaming (1)

hsmith (818216) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869126)

I have a ps3 and a few blurays, but I also have an AppleTV (and Netflix). I can rent movies for $3.99 from my couch or for free through streaming (minus the monthly cost). So for movies I'll watch once, maybe twice, why would I pay $25 for bluray again?

I can't see a difference on my system! (1)

SoTerrified (660807) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869134)

There's a lovely chart out there that combines screen size, distance from screen and some other factors and shows that, at many common screen sizes (I have a 42" LCD) and viewing distances, Blu-ray is indistinguishable from DVD quality. As my wife and I happen to have our home theater in that range, I have seen absolutely no motivation to switch to a new format. (A friend brought over his Blu-ray player at one point, and once it was hooked up, we all agreed the difference was almost negligible.)

So why would King be shocked that a format that means nothing in a majority of households (I assume most of us are getting by with 46" screens or less) isn't taking over?

Economics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869136)

Blu-rays are like $40 here (for popular new titles), which is insane. It's high for a video game, which you can get re-play value from. I'm not paying that much for a movie I'll watch once, maybe twice. Plus, the video store around here that had a decent stock of blu-rays went out of business. The one that opened in its place has a pitiful stock of blu-ray movies. I have to drive to a store 25 minutes away to get a good selection.

I'd rent them weekly if they'd just carry them, and even pay the $1 extra willingly, but it's not an option.

People don't care that much about quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869144)

People generally choose cheap prices over quality. I know many people who listen to music on laptop speakers. HD is nice... but I can enjoy most TV shows/movies at 320x240. If I want an HD experience (which is rare), I go to the movies.

DVD is simply "good enough", and is very cheap. It's not the best, but if being the best mattered, then McDonalds would have failed at selling burgers.

A number of reasons. (1)

Endophage (1685212) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869146)

I can think of at least 2 reasons why Blu-ray hasn't succeeded. The first is that research shows that picture quality is less important if you are actually enjoying what you are watching. Interestingly, enjoyment isn't so much linked to the picture quality as the quality of acting/animation, the script, plot, etc... At the end of the day, we don't care that much about whether things are a little less sharp. Heck, that's part of the reason there's such a market for poor quality copies. If it's a good film, you're still going to enjoy the slightly grainy rip you bought from a dodgy guy on the street. If it's a crap film, it doesn't matter how good the picture quality is, it's still a crap film. I can hear people already saying "But you'll enjoy a good film more if the picture is better!" Meh... If I weighted all the factors involved in enjoying a film, picture quality would be weighted very heavily until the quality drops to the point where you can't really see what's going on.

Secondly, Blu-ray appeared at the same time as many of the online streaming services that are now becoming so popular. It's a matter of convenience. I know it's probably good for me to get out, get some sun, while I go to some rental place or shop. However, I have to pay per disc that way, as opposed to the flat rate I can pay Netflix. This also alleviates any thoughts that I may have wasted my money on a film I won't enjoy. Don't like that bad action film you're streaming? Stop it and find another... problem solved. No need to go spend more money and make another trip.

Re:A number of reasons. (1)

Endophage (1685212) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869168)

gah! typo... "picture quality WOULDN'T be weighted very heavily"

Wow, way to move the goalposts... (2, Insightful)

feepness (543479) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869152)

It used to be about how BluRay will fail completely. Now it's "only" selling half of the market.

No, BluRay will likely never have the complete hold of DVD, simply because download is a real option. But it's certainly not going anywhere.

What do you think will be in the next consoles? [eurogamer.net]

TV quality, price barrier, streaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869156)

You need a good tv to watch the bluray on, as well as paying for the bluray player and the movies. Plus you don't really notice the difference until you've watched blurays for a few months and then are horrified by dvd quality. I get blurays through netflix, but even with that, streaming is a lot faster and good enough for most things.

No simple answer (1)

geek (5680) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869158)

My father would love to have a good blue-ray collection but he has terrible internet service where he is so half the features blue-ray players offer, like streaming Netflix and Pandora aren't viable for him. My mother can't tell the difference between Blue-ray and DVD either so he doesn't bother to spend the 30$ for the discs.

To make matters even more complex, he has around 400 DVD's already. He's not going to re-buy all those on Blue-ray so his DVD player works just fine for him.

I own two Blue-ray players and would love to own more Blue-ray discs but truthfully, when new releases are coming out at 30$ it's easier for me to just download it from The Pirate Bay.

