Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
The simple quick reason why they didn't put them both together is because people don't want to spend $20 on DVDs anymore and Blu-ray was supposed to allow studios to sell movies for $20-30 again. If they make it a combo movie to dupe would-be DVD buyers they would either need to keep the price in line with Blu-ray or customers will probably be mad that they can't just buy a DVD without the Blu-ray side. The whole point of selling a movie on Blu-ray (to the studio) is the added profit over DVD.
I'd rather not, since that means that people wonder which side the DVD version is on, as I doubt it will be standardized (is the label correspond to the side you're reading or the side that should be facing up?)
Instead, they need to have Blu-ray/DVD content on the same side at different layers. That's more worthwhile.
I'm happy they are finally doing this and all, but it seems obvious that doing it right away would have made less impetus for people to buy Bluray players at the outset. It makes sense to me for them to wait like they did, allowing three years of people buying overly expensive players. Now that the price is coming down, it makes less sense.
Anyway, I myself am waiting until GOOD Bluray players get into the $80-100 range before buying one, but I might go ahead and in the near future pick up some must-haves in this format if I see a deal. I ALMOST bought the new Star Trek on Bluray when I was in Best Buy on Black Friday just so that I would have it when I finally broke down (my wife) and got a player.
Why? Because Sony wanted to corner the entire market, and doing dual-format releases means sharing the royalties with the DVD format. They thought that Blu-Ray + PS3 = guaranteed win across the board, and they're very stubborn about admitting when they're wrong. Remember, this is the company that held off so long on giving up the Walkman that Apple had already _won_ the digital music player market before they even got started. And this is the same company that was so convinced that flatpanel TVs would never take off that by the time they changed their mind they needed to ask rival company Samsung to help them get their own flatpanel TV line off the ground.
@mistergalarza:
They are one of the nine founding companies and they are clearly the public face of the BDA, in part due to how closely Blu-Ray and the PS3 have been associated with each other, and in part due to the fact that Sony is the only member of the BDA that has made any attempt to publicly associate themselves with the format. If they're not in charge, I'd still suspect that they are treated as a king among equals. After all, even with how poorly the PS3 has performed, it was probably one of the most significant driving forces behind Blu-Ray's "defeat" of HD-DVD, what with how all PS3 consoles were bundled in with standalone Blu-Ray players when citing how many more people had adopted the format over HD-DVD.
@Nick: That is similar to my idea of a multi-LASER player. You add the DVD LASER, BR LASER, and HD LASER about 60 degrees apart. Whichever disc is inserted, the corresponding LASER is activated.
For one, to any hardware today, data is data, there is no "video" or "audio", just data. The data rate of current lasers (players) is well above that of both audio and video streams on any blu-ray disc today.
Additionally, separating the audio and video streams like that would only lead to further complicate the technical issue of keeping them in sync.
@cbstryker: oh, stryker. do you know how many gadgets and gizmos are around today that at some point were "completely pointless?" the double AA battery, for example. Jesus and the Apostles had no use for it, but now it's essential to everyday life. c'mon man. bring your A game.
@jayhawk11 is not a fan of smallpox.: Assuming no other bottlenecks (like server speeds), DVD quality video transfers at a rate of roughly 8-10 Mbps. Blu-ray video tops off at around 40. While technically, yes, the capability exists in some places in America (and I'm ignorantly assuming you're in America) to get a real-life 40Mbps downstream connection, it's far from the norm, even among the readership here, much less the average consumer.
Add to that the average consumer not caring as much about every pixel as we techies do, and the even lower standards folks have for streaming video, then yeah. The motivation, the resources, and the tech needed for Netflix to start streaming Blu-rays to your living room is still a few years off at least.
@jayhawk11 is not a fan of smallpox.: Vudu HDX comes close enough to Blu-ray that the vast majority of consumers will not be able to tell them apart in normal viewing conditions. Zune Video 1080p streaming on Xbox Live is also competitive with Blu-ray.
jayhawk11 is not a fan of smallpox. promoted this comment
Edited by uchendunwachukwu at 12/01/09 3:26 PM
uchendunwachukwu was starred
uchendunwachukwu was unstarred
@uchendunwachukwu: I know about Vudu. I'm more concerned about lossless audio. I'm an audio nerd, so that's a bigger deal to me. As far as video quality, yeah Zune Marketplace and Netflix HD is pretty solid.
Still, at this point OCEntertainment is hitting the nail on the head. Nothing is going to beat Blu-ray's quality because we simply can't sustain it, both on the server backends and the average consumer's connection speed.
@jayhawk11 is not a fan of smallpox.: The trouble with lossless audio is very few people have the equipment and acoustics, much less the ears to appreciate it.
I have some old Warner DVDs that have widescreen on one side, and 4:3 on the other. I thought DVD/Blu-Ray hybrids had been proposed a dozen times since Blu-Ray came out anyway? Sounds like a fine idea to me if it won't drive the price up. Now I have Blu-Rays that I can't lend to some people because they want to see the movies but only have a DVD player.
Double-sided laserdiscs were sometimes done as basically two discs glued together, and as temperature and humidity changed, they would flex, and separate, corrupting the information on them. A CD sized disc should be much more robust though, and better made in the first place.
@fuchikoma: There are two competing interests here, the people who want to charge you for ondemand like netflix, apple, etc... and then the cable/phone companies that have to foot the data bill.
We are already seeing data caps, and more are coming before they go away. If the datacaps become the standard, then the on demand dream will be just a dream.
I know I don't want to pay twice to watch everything, once for the content, once for the cap overages.
@Alluvian: This is a story about DVD/BD hybrids, so there is no data cap, on-demand video, or data bill to worry about unless you mean a small bit of content on BD Live features, but I really haven't seen anyone make heavy use of that yet.
@Bokusatsu_Tenshi: Yeah, but see then you face the perilous conundrum: which side? Do you place it with the data side down, knowing it may rub against minor impurities in your smooth table but that's all it could touch, or do you leave it data side up, safely aware from the table's nicks and scratches, but vulnerable to airborne threats like dust, sunlight, and cats?
I told them they should have made DVDs out of adamantium, but engineers never listen to me.
@OCEntertainment: Oh, they listen, OC. They listen... and they writhe, and they seethe. A guttural noise of pure contempt rises from the shadows of their cleanly-designed souls, and they plot.
First of all, does this mean that the BR side will only have a single layer?
I don't think this is difficult to do. All they had to do was use a 2 sided BR disc and just burn one side with the lower resolution DVD pits. Or am I mistaken?
"The release will mark the first time the Bourne trilogy, one of the highest grossing action movie franchises in history, is available individually in Blu-ray'sâ„¢ renowned perfect picture and purest digital sound."
Is this an outright lie? I thought the Bourne BR discs were already out?
I'm not just taking crazy pills, right? HD-DVD already did this?
Truthfully, it is not a bad idea. In addition to what Kaiser-Machead wrote, it might appeal to folks planning to buy a Blu-Ray but who haven't yet, though that seems a pretty narrow segment, especially now that you can find Blu under $100.
I actually don't think this is a terrible idea from a marketing standpoint.
I don't buy Blu-ray discs because they are still too expensive, though I have a PS3, but if the price were to come down......
You see. If the industry adopted a "flipper" disc only standard of production/stopped selling DVD only discs you would see a price drop on Blue-ray discs thanks to production/demand numbers, and you would likely see an increase in Blue-ray player sales as more and more people will say "eh, might as well," which would likely bring up production numbers/down cost for Blue-ray players.
So, aside from painting an inaccurate picture of a stupid product, why don't you tell us why this is actually a "terrible" idea. And yes, you do concede that the idea is as terrible as you want to say it is, but you still run it down as being absurd.
@Voyou_Charmant: They should have just done it straight away. Why did they bother releasing blu-ray only? It would have gotten people buying the discs waaaay sooner
@Voyou_Charmant: The prices have really come down on BR discs. I picked up a couple last night on Amazon for $10 each. Amazon is the place to go for BR anyway.
@bornonbord: now it's too late... HD streaming is a reality and the point in buying another device to hook up to my TV as well as the price of all the discs is totally not worth it.
@opanitch: This isn't good enough for everyone. Every HD stream I've seen uses lossy audio codecs (rather than the superior lossless or uncompressed that is found on nearly all of my BDs). Also, with my ISP capping monthly usage at 250 GB, I don't want to kill that by streaming a few movies. Not to mention all of the additional stuff available on the disc (most Blu-rays are in the 25+ GB range, yet the streams are less than 8? - what gives). With a decent A/V setup, I certainly do not want to sacrifice quality.
@Voyou_Charmant: For the record, I just picked up about 4 movies at BB for $10 a piece. The have sales that rotate through titles, so if you pay attention to them you can usually find good deals on Bluray media in stores as well (just don't expect new releases to cost $10).
@CocktimusPrime: Comcast likes to destroy my Netflix experience. I can barely watch an episode of a TV show without it adjusting, due to a slowed internet connection, at least once.
@Voyou_Charmant: Agreed. I love (joking) Comcast. I enjoy watching movies enough that streaming them could easily put me over the 250G cap in a given month (not every month, but I could see it occasionally).
@pokeyg23: True, they are out there and "affordable", however my comment was to not expect to see them at $10 (that's just a bit unlikely at this point).
@Voyou_Charmant: Not necessarily. I got some good films earlier this year that were pretty cheap on Amazon. If you are going to buy one at Target then yeah I'd expect to pay a bit more. I went there last night looking for a flick and didn't find one that was reasonable enough. Plus the selection blew chunks. I was there since I saw 'The Wizard of Oz' as the deluxe box set disc set but I couldn't find it when I went last night. I ended up going online and saw what was priced at 60 something at Target for about 42 on Amazon.
@CocktimusPrime: there's always such things as higher compression video codecs and along with all the additional content, that's probably what adds up to the 25 GB on your discs.
I'm also not that familiar with the Netflix streaming (as it's my friends account, not mine), so wouldn't the special features be available as well since they are offering basically the same thing except you don't have to wait for the physical disc?