Furthermore, it's been a while since something came out I cared enough about to actual own. Maybe I'm getting old, but movies coming out these days just don't appeal to me. I think a lot of people feel the same right now, especially when money is tight in a down economy.

Because for most people DVDs are "good enough" (5, Insightful)

Chas (5144) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869162)

Plain and simple. Most people aren't looking to play in high definition on Frank's 2000 inch TV.

And for screens 60" and smaller high def, while noticeable just isn't enough of an improvement to merit the switchover.

That and the huge install base of DVD players and drives out there is just an 800 lb gorilla that Blu-Ray has to struggle to overcome.

And the capper.

If there had NOT been a credible format war between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, we'd probably have seen better adoption by now. The format war completely crippled uptake of the format for YEARS. As such, neither HD platform gained the critical early traction necessary to overtake DVD. Now, this late in the game, since it has to now compete with streaming/downloadable content as well, it's going to continue to stumble.

High price, and limited devices to play on (1)

EMR (13768) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869164)

Odds, are it's a combination of the following..

1) higher price
2) limited playability (must have a blu-ray player which you can't get for 30 bucks)
3) requires a "newer TV" and the reality is many have tvs without HDMI (and the copy projection restriction mechanism that rides along)
4) for many it's not all that much extra. (me personally I have a 42" tv and things do look somewhat better, but the biggest thing I notice is subtitles are MUCH crisper in blu-ray., but I have to watch it on THAT tv only)
5) Refusal to purchase as a matter of principle of being PISSED at the movie studios for crippling DVDs..
      - Have you noticed how DVDs now have less and less special features? As an attempt to "encourage" and punish you into buying blu-ray.
6) Can't really play blu-ray on your desktop computers.. and blu-ray is not a standard piece in computers AND software are not available for all platforms even.
7) Netflix and Redbox.
    - Yeah I make frequent use of redbox.. I can "Try before I buy" and sift through all of the CRAP that comes out of hollywood for $1 a pop. And unfortunately there's a lot of crap so people just plain aren't going to spend 25-40 bucks to buy a piece of crap. They'll wait until it's in the $5 bin at wal-mart.

failed? (2)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869172)

I'm not running out to re-purchase my entire collection of DVD's in Blu-Ray format...

And I've always been picky about what I purchase.

But any new movies I buy have been in Blu-Ray format.

No real reason to switch (2)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869174)

On my TV, (37" 720p/1080i) I don't notice any quality difference between Blu-ray and DVD.

But I do notice that the disks take a lot longer to load, trailers are harder to skip over (one blu-ray had nearly 15 minutes of trailers that I had to skip by fast-forwarding then when it hit the next one, I had to fast-forward again and repeat about 8 times), and I can't easily rip a Blu-ray to my hard drive so I can watch it on the plane.

Good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869182)

There are several factors in the blue-ray story. First, and probably the most significant,; people are tired to death of being sold the same thing over again at the same or even higher prices just to have the new format. DVDs are not capable of the highest resolution, but neither are 90% of the devices they are being displayed on, and without the top of the current display technology, the difference is almost negligable, so people see no reason to shell out yet again. Finally, the price premium between the blue-ray and dvd devices is still a significant one, so until the DVD device they have has to be replaced, there is little incentive to go to the blue-ray and pay the higher prices.

Streaming and view-anywhere technologies are going to play a major role in the market and the movie industry will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the current process, where content is movable and the old "buy a copy for each device and format" model is laid to rest at last.

Optical Disks are going the way of the floppy... (1)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869186)

My first job out of college was at a consulting firm that primarily dealt with computer set ups for small/medium video production shops. This was during the transition from OS9 to OSX and the big thing people were discussing was the move to HD.

One of the biggest questions I got back then was "Should I get a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray burner?". Back in circa 2003 my answer was neither. The future was going to be digital content downloaded from the internet and/or the use of something like Compact Flash/SD/USB thumb drives. What I didn't know was whether the delivery of content would be via services like iTunes Store where you downloaded to a local hard drive, some kind of more traditional set top box, internet streaming or some combination of all three.

It looks like it is going to be video streaming. In 2005 I bought a Mac Mini and hooked it up to my 32" LCD TV's DVI port and cancelled my cable TV subscription. The few TV shows I watched was cheaper to by on iTunes than the $60 a month TV was costing me.

In 2009 I started streaming Netflx to my TV via Xbox for $8 a month. The new TV I just bought last christmas now has Netflix and Hulu built in.

In all that time I've never even considered getting a Blu-Ray other than considering getting a PS3. But I barely used my Xbox for gaming. I used it for streaming Netflix.

Ridiculously long load times (1)

TheDan666 (709087) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869200)

I have a BluRay player and I like it. I can notice the difference in quality even on my 5 year old 720p DLP TV. However, the load times are insane. From putting in the disc to finally starting the play button takes around 3 minutes. Just loading the disk takes almost 1 minute. Then you have to putz around with the previews and hopefully the disc lets you skip them. Whereas with Netflix on my Wii, I can click on a show or a movie and have it play withing 5 seconds with no BS previews or menu crap. So even at 480p, I prefer it. And once the new Wii comes out with HD support, forget it. I'll be done with disc-based players. Oh, and I don't have to worry about scratching the discs. Or losing them. Or putting them back in the boxes. Streaming is so much better.

Good enough, ubiquitous, cheaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869212)

DVD players are more universally available. When you need to go from the couch to the minivan, they don't put Bluray players in these things. DVD picture quality is good enough and works well with an upscaling DVD player. I resent having to re-purchase titles again in a new format, and the costs of Bluray are more compared to the same title on DVD.

It's simple (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35869214)

It's really simple, not everyone has a high def tv. I have a ton of customers that still have a old school tube 4x3 TV and DVD's look fine on there. They really wouldn't be able to make use of blu ray without buying a new tv first so blu ray only suits a niche market at this point.

Why I have one at all (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869222)

I bought a new TV and it didn't have SD hookups, given that I've had my DVD player since '99 I figured it was time to upgrade.

I could care less about the BluRay player, the feature that had me interested was the fact that it can stream MKVs over my network. I've taken the Herculean task of ripping my current DVD collection to MKV so that I don't have to play detective and look for missing/misplaced discs anymore.

That said, I have a couple of BluRay discs now, a couple came in those DVD/BluRay combo packs, I actually purchased "Dark City" (finally a good transfer!).

I think I'm getting done purchasing disc media altogether, it's bulky and largely pointless. Especially digging through the collection and asking myself "why did I buy this?".

Who needs physical copies? (1)

chaotixx (563211) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869232)

I no longer see the point in owning physical copies of media. Why spend my limited viewing time watching something I've seen before when my Netflix streaming queue has so much new stuff for me to see?

There's also the DRM issue. DVD players pretty much just work. My in-laws purchased a Blu-Ray player, but no longer use it since it refused to play a handful of movies they had rented. They're not going to bother with updating the firmware on their device when they could just watch a DVD instead.

Are you sure? (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869234)

All the major new releases at my walmart are featured in Blu-Ray. The HP movies as well now that the Deathly Hallow's is out. All the Redboxes in my area got Blu-Ray releases alongside the DVD releases now. And the players have gotten cheap finally.

I still only have DVD players but since I only rent now-a-days (or buy the DVDs I want when Redbox sells them for $5 after the rental run is over) so it's rental that will get me to buy a Blu-Ray player. And I'll probably only acquire Blu-Rays if I can help it. I really do like the extra resolution.

I would have gotten a player sooner if HD-DVDs prevailed. I wish they did. It kinda sucks bringing a Blu-Ray to someone's place and find out they only have a DVD player - that's still pretty common. HD-DVDs would have solved that problem by having both formats.... but I guess it was a lost game with the Playstation pushing early sales numbers of this format even if the buyers couldn't care less about Blu-Ray movies at the time.

I guess the malaise is about the whole thing is knowing the next format isn't going to be physical at all and Blu-Ray feels like a stop-gap measure in between then. It won't ever have the impact or ubiquity DVDs did.

50% isn't that bad. (3, Insightful)

Fr05t (69968) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869236)

50% market share isn't that bad is it? For a long time after DVDs came out VHS was still selling and renting well. Most people I know (including my parents) upgraded to Blu-Ray shortly after getting a >40" LCD.

Just wait a few months .... (1)

spinninggears (551247) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869242)

I think that most people are just waiting for a price point/feature set to justify the switch. I finally purchased a blu-ray player when it dropped under $100 and included apps like Netflix streaming.

Physical Media is So Last Decade (1)

TraumaHound (30184) | more than 3 years ago | (#35869246)

Compared to services like iTunes, Hulu, Netflix and, let's face it, torrents, physical media is a pain in the butt. No need to switch discs, access from (most) any device, no unskippable ads, etc.

I think a lot of the tech geeks and early adopters have already moved on; with or without the entertainment industry.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?