I'm also not an expert with the difference between lossless and lossy audio. I know a decent bit, but really, I'm not going to be able to tell the difference, and I have a decent A/V setup.
Currently, I don't have to worry about a download cap, so yeah, I can see your point there, but it's not going to be that way forever...
12/02/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
Instead, they need to have Blu-ray/DVD content on the same side at different layers. That's more worthwhile.
12/01/09
Anyway, I myself am waiting until GOOD Bluray players get into the $80-100 range before buying one, but I might go ahead and in the near future pick up some must-haves in this format if I see a deal. I ALMOST bought the new Star Trek on Bluray when I was in Best Buy on Black Friday just so that I would have it when I finally broke down (my wife) and got a player.
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
They are one of the nine founding companies and they are clearly the public face of the BDA, in part due to how closely Blu-Ray and the PS3 have been associated with each other, and in part due to the fact that Sony is the only member of the BDA that has made any attempt to publicly associate themselves with the format. If they're not in charge, I'd still suspect that they are treated as a king among equals. After all, even with how poorly the PS3 has performed, it was probably one of the most significant driving forces behind Blu-Ray's "defeat" of HD-DVD, what with how all PS3 consoles were bundled in with standalone Blu-Ray players when citing how many more people had adopted the format over HD-DVD.
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
Gizmodo is dual sided!
12/01/09
Dear Patent Office:
see comment above.
- Nick
12/01/09
Boom. A true multi-media player.
12/01/09
12/01/09
For one, to any hardware today, data is data, there is no "video" or "audio", just data. The data rate of current lasers (players) is well above that of both audio and video streams on any blu-ray disc today.
Additionally, separating the audio and video streams like that would only lead to further complicate the technical issue of keeping them in sync.
12/01/09
12/02/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
Add to that the average consumer not caring as much about every pixel as we techies do, and the even lower standards folks have for streaming video, then yeah. The motivation, the resources, and the tech needed for Netflix to start streaming Blu-rays to your living room is still a few years off at least.
12/01/09
12/01/09
Still, at this point OCEntertainment is hitting the nail on the head. Nothing is going to beat Blu-ray's quality because we simply can't sustain it, both on the server backends and the average consumer's connection speed.
12/01/09
12/01/09
Double-sided laserdiscs were sometimes done as basically two discs glued together, and as temperature and humidity changed, they would flex, and separate, corrupting the information on them. A CD sized disc should be much more robust though, and better made in the first place.
12/02/09
We are already seeing data caps, and more are coming before they go away. If the datacaps become the standard, then the on demand dream will be just a dream.
I know I don't want to pay twice to watch everything, once for the content, once for the cap overages.
12/02/09
12/01/09
Hey, it's the only way I can buy the BR and still play it on my Macbook, right?
12/01/09
I think it failed because I never saw it ever since.
Wouldn't work for me because I tend to leave DVDs around, so I need a side to put it on.
12/01/09
I told them they should have made DVDs out of adamantium, but engineers never listen to me.
12/01/09
12/01/09
.....Shit.
12/01/09
I don't think this is difficult to do. All they had to do was use a 2 sided BR disc and just burn one side with the lower resolution DVD pits. Or am I mistaken?
"The release will mark the first time the Bourne trilogy, one of the highest grossing action movie franchises in history, is available individually in Blu-ray'sâ„¢ renowned perfect picture and purest digital sound."
Is this an outright lie? I thought the Bourne BR discs were already out?
12/01/09
12/01/09
Truthfully, it is not a bad idea. In addition to what Kaiser-Machead wrote, it might appeal to folks planning to buy a Blu-Ray but who haven't yet, though that seems a pretty narrow segment, especially now that you can find Blu under $100.
12/01/09
I don't buy Blu-ray discs because they are still too expensive, though I have a PS3, but if the price were to come down......
You see. If the industry adopted a "flipper" disc only standard of production/stopped selling DVD only discs you would see a price drop on Blue-ray discs thanks to production/demand numbers, and you would likely see an increase in Blue-ray player sales as more and more people will say "eh, might as well," which would likely bring up production numbers/down cost for Blue-ray players.
So, aside from painting an inaccurate picture of a stupid product, why don't you tell us why this is actually a "terrible" idea. And yes, you do concede that the idea is as terrible as you want to say it is, but you still run it down as being absurd.
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
Netflix streaming FTW
12/01/09
I would have no complaint if I could pick them up for $10 a piece. I'm really basing affordability on the prices at places like Target and Best Buy.
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
12/01/09
@pokeyg23: True, they are out there and "affordable", however my comment was to not expect to see them at $10 (that's just a bit unlikely at this point).
12/01/09
12/02/09
I'm also not that familiar with the Netflix streaming (as it's my friends account, not mine), so wouldn't the special features be available as well since they are offering basically the same thing except you don't have to wait for the physical disc?
I'm also not an expert with the difference between lossless and lossy audio. I know a decent bit, but really, I'm not going to be able to tell the difference, and I have a decent A/V setup.
Currently, I don't have to worry about a download cap, so yeah, I can see your point there, but it's not going to be that way forever